What is Digg?82 Comments
- keitho, on 10/12/2007, -3/+44since when has Bush or Rumsfeld ever cared about the troops safety?
- martalli, on 10/12/2007, -4/+39It's good to see Powell standing up to the administration. Maybe he will consider running for president during the next election.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+21Powell is retired. I wouldn't exactly say he's "in" power.
- Ascendant, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15Yeah Powell did give that shameful report, basically he was "taking one ofr the team"
- FrankieB078, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16I can't wait to see how much Washington will ignore this letter.
- mc4_a, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15I'll never forgive Powell for that UN speech, but I'm glad he's been a consistent voice of reason in this administration.
- Langford, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15It won't matter to Bush. Even if Bush were capable of planning or foresight, he wouldn't care about the consequences. Bush is just a rich sociopath.
- EtherGnat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11My sarcasm obviously missed the mark. Anybody who criticizes the war effort or treatment of detainees is painted by the right as a terrorist-loving, American-hating, pacifist liberal. As a highly decorated general and a republican General Powell is obviously none of those things. Bush apologists will have a hard time attacking his statement. Sorry for the confusion.
/sarchasm: the gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the recipient who doesn't get it - pintomp3, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9you forgot the "/sarcasm".
- fjvwing, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Thank god you are keeping the bar low for the US. For a moment there I thought the US would be hindered by having to set an example that its beliefs and ideals of the dignity and rights of people actually work, even when dealing with an enemy, that anything else debases the people of the US as a whole by exposing them as hypocrites about this whole due process and justice *****. Now all the US needs to be is just a hair better than extremist terrorists to still have 'won'.
- ne0shell, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Hey Kyle do you even have a clue what actually took place at Abu G? Believe me it went way beyond sexual humiliation. John Wu gave a conference a while back in which he asserted the administration could order the torture of children, including the "crushing of a child's testicles". I guess if the child's a shade or two darker than you it's OK , right?
- ne0shell, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8I just watched the white house press conference live on FOX news (I wanted to eliminate any claims of bias from the Bush boyz). It was a frigging joke. Tony Snow danced around the questions.
In detail:
Shouldn't Americans be concerned that three prominent Republicans, especially John McCain oppose this proposal? Tony Snow-job: They just don't understand the bill.
What about Colin Powells letter? Tony Snowman: We don't feel his letter says he is opposed.
WTF???
They've gone from outright lying to lying and calling us all stupid too. The far right base supporting Bush needs to wake the hell up. As long as America is fighting MORAL wars we have never needed to worry about our troops being charged with war crimes and when they were it was by us and for good reason.
This was followed by them showing a FOX news poll where Bush's approval rating dropped to 58% disapproving, the only change being a drop of two points in those who approve and they were saying it was an "improvement"???????
Give me a ***** break. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Wasn't he PRO war during his time with the administration?
see that is important. You can be pro war, pro regime change in iraq and still against the policies on how to get it done.
Yes powel was pro war, but he wanted and often demanded better evidence of saddams crimes. He also wanted to give aphghanistan more time. But most importantly he wanted to go into iraq with overwhelming force(500k troups) and have a plan for exit and incase of insurgency. Rumsfeld did NOT want a plan for insurgency because he thought there was little likelyhood of it happening. Powell ran the first gulf war and very well. We did not get saddam but that was NOT his orders. WE should have listened to the man with experience. - labmouse42, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5@fleischner
That was an insult? I thought it was a compliment!
@TubaTechno
Most republicans today toe the line as a neo-con. People who call themselves conservatives (in the classic) sense, are rarely assocated with modern day republicans. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5They didnt, they just said he doesnt get it.
- djbruker, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I think Powell has far too much class and has too much respect for his family to run for president. That's why I'd like to see him 'drafted' into service as President. I think he would use military force competently and wisely, completely unlike Bush and Cheney.
I agree Powell's UN presentation was a bizarre anomaly. But whereas Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, and Rove were creating the lie about Iraq being part of the war on terror, I believe Powell saw that everyone else who disagreed was just shown the door. So I think he tried his best to do his job as an administration official to publically support administration policy, but to do it as honestly as he could. So he looked at the evidence himself, held his nose, and did his duty. Maybe he thought that by staying on the job instead of resigning in protest he could continue to provide a sane, moderating voice. Too bad that failed.
