McCain Thinks I am Torturing People.....
By robertm75 Posted in Archived — Comments (1) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
A couple of you have taken offense to my saying that Viet-Vets need to stop projecting thier failures in Vietnam on my generation while they fight in the GWOT. Some have tried to put words in my mouth by saying that I really mean the John Kerry-Vets. Well, I want to be perfectly clear: I mean any Viet-Vet out there, whether it's John McCain or John F. Kerry, maligning me and my mates while they put their a** on the line in defending this great land. John Kerry is easy to refute for what he is, but John McCain is more difficult because he wraps himself up in the flag and the fact that he was a POW. But it is no secret that he has, in so many words, said that those involved in the extraction of information from detainees in GETMO or anywhere else are acting in a torturous manner. He points to waterbording as his "Exhibit A" and his vile comments are just as damaging to our war effort as the wacko-Left's statements. There is NO torture going on.
I give you a piece by J.R. Dunn located on RealClearPolitics.com titled "The 'Torture' Fraud of the Left." (here's the link: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/11/the_torture_fraud_of_t...)
If you read down towards the end you will find this passage: "KSM (as he's known in intelligence circles) was partly responsible for the murder of close to 3,000 people. That being the case, it would please me to learn that he was being waterboarded at least once every day of his life, and I'm sure I'm not alone. But what is being overlooked is that Khalid's case matches the one exception to the 'no torture' rule almost universally granted by critics, including several of those same Democratic candidates: an emergency where the possibility exists that many lives may be threatened by terrorist action. Such a possibility existed in the case of KSM. As a result he suffered a short, nasty interlude, and the possibility was laid to rest." The one politician not mentioned is John McCain.
I am sorry, but I don't want a Commander-in-Chief who looks at me and my collegues as torturors whether it be a Republican or Democrat. McCain has acted in a manner that relays his message loud and clear: The US Military has tortured people. We have not; we will not. So, he and all the other Viet-Vets out there that look for some reason to besmirch this generation's fight in the GWOT need to get on with it. They need to deal with their past and support us, knowing full well that we are not what the Left makes us out to be, or they need to shut up and let us win this d**n thing. I hate to be so blunt about it, but I would rather emulate my Grandfather's generation than my Father's.
I think that the focus on torture should be too simply say that we don’t do it, we don’t condone it and that there are extremely limited circumstances that could possibly (i.e. Jack Bauer scenarios) call for torture. Its important that we stick to our ideals that we are a force of good in the world, but still be realists that there may be a time and place for torture.
That being said, the article you posted was a really informative on defining torture. It made a good point that the liberals have pretty much provided all of the definitions of what constitutes torture. Some of the acts the libs consider torture such as waterborading, forced positions, loud music – I think would be totally appropriate under the proper circumstances. Other actions, again depending on the circumstances I would think are torturous, including, continued electrocution, cutting off fingers or limbs, etc.
I think the definition of torture really depends on the context and that no generalization of or “obvious” torture can be made. For instance, beating some young, punk shoplifter with a stick to admit to his crime would seem torturous, but beating a terrorist with a stick to give up the location of roadside bombs that would kill a convey of troops seems legitimate, indeed necessary and prudent.
I guess the only way to define torture for me, is "I'll know it when I see it..."