Moderators: peeker643, swerb, Ziner
by e0y2e3 » Mon May 02, 2011 2:56 pm

by hermanfontenot » Mon May 02, 2011 2:58 pm
e0y2e3 wrote:So that Pakistani guy that accidentally live tweeted it was obviously a plant by the US gov't

by Orenthal » Mon May 02, 2011 3:11 pm
exiledbuckeye wrote:Orenthal wrote:I told CDT someone would come out complaining. Oh and the celebration was complained about too, or maybe just how they celebrated.
FWIW, not in message board land but here in real life, I just spoke with a coworker who lost their mother in the World Trade Center. She is upset with the street celebrations because that is what many in the muslim world did after al Qaida attacked us.
I myself thought that the street celebrations were pretty awesome until I heard her perspective. Now my views are tempered, but I still think it was kind of cool.
by peeker643 » Mon May 02, 2011 3:17 pm
hermanfontenot wrote:e0y2e3 wrote:You going diving in the Ocean to find it herm?
No, because it probably isn't in the ocean, because we're probably being lied to as to exactly how, where and when this went down.
by danwismar » Mon May 02, 2011 3:33 pm
peeker643 wrote:hermanfontenot wrote:e0y2e3 wrote:You going diving in the Ocean to find it herm?
No, because it probably isn't in the ocean, because we're probably being lied to as to exactly how, where and when this went down.
Of course it ain't in the ocean.
This is the old "We took Sparky to the farm where he could run and play with other dogs" bullshit. Some muslims will sleep better believing it.
by peeker643 » Mon May 02, 2011 3:46 pm
danwismar wrote:peeker643 wrote:hermanfontenot wrote:e0y2e3 wrote:You going diving in the Ocean to find it herm?
No, because it probably isn't in the ocean, because we're probably being lied to as to exactly how, where and when this went down.
Of course it ain't in the ocean.
This is the old "We took Sparky to the farm where he could run and play with other dogs" bullshit. Some muslims will sleep better believing it.
Trying hard to come up with a coherent rationale for saying we buried him at sea when we didn't. Seemed to me like a legit attempt to pacify outraged Muslims. What's our upside to holding on to a rotting corpse? Don't get this line of thinking at all.
by jerryroche » Mon May 02, 2011 3:52 pm
by danwismar » Mon May 02, 2011 4:20 pm
by hermanfontenot » Mon May 02, 2011 4:54 pm
danwismar wrote:Now the judgement call is...do we "defile the dead" by showing the tape or allowing it to leak to the public, or just endure the doubts of the skeptics.

by Lubber » Mon May 02, 2011 5:47 pm
danwismar wrote:peeker643 wrote:hermanfontenot wrote:e0y2e3 wrote:You going diving in the Ocean to find it herm?
No, because it probably isn't in the ocean, because we're probably being lied to as to exactly how, where and when this went down.
Of course it ain't in the ocean.
This is the old "We took Sparky to the farm where he could run and play with other dogs" bullshit. Some muslims will sleep better believing it.
Trying hard to come up with a coherent rationale for saying we buried him at sea when we didn't. Seemed to me like a legit attempt to pacify outraged Muslims. What's our upside to holding on to a rotting corpse? Don't get this line of thinking at all.
by peeker643 » Mon May 02, 2011 5:55 pm
by e0y2e3 » Mon May 02, 2011 5:59 pm

by peeker643 » Mon May 02, 2011 6:13 pm
e0y2e3 wrote:Frankly, I am with dan but in a bit of a different way.....
The biggest FUCK OFF you can give someone is by showing how much better than them you are. This goes to exhile's point on the celebration thing.
Us Doing The "Proper" Thing is the biggest middle finger I have ever seen given, thus I believe they did it.
by e0y2e3 » Mon May 02, 2011 6:15 pm

by peeker643 » Mon May 02, 2011 6:23 pm
e0y2e3 wrote:My biggest question on that is, was he dropped off on a flight to an AC?
That makes the most sense to me.
by mattvan1 » Mon May 02, 2011 7:41 pm
by Cerebral_DownTime » Mon May 02, 2011 7:43 pm
by peeker643 » Mon May 02, 2011 7:54 pm
Cerebral_DownTime wrote:They'll release the pictures just like Uday, Qusay, and Zarqawi.
by Cerebral_DownTime » Mon May 02, 2011 8:15 pm
They have to don't they? If they time stamp his forehead all the better. Because there are already people out there who don't believe a word of this.
by skatingtripods » Mon May 02, 2011 8:17 pm
Cerebral_DownTime wrote:He's fucking dead. As we speak his remains are probably be excreted from the anus of a shark.
by Cerebral_DownTime » Mon May 02, 2011 8:20 pm
skatingtripods wrote:Cerebral_DownTime wrote:He's fucking dead. As we speak his remains are probably be excreted from the anus of a shark.
At least until some crazy Islamic fundamentalist claims that his body washed up on shore.
by skatingtripods » Mon May 02, 2011 8:21 pm
Cerebral_DownTime wrote:In burials at sea I think they use weighted and sealed caskets to ensure that doesn't happen. Now maybe he wasn't stuck in a box and they just tossed him overboard like trash.
by FUDU » Mon May 02, 2011 8:22 pm
by Lubber » Tue May 03, 2011 12:18 pm
peeker643 wrote:e0y2e3 wrote:Frankly, I am with dan but in a bit of a different way.....
The biggest FUCK OFF you can give someone is by showing how much better than them you are. This goes to exhile's point on the celebration thing.
Us Doing The "Proper" Thing is the biggest middle finger I have ever seen given, thus I believe they did it.
Maybe. I still have a hard time buying it given the distance to the Arabian Sea and the general disdain the professionals who extracted him would have. Their way of showing how much better they are would be to throw him in the nearest pre-dug hole and walk away like it was a 40min jog on the beach.
That'd be more in line with them being bigger and badder than the whole fucking nation of Islam.
I really doubt he mae it to the sea unless in some way that would have been , as Lubber mentioned, less than what the radicals would have preferred.
by Lubber » Tue May 03, 2011 12:19 pm
Cerebral_DownTime wrote:skatingtripods wrote:Cerebral_DownTime wrote:He's fucking dead. As we speak his remains are probably be excreted from the anus of a shark.
At least until some crazy Islamic fundamentalist claims that his body washed up on shore.
In burials at sea I think they use weighted and sealed caskets to ensure that doesn't happen. Now maybe he wasn't stuck in a box and they just tossed him overboard like trash.
by danwismar » Tue May 03, 2011 1:31 pm
by peeker643 » Tue May 03, 2011 2:20 pm

