JDoors
-
Content Count
3564 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Posts posted by JDoors
-
-
-
This crawls into the territory of whether or not we believe people are guaranteed basic human rights, or privileged to legal US rights. I suppose that's where you and I disagree.
We don't necessarily disagree, we haven't yet defined what we believe those "basic" rights might be. I was referring to "international" courts, governing bodies, and non-governing bodies (Geneva convention, UN, etc.). To be applicable and practical, rights have to be defined. Those sources have defined those rights. In a confrontation you have certain rights -- if you're following the rules -- fewer if you're not (you're still entitled to food and water for example, regardless of what you've done or how you've done it).
-
THEY have abandoned any "right" to a civil reaction.
They never got a trial to 'prove' they did anything to 'abandon' their rights.
Once it's clear that a civil reaction is or will be ineffectual (meaning, it must, at least, be tried, and I think we did that, and paid a very high cost for it), then it's time to react in a manner commensurate to the dangers we face.There have been many CIA officials who have come forward and said that we could have gotten all of the same info through more reasonable means.
Also, how about the notion that these forms of 'enhanced interrogation' often produce false information--getting the recipient to say anything to make it stop?
According to "the rules," they didn't have rights to begin with, we as a nation, however, accord them rights -- up to a point.
An opinion that something might have gone differently is meaningless. Some people were of the opinion that we should have been harsher still. I wouldn't elevate opinion to the level of fact.
How about the notion that we were already getting false information?
-
You should wear matching electric green leotards and a mask -- that'd be SO cool.
-
Two thoughts on that: Apparently no one's willing to take on the job of Security Czar, and I don't have a problem with the government having the capability of seizing control of the Internet during emergencies (just as they seize control of streets, airports, etc., during emergencies).
-
-
... It is absolutely necessary that we hold ourselves to a higher standard. ...
I can agree with that, however I don't think it means we must restrict ourselves to the point where we are ineffectual in fighting those who HAVE no standards. In a war against an opponent that obeys modern rules of war, we too must obey modern rules of war. In a war against opponents that obey no rules but their own ... I'm not willing to sacrifice hundreds or thousands of lives solely to retain a self-defined moral superiority, one they do not subscribe to in the least. If a common enemy blows up highly populated public places, hijacks airliners full of innocent passengers and intentionally crashes them into highly populated buildings, gasses their own citizens to ethnically cleanse their population, specifically target civilians and hide within civilian populations to avoid retaliation, THEY have abandoned any "right" to a civil reaction. Once it's clear that a civil reaction is or will be ineffectual (meaning, it must, at least, be tried, and I think we did that, and paid a very high cost for it), then it's time to react in a manner commensurate to the dangers we face.
If a common enemy uses a weapon or tactic that makes ours ineffectual and obsolete, we must do something. At one time it was "improper" to shoot at your enemy if it wasn't your turn! It was "impolite" to kill a high ranking soldier. It was even considered "bad manners" to take cover! If the enemy changes the rules, you HAVE to respond, or perish.
To be clear, I'm philosophically opposed to "torture," and that includes "outsourcing" torture (whether it's so we can pretend we're not the ones responsible or as a matter of efficiency or expediancy). However, I'm also philosophically opposed to war, but that doesn't mean I can NEVER under ANY circumstances accept that a war may be necessary. War itself is an abomination, but self-preservation, probably THE most basic animal instinct, is necessary if society is to survive at all.
-
... like no one ever injected politics into threads about other politicians after their death ...
-
If Kennedy is really concerned about having 2 votes down the road from Mass., he needs to resign now. That will give the state more time to hold the required election. It's not like he's performing daily activities that go with the job now.
Resignation, no matter how obvious the need might be, isn't in some people's vocabulary (the guy DID remain in office after an incident that would have been, at the very least, the end of nearly any other politician's career).