Anyway I always rail against Bush in this forum for his unbelievable willful incompetence and dishonesty with regards to Iraq. Sorry, it's not just liberals and Democrats who are against Bush. It is also people who care about right and wrong, no matter what the politcal party. - headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Lets just say he has influence, and leave it at that. Well, then again, no one can influence the nut-bags in the administration. They have their own agendas, and no one is going to sway them until they're all dirty, filthy, stinkin' rich, and we're all dead.
- ahhell, on 10/12/2007, -7/+11Holy crap! Someone in power that has a brain!!!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6It's a transcript of his actual letter. Granted they could have picked a better source for the transcript, but there's nothing about this that's opinion.
- pintomp3, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8maybe if bush or cheney had ever actually served, they would have some concern for our troops. to them it's just one big video game.
- helchose, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4As I recall, Powell was the only member of the Bush Administration back in 2002 that was calling for temperance and for Bush to wait until they generated UN support when they were revving up to attack Iraq. Then, one day, he flipped 180 degrees and was coming out gung-ho with Bush.
Since that day, I have always imagined Bush calling Powell into his office and ordering him to fall in line or else. Being a lifelong military officer, he followed orders, put his personal opinions aside and fell in line with the warmongering dog and pony show. It would also seem that putting Powell in front of the UN to sell their case was a further humilation tactic by Bush and friends to make sure Powell was under their control. Quite Machiavellian. I noticed that as soon as he had his chance to get out, he did. That was also quite telling.
Even though he bent over and took it from Bush, and rather quickly I might add, I still have some respect for the man for at first trying to be the only voice of reason in the administration. - spurtle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4They're dead within 10 seconds if they sever the jugular. Torture you have to endure hours upon hours of pain where the prisoner would wish he was dead.
And this is not just for the here and now. How about wars down the road? The way we're pissing people off left and right, I wouldn't be surprised if Russia, China, Austrailia, the UK, or any other country declare war on us within the next 50 years. And then what? They'll say we don't give a ***** about the Geneva Convention, why should they when dealing with us, and they start torturing and experimenting on our troops. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I would have backed Powell for President until he completely disgraced himself by "taking one for the team" and claiming WMDs were found.
It's great that he is finally speaking out about the current ***** administration but it's too late in my opinion. - headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Guess you missed this part, "Furthermore, it would put our own troops at risk."
Everything about the Geneva Convention is about protecting your own troops. You treat your prisoners with respect and humanity, so that the enemy will treat your troops with respect and humanity when they're captured. It's not about being a really nice guy, it's about fair play. - malfourmed, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5@EtherGnat:
I dug down your original comment because unfortunately the line between between satire and the real thing has pretty much disappeared these days. Sorry about that. :-( - dargon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Torture is very effective in getting your subject to say what you want them to, whether or not it's the truth. This is problem. When you have been subjected to hour upon hour, day upon day of torture in pretty much any form you'll say pretty much whatever you need to to make it stop. A great example of it's effectiveness is the ST:TNG Episode Chain of Command, pts 1 and 2.
- fleischner, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4NYT: "Mr. Zubaydah was being subjected to coercive interrogation techniques — he was stripped, held in an icy room and jarred by earsplittingly loud music."
- fjvwing, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4That's what happens when you shroud a prison in secrecy: nobody believes you when you say the place is now all A OK.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5its not that its inefective its imoral and forbidden by common war laws, though these laws are world wide we tend to follow them, or atleast we thought we did
- kromeassassin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4[Coercively] corrects fleischner
It is indeed 'torture'. Read the real news and see real pictures that our media thinks are 'too disturbing for television'. - dargon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The "current" enemy already does some pretty nasty things, sure. They aren't the first enemy the US has ever had and they sure as hell won't be the last.
- EtherGnat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Don't worry if you dugg me down--so many people misunderstood it obviously wasn't funny. The /sarcasm tag might have helped but if you have to explain a joke it was rarely humorous to begin with.
