Forum
  Classifieds
  News
  Localband
  Shows
  Show Pics
  Polls

  OT Threads
  Other News
  Movies
  VideoGames
  Videos
  TV
  Sports
  Gear
  /r/
  Food

  New Thread
  New Poll

E-mail

New site? Maybe some day.

Username:

SPAM Filter: re-type this

(values are 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,A,B,C,D,E, or F)

Message:

UBB enabled. HTML disabled Spam Filtering enabledIcons: (click image to insert) Show All - pop

b i u add: url image video(?)

:	post by ShadowSD at 2006-03-16 16:30:01

hungtableed said:

hmmmmm, seems like you're more willing to give the sub human arab terrorist head cutters the benefit of the doubt because, well, afterall, our government is capable of lying as well.

No, I just hold our government to a higher standard than I do terrorist head cutters. If I didn't, then that would mean I don't expect any more from our government than I do from terrorists. And if I don't expect more from our government than I do from terrorists, then there's no reason to be more fearful of one than the other.

Forget your politics for a moment, and look at the logic of that argument, step by step. If you still don't get it, let's try it with music. Say you think a recently released metal CD by a band that you really like is worse than an earlier CD by that band. So you spend all this time on rttp talking about how much the new CD sucks balls and how disappointed you are - in fact MUCH more time than you spend talking about how much you hate let's say disco. Now does that mean that you think the new CD is shittier than disco just because you spent more time complaining about it? No, you just don't hold disco to as high a standard as the metal you like. Now if someone were to seriously say to you, well you must think the new CD is worse than disco since you spend so much time criticizing it, you would call them a retard, and you would be right to do so. Someone who would assume that my criticisms of our goverment equal a favoritism towards terrorists would be comparably retarded.

hungtableed said:

So, you're worried about increased recruitment in Al Qeada huh?
I bet you were one lead the charge, along with the un-American un-Civil Liberties Union, who fought a bloody battle the release 100+ sum odd new abu garib photos.
....now, why do you think the U.S. govn't didn't want them released?
because we'd see shit we never saw/heard about?
---NOPE! there was nothing new, same shit, naked bodies getting barked at by dogs.

Clearly, in the article that started this thread and the pictures that were originally released, we've established that there have been beatings, electrodes, and at least one death that resulted from prisoner mistreatment. Based on that information, and based on the fact that the government initially tried to conceal that information, it is only the function of a free society that people demand additional information to ensure that nothing further was concealed. Whether or not a certain set of photographs "reveal nothing new" is irrelevant to your argument, as the terrorists have enough imagery from the initial set of photos to make effective recruitment posters for the duration of this war.

Regardless of which side of this argument you fall on, concealing information when there has already been a scandal about it is both stupid and pointless, because it only makes people more suspicious and driven to uncover the truth.

hungtableed said:

ohhh, also, shit like "Saddams torture chambers have been re-opened....under U.S. management" being said by elected officials who obviously were never was given the 101 of Saddams torture chambers doesn't help us either.

It is clearly an exaggeration for them to say that, because no matter what you believe, there is some nasty shit that happened in Saddam Hussein's prisons that will NEVER happen under America's watch. And I will also agree with you that such exaggeration comes at a price.

Internationally, although it is helpful in the regard of showing people that there is internal criticism of bad US policies, it is harmful in the sense that the quote can be used by our enemies as propaganda. However, if you want to make the case that the harm outweighs the helpfulness, you could just as easily say that any internal challenge of American policy can be used as anti-US propaganda (which it can), and then the only solution would be to cease all public criticism of US policy, and consequently we would stop being a democracy. Clearly, if we stop being a democracy, the terrorists win.

Domestically, saying "Saddams torture chambers have been re-opened....under U.S. management" is helpful in the sense that it grabs people's attention and shines a bright light on the subject, as well as encapsulating the outrage of Americans who were appalled by the photos. However, it is harmful in the sense that when people become aware that there has been some exaggeration, they often end up dismissing the whole topic as an exaggeration (as you just did). If you want to make the case that the harm outweighs the helpfulness in this case, I would be inclined to agree with you. (As I explained earlier in this thread, the left needs to stop preaching to the choir and focus on appealing to those on the other side, instead of constantly alienating them with hyperbole and presumption.)

[default homepage]

[print][

5:31:26am Apr 30,2024
load time 0.01249 secs/10 queries]

[search]

[refresh page]