SF soldier submits to waterboarding to prove a point


No they didn’t. Nothing they did gave her the greenlight for the kind of abuse that went on there.


Apparently, I have to repeat myself.

They also created the environment for that to happen. (Abu Ghraib)


Repeating it doesn’t make it true nor have you even attempted to show how it would be true.


I didn’t show you how the Bush admin. created an environment for Abu Ghraib? Didn’t I mention the torture memos earlier?

i refer you to the wikipedia pages about abu ghraib:
The administration of George W. Bush asserted that these were isolated incidents, not indicative of general U.S. policy.[8][9] This was disputed by humanitarian organizations such as the Red Cross, Amnesty International, and Human Rights Watch. These organizations stated that the abuses at Abu Ghraib were not isolated incidents, but were part of a wider pattern of torture and brutal treatment at American overseas detention centers, including those in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Guantanamo Bay.[9] Several scholars stated that the abuses constituted state-sanctioned crimes.[8][9]

And the torture memos:
Following accounts of the Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse scandal in Iraq, one of the memos was leaked to the press in June 2004. Jack Goldsmith, then head of the Office of Legal Counsel, had already withdrawn the Yoo memos and advised agencies not to rely on them. After Goldsmith was forced to resign because of his objections, Attorney General Ashcroft issued a one paragraph opinion re-authorizing the use of torture.[1] Then in December 2004, another head of OLC reaffirmed the original legal opinions.

What else do I need to Show you?


None of which supports the claim that the administration created the environment that led to it.

Whether you agree with the Yoo memo’s or not nothing in them allowed for the kinds of abuses that were going on at Abu Ghraib.

EI was nothing new, we’d been doing everything allowed under the Yoo memos and more for more than a hundred years.

Yoo’s memos did nothing but provide specific legal guidelines for what would be allowed and what would not.

This whole meme about how “We’re better than that” with respect to enhanced interrogation was nothing but a partisan attempt to diminish the Bush Administration.

Throughout the sixties, 70’s and 80’s and well into the 90’s nobody would have even attempted to argue that waterboarding was torture much less the sleep deprivation and withholding of food. Hell we put our own troops through worse just in training.


This is not some “hair brained” scheme I have come up with on my own. It has been stated for years.


Not by anyone I would give any credibility to.

You’re citing a bunch of people that think anything less that making them as comfortable as possible is abuse.

Your cited author is certainly not someone with any credibility on the issue.

What I am trying to point out is that Nothing that was done with respect to detention or interrogations in Iraq or Afghanistan that was authorized by the administration, the DOD or CIA was any rougher or tougher than the methods we’d been using throughout the entire 20th century.

Suddenly though when it became convenient to use this one incident to attack the administration we have to rewrite history and pretend it all began and ended with Bush.

What went on at Abu Ghraib was the result of a commander that was a cruel sadist who encouraged the abuse of the prisoners under her charge. Nothing the Administration did greenlighted those abuses nor enabled them.

You’re just trying to make a connection that doesn’t actually exist.


The administration created the environment for this to happen,
When was the term “enhanced interrogation” created? Why was “enhanced interrogation” needed? Who made up that term?

The administration created the environment for this to happen.


You keep repeating this but it has no basis in fact.


Provided plenty of facts and opinions, as opposed to your posts.


No you haven’t, you haven’t provided anything that shows they created such an environment that allowed for Abu Ghraib to happen.


I, once again, refer you to wikipedia. If you don’t like what’s there, go ahead and try to change it.


Nothing in the article shows that the Administration created the conditions that led to Abu Ghraib.


Did i every say I condone Torture? your Question was a Specific question I answered it.
And it is Not a FEW FRINGE LIBERALS who want to ban all firearms.
Because the Banning of the "Light Firearms or should i say “Assault Rifles” makes no logical sense when the majority of crime and deaths are used with Handguns.
I have heard plenty of Main Stream Democrat and Liberals talk about banning all Firearms.


Name a few mainstream Democratic politicians who want to ban ALL firearms?




Name one time gun control advocates ever stopped of their own accord.

It’s obvious what the script is. Ban ARs because they’re weapons of war and “nobody really needs one.”

Then, “We banned those so obviously we can ban others. All semiautomatics!”


You see these very arguments in every gun thread on this forum and every time a pol opens their mouths on it.

And we have a couple if in progress examples.


But somehow the government will know when to stop when it comes to torture.


I share your distrust and it should have to go through a process for approval that includes a trusted entity, outside the military.


Pelosi and Feinstein.