by danwismar » Tue May 03, 2011 4:44 pm
by JCoz » Tue May 03, 2011 5:19 pm
exiledbuckeye wrote:Orenthal wrote:because that is what many in the muslim world did after al Qaida attacked us.
by Cerebral_DownTime » Tue May 03, 2011 6:50 pm
Any waterboarding opponents (you know who you were) rethinking that opposition?...now that we know we'd probably still be looking for the guy had we not used it?
Does the fact that we used the technique on only a handful of high-value prisoners make it more justifiable?
Does the fact that it clearly worked make the arguments of its opponents that "it doesn't work" seem a bit empty and foolish today?
Does the fact that various journalists have undergone the technique with no lasting physical or emotional after-effects...and our own soldiers are subjected to it in training...and that it does no permanent physical damage to its subjects...any of that...make it in retrospect reasonable to say that it walks up to "the line" of torture, but doesn't cross it?
by Fire Marshall Bill » Tue May 03, 2011 8:13 pm
[for jb, especially].... just cuz I had the opportunity
by Cerebral_DownTime » Tue May 03, 2011 8:16 pm
by Fire Marshall Bill » Tue May 03, 2011 8:30 pm
hermanfontenot wrote:e0y2e3 wrote:So that Pakistani guy that accidentally live tweeted it was obviously a plant by the US gov't
What's that old phrase, "Trust in God, everyone else needs verification"? Or something like that.
Pakistani twitters aren't verification enough for me.
by Fire Marshall Bill » Tue May 03, 2011 8:32 pm
Cerebral_DownTime wrote:Is Wolfowitz a wee tiny guy?
He looks like a midget.
by danwismar » Tue May 03, 2011 8:55 pm
Cerebral_DownTime wrote:lol. You could've just addressed the post to me, I wouldn't have been offended.
by Cerebral_DownTime » Tue May 03, 2011 9:05 pm
danwismar wrote:Cerebral_DownTime wrote:lol. You could've just addressed the post to me, I wouldn't have been offended.
I thought about you, dude, but you weren't the only one. Thanks for weighing in. It's all about the conversation. Different strokes....
by FUDU » Tue May 03, 2011 9:11 pm
by Cerebral_DownTime » Tue May 03, 2011 11:15 pm
FUDU wrote:Just to keep this place fair & balanced I never think about you CDT.
by motherscratcher » Wed May 04, 2011 12:41 am
by danwismar » Wed May 04, 2011 1:43 pm
Cerebral_DownTime wrote:To be honest, I have no problem with using the Predator, targeted killings, or military tribunals.
by mattvan1 » Wed May 04, 2011 2:05 pm

by Cerebral_DownTime » Wed May 04, 2011 2:27 pm
danwismar wrote:Cerebral_DownTime wrote:To be honest, I have no problem with using the Predator, targeted killings, or military tribunals.
You know, a real nit-picking asshole might come in here and point out the logical or moral inconsistency in saying it's OK to drop a missile in a suspected terrorist's living room, blowing him, his wife and kids, and anyone else in the building with him to smithereens, but it's inexcusable and morally wrong to pour water on his face.
by danwismar » Wed May 04, 2011 2:48 pm
by Cerebral_DownTime » Wed May 04, 2011 3:03 pm
danwismar wrote:I am, but I'm not sure what that has to do with the topic of the logical/moral inconsistency I brought up.
by danwismar » Wed May 04, 2011 3:32 pm
by Cerebral_DownTime » Wed May 04, 2011 4:04 pm
You turned the question around to my beliefs rather than address the confusing logic behind yours....which I guess I can compress into "targeted killings are OK, but waterboarding is not". I'll continue to await your answer.
by danwismar » Wed May 04, 2011 4:26 pm
by Cerebral_DownTime » Wed May 04, 2011 4:39 pm
danwismar wrote:John Yoo did his job...which was to give legal advice to his superiors, so they could provide guidance to operatives dealing with complicated ethical issues. That he was targeted for criminal prosecution for having policy differences with the political opposition at the time is a disgrace, and a dangerous precedent, no matter what side you're on.
by peeker643 » Wed May 04, 2011 8:13 pm

by gotribe31 » Wed May 04, 2011 8:15 pm
peeker643 wrote:I wonder if there are any stats on this. That would help us understand it all.


Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests
