Korean Job Discussion Forums

[mithridates]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/27/AR2006102700560.html

[huffdaddy]

What are the chances that a Democrat controlled Congress or even a Democrat President will investigate this? If what we think is going on under this administration is really going on, Bush and Cheney deserve their own cells at Gitmo.

[Gopher]

[huffdaddy]

[ddeubel]

I agree with a call for a new administration and even your call for McCain to be included (once didn't like the guy but he seems one of the few with power to say how dirty this administration is acting).

But you phrase the whole question in a wrong manner .

[Gopher]

Beg your pardon.

My scenario presents a realistic tactical matter. You have no experience in tactical matters, military or otherwise. I do. Sometimes events develop exactly as I suggested above. I also think that this is precisely the scenario that Scott Hennen presented Cheney with (when he apparently baited him). Your knee-jerk rejection of my scenario, then, is wholly unwarranted.

I also note that you are violently resisting answering it. That is because you do not have an answer, do you?

Welcome to the real world. This is the world that those who are dealing with the insurgencies in Afghanistan and Iraq deal with every day -- except they, of course, are not dealing with direct threats to the United States itself. Also, however, add Israel, which does indeed deal with such direct threats.

And you can not demand that everyone should treat some historical actors and groups with sympathy, and drop the hostility, while at the same time obsinately refusing to extend that same sympathy to all historical actors and groups, including unpopular governments.

We all have points of view, then, that must be considered if we are to claim that we have a fair and balanced view of what is going on and why...

[huffdaddy]

[Octavius Hite]

No Gopher it doesnt, its a serious tactical matter for Jack Bauer. What your suggesting is most unlikely. But if it did, for the sake of argument, the police would torture it out of him anyway and then the president could give everyone a presidential pardon and no American would object to it. What everyone is objecting to is that they are torturing bin Laden's driver who has no tactical knowledge of anything, especially since he's been in jail for 5 years. But nice try scaring people.

[Gopher]

[mithridates]

Cheney certainly doesn't seem to be very bright or know the media very well. What he should have done is stopped the guy at the "dunk in the water" phrase and make a small statement about how no extreme measures can be summed up in such a glib phrase, but that sometimes hard choices have to be made. Not that I agree, but that's the way Cheney should have said it if he wanted to avoid a media firestorm. Now Snow (I think it's Snow, the press secretary) has to answer awkward questions for the next few days:
(paraphrasing)
"What did he mean by a dunk in the water?"
"Just what it means. A dunk in the water. It means what it says, a dunk in the water."

Yeah right. A little dunk in the water is all you need to get a crucial secret out of a hardened terrorist.

I'll never talk!

Dunk.

Okay, I'll talk! Everybody knows what the interviewer implied when he said it. Reminds me of Joo when he talks about "playing Iron Maiden a bit loud" and "turning on the air conditioner" as other methods.

Yes, one thing I think we're all in agreement on is that Cheney is not very bright in answering a hypothetical like that. He doesn't even seem to understand the outrage either which is interesting. I believe him when he says he doesn't read the paper.

[laogaiguk]

I always hear that torture doesn't even usually give reliable information and is sometimes worse as people will say anything (and things can't be checked within a few hours time). I don't know if this is true, but I think torture, especially under those short time conditions wouldn't really even be reliable.

[huffdaddy]

[Meegook]