posted by Winston Smith at
3:32 PM
Thursday, September 14, 2006
Previous Posts
- When Prophecy FailsWell, looks like we're still ar...
- Nice Knowin' YaDon't forget, the world ends today....
- Grasping at Straws, Linking to Straw-GraspersAh, I...
- Where'd I Go?The Path from 9/11Well, after the bre...
- I'm Confused About What Rumsfeld Means Here, but I...
- Apocalypse SoonSo, according to one Yisrayl Hawkin...
- Clinton Was Right, Episode XXXVIII Or So: Welfare...
- The Real OBL?At Harper's. Read it!
- There's An Old Saying In Tennessee...Etc., etc.......
- "...Nobody Has Ever Suggested In This Administrati...
Subscribe to
Posts [Atom]
18 Comments:
Fuck Colin Powell.
He had a chance to really make a difference; he's the only person in America who had a real opportunity to derail the Iraq war, and instead, he essentially guaranteed it was going to happen with his U.N. "bullshit" dog and pony show. Then, when Iraq proved the stunning incompetence of the Bush admin war planners (added to their already-grossly illustrated perfidity), Powell could have spoken up during the 2004 campaign and maybe helped put some non-insane people in charge. Instead, he held his tongue while thousands died needlessly. Now he's squaking in a pathetic, Kissingerian attempt to burnish his image? Wash your hands all you want, Colin, the blood won't come off.
Tony D:
You have an excellent future as a DLC Beltway campaign strategist a la Shrum.
Personally, I'd take your purely hypothetical "huge gains" to have Roberts and Amato off the Supreme Court and a better FDA, just for starters.
I knew I forgot something: Katrina.
Whew, I fear my vitriol may be catching...
What I lack is the ability to predict the future of a hypothetical world.
Unlike you.
(Crap. Gotta break the habit of commenting as soon as I read.)
Tony D, your TR quote sits oddly with your relief that Kerry missed his chance in the arena.
And, in case I wasn't clear, I can imagine plenty about "how much worse the pseudo cons could be" but that would only come after your "huge gains", which I say again are purely hypothetical. It's that kind of imagination that keeps people out of the arena.
And my handle is NO fortunate son, nfs is fine.
"Amato"! Did I actually write that? Double crap. Alito.
Anyone helping McCain/Graham/Warner does in fact hate America.
Yeah, good thing Powell kept his mouth shut and kept that crucial "influence" of his. Lord knows how shitty Iraq could have gotten if he hadn't been there to whisper futiley into Bush's ear. Hell, Saddam might be in the white house by now!
If, by early 2003, Powell hadn't realized that him and the state department were being chemically castrated, that Rumsfeld and Cheney were running things, and that the only difference he could make was by revealing what he knew BEFORE they could start their splendid little war, he's an idiot. If he did see the truth, and still kept silent, he's a knave. Take your pick.
Hilzoy: It's very bad.
Me: OK, I'm warming up to it.
* It would eliminate the right of any alien who is in US custody outside the US, or who "has been determined by the United States to have been properly detained as an enemy combatant", to file for habeas corpus.
Me: Good.
*It would eliminate the right of any such alien to take any legal action against "the United States or its agents" concerning the conditions of his or her detention, other than to appeal the results of Civilian Status Review Commissions or military tribunals.
Me: I like that.
* Both of these provisions apply to all cases pending when the bill becomes law, which means that any of the cases currently wending their way through the legal system that haven't been resolved by that time become moot.
Me: Cool. The chance that the last remaining detainees are Mother ibn-Teresas and not Adolf bin Ladens is exceedingly small. And if a few got caught up unjustly, I hope we sort it out, but I reckon even they've already thrown their feces and semen at the guards, which rightfully keeps them in the dungeon that we saw Hannibal Lecter in.
* It changes the definition of war crimes: currently, any conduct that violates Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions counts as a war crime; the draft bill changes this to "a grave breach of common Article 3".
Me: Good with that too. Article 3 would be laughed out of any court of law as unenforcably vague.
* And it makes this paragraph from the Detainee Treatment Act applicable to any prosecution for war crimes involving violations of Common Article 3...
Me: Yeah, whatever.
If somebody wants to stand up and say that we shouldn't use strongly coercive tactics even if it costs innocent lives, let them say so.
I could respect that. Just say it.
If they say that we might save a few lives in the near term but lose many more by relinquishing the moral high ground, let them say so.
I could respect that, too.
But there is no "torture doesn't work" easy escape from this. That is moronic. We just saved a ton of lives by turning Rashid Rauf over to Pakistan's tender mercies. He gave up the whole plot.
It's a moral dilemma, and to pretend that it isn't is fantasy. There is no easy way out of this.
tom van dyke:
Why is it that you respond to hilzoy here instead of at Obsidian Wings?
nfs, you should be asking why he's responding like a fascist not an American.
rilkefan:
I've noticed that asking tvd an open ended question like that tends to turn into unending wrangling. I'm hoping that my simple question will not have that effect.
Tony D:
If you are talking about me then I think you have misunderstood what I wrote. What I am objecting to is not your characterization of the psuedo cons and what they might unleash. I object to your conviction that a Kerry presidency would have led to "HUGE gains" by them.
This purely hypothetical and in addition insulting to Kerry. You have no way of knowing that Iraq would have been as disastrous for him as it has been for Bush.
And then to say that we need to count our blessings that Georgie got his second term, well as I said that's the attitude that keeps people out of the arena.
Because I delude myself that I'm part of this community, nfs. Hilzoy was put on the table. I answered. Pass the mashed potatoes.
Tom, it doesn't appear as though torture(if it was done to Mr. Rauf), yielded anything in this case:
But after two weeks of interrogation, an inch-by-inch search of his house and analysis of his home computer, officials are now saying that his extradition is ‘a way down the track’ if it happens at all.
It comes amid wider suspicions that the plot may not have been as serious, or as far advanced, as the authorities initially claimed.
It should be noted that Pakistan hasn't
handed Rauf over to the British yet, which does raise a few questions, IMHO.
tvd:
Ok, I can accept that, but do you plan to comment at hilzoy's own site or are satisfied to have your criticisms pass below her radar?
Also, it appears that Rauf was arrested in Pakistan, so nobody turned him over to "Pakistan's tender mercies." And the published reports do not indicate they learned much from him.
I got my information off Wiki, where did you get yours?
Dahlia Lithwick on Americans-for-torture.
Via this explanation.
NFS, I tend not to post on blogs where there are a ton of comments. Just one of those things. Makes me feel unspecial.
Hilzoy and I had a nice exchange awhile back on this blog, tho, over the now-familiar meme that one should restrict their criticisms of world events to the flaws of the US, in the belief that the US' conduct is all a poor blogger can expect to influence.
I, naturally, disagreed.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home