I'll agree with it being increasingly difficult to separate humor from satire. Our current government is a bad Saturday Night Live skit that's gone on 6 years too long. - mc4_a, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Naturally I meant when he was in the administration, Mr Semantics. Maybe we can get together later and split some hairs for fun.
- ne0shell, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Nice try but it's an article covering the actual letter sent by Powell. That's political news. By your logic every FOX news sourced article should be marked inaccurate if not marked as opinion from now on.
- jellygraph, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Can't wait to see how the whacko conservatives will spin this one... and, you know, there's still plenty of leg room for even more of their insanity... like accusing Powell of eating babies. Haven't heard that one _yet_.
come on... you know you want to say it.
bring it... - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3It isn't that it isn't effective, it is that there are more effective ways to get info.
People often lie or tell you what you want to hear. Most people at the CIA say it isn't as effective as some of there other alternative methods, like simple carrot and stick procedures. One guy was convinced to talk by using his religious beliefs in predeterminism to convince him he was caught for a reason, he was doing Allah's work and the reason he was caught alive was to tell us what he knew.
Things like that often will give you a higher percentage of truthful answers than torture. Also the tell tale signs of lying are more apparent when someone is not under durance. - triplehelix, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4give me for mccain pres with powell as vice pres and a democratic controlled congress with a nice chunk of independents for balance and we might be able to get back on course.
does anyone know if barack obama has any interest in running? i'd love to see him through his name in the hat. - Quactaur, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Which makes him a good guy?
The current batch of Neo cons are awful. As much as i personally hate their ideology, there has to be something of merit to it, or else it wouldn't have lasted so long in America and acknowledged by the world (though Europe is now beginning to get extremely vocative of their dislike of the ideology). The next presidential race really must see the current administration completely dismantled if the republicans want to be respected whilst in power. By the rest of the world of course, American voting habits completely mystify me. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2There's nothing in his letter stating he's anti-war now.
- triplehelix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2maybe cheney and rumsfeld will say his brain has been infected by terrorists because he spent to much time thinking about right and wrong.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2first reagan was the first confessed neo lib, you should look up the word.
I am just amazed as the so called republicans turn and swiftboat one fo their own simply because he disagrees witht he president.
I didnt know that 100% uncondition support for George Bush was a requirement to be a republican.
I guesss mccain and specture and other prominate republicans that have spoken out against this admin are dems as well
Powell is anything but a dem. He was pro war but just wanted enough troups to get the job done. - oneiroi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I beleive Powell has said something similar to....that he was trusting the intelligence data he was provided by the administration and presented it believing the administration...but sorta felt betrayed by how the data turned out to be unreliable.
But yeah he was always one of the lone people questioning the war...and he was kicked out. While the people that supported the war, messed things up in the war, get awarded and praised.
- kylesellers, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Wow, did you really just use Star Trek to prove your views on detainee policy?
Bravo! - labmouse42, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@EtherGnat
That was a funny post you made, its a shame it was dugg down.
Adding (/sarcasm) after it might help people get it. :D - starmanjones, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2just one more general breaking with the bush admin. this time last year i was really worried that clinton would be the last president elected to the office... i feared that the military would do what you might expect them to do and support bush in a take over of the U.S. government. my first hope this might not be true was general honore taking charge in new orleans. he could have said anything... but what he did say deferred to civilian authorities even when they didn't deserve it. now this year... the whole thing is melting down around bush and there is even talk of criminal charges. i'm sorry for what bush has done to the U.S. and the world but i am now optimistic about americas future.
- rolosworld, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2http://www.bbspot.com/News/2005/01/bush_countdown.html
damn... too much time left... - fleischner, on 10/12/2007, -7/+8It's not "torture." Using that word is biased and inflammatory. "Coercive interrogation" is what's being discussed.
- williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Coming soon:
Post delivery abortion.
Asset ownership adjustment.
Mandatory service volunteering. - brentzilla, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@PowerCow:
"aphghanistan"!?!?!! Nice try. - triplehelix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1powel has a good head on his sholders and isn't tied to the party line. he takes issues one at a time as more politicians should.
-
Show 51 - 81 of 81 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is