Not that it matters any more (R.I.P.), but I wonder WHEN the issue of succession first came up. I would think it should have been one of the first issues to be taken care of once the Senator became active again after his diagnosis.
-
Why does the "royalty" always want to change the rules for themselves? Didn't Bloomberg just do the same in NYC?
What was it momma said? "Do as I say, not as I do"
Apparently that IS our system: Change the rules to favor themselves, then when it no longer favors them, change it right back. I like that Kennedy said, "Oh ... I 'support' the current rule -- But I want to change it." Huh? If that ain't doublespeak I don't know what is.
IrregularJoe: The "World and Politics" forum was created a while ago, looks like you missed it when it came out. We've been warned to keep it from getting out of hand, but that's about it.
*****
Personally I'd rather the forum be used to have intelligent conversations regarding current events rather than just bash someone using links to sites created and maintained by crazies, but I don't run the place.
-
I haven't bought any new music in ages.
-
My first thought was a defective connection, but the new mike did the same thing ... so it 'sounds' like your sound card failed. If you're comfortable working inside the computer I'd still check the internal connections (and connectors) first though.
-
Associated Press
BOSTON -- Sen. Edward Kennedy asked Massachusetts lawmakers to change state law to give Gov. Deval Patrick, a fellow Democrat and supporter of President Barack Obama, the ability to appoint an interim replacement to Kennedy's seat should Kenneday be unable to continue serving.
Under state law, an election is required within 145-160 days after a Senate seat becomes vacant.
That would temporarily leave Massachusetts without a voice in the Senate -- and Senate Democrats potentially one vote short on any health care overhaul legislation.
Kennedy said he supports the special election process, but wants to ensure the seat is filled during the course of the election.
The state last changed its succession law in 2004 to require the special election. Before that the governor was allowed to name a successor.
At the time, Democrats were worried that then-Republican Gov. Mitt Romney would be able to fill any vacancy created if Democratic Sen. John Kerry was elected president.[emphasis added]
Politics.
-
It's a personal thing, but I don't think I'm the clothing store type either. I don't CARE about clothes, so it'd be tough to stay involved.
-
Wow, if I had to remember the last time I actually held a copy in my hands ... My memory doesn't go back that far. Several decades maybe?
-
Keep in mind that most of their subscribers will expire before their subscriptions.
Oww!
-
They still have like five million subscribers -- who can't make money on that? All I need is fifty cents from each of five million people and I'd be a happy camper. Ten cents. I'd settle for a penny. Just joking.
Ages ago I read my sister's subscription, later I subscribed but they got too political (not MY political affiliation) and I cancelled. Many years after that I read somewhere that they were TOTALLY in the tank for MY political affiliation and I thought, that's odd, they were the exact OPPOSITE the last time I had read it. So I checked it out and sure enough, they'd swung the other way. Now I couldn't care less, one way or the other, unbiased or not.
-
OMG!!!
I bet we have different REASONS, however.
-
Tons o' good stuff in there!
-
I just bought two 1.5 TB Seagates for $114 each. It'll be some time before the solid state HD's can compete with that.
Holy Mother of ... !
A thought -- WHY do you need that much storage?!?
-
Do they use the term "aftershocks" there? That's what they call the baby quakes that occur after a larger one (here, at least). "Hummers" has an ENTIRELY different meaning.
I'd take it as a good sign that things are settling down -- for a while we hope.
-
Cost is the only reason SSD's aren't standard everywhere. Not just because SSD's are expensive, but also because hard drive manufacturers keep driving down the cost of hard drives. I think they see the writing on the wall.
There are downsides, but we'll get used to 'em.
-
I'm suspicous, a blonde wouldn't know a Lexus from a potato peeler.
-
They should get that fixed just about the same time cool Fall weather arrives.
Goodbye Cc, Hello University
in Open Chat
Posted
Parking's always a problem. If you're thinking of leaving early to walk, why not leave early, drive there, get a better spot, and have yourself a cup'a Joe?