Come back with some proof or sources on your ridiculous arguments, then we can debate.

 

i doubt he'll be able to do that, more than likely the 'sources' he post will be from ignorant people and bias news articles. 

Spot on. 

 

And just to make a point here, 3,000 people died in the 9/11 attacks.Over 200,000 Iraqis have died since the 2003 invasion. Just a little perspective. 

Iraq isn't the only war where more foreign troops have died than American troops. Most of the wars the United States has been in, were involved or took place in third world countries. Somalia, Vietnam, Korea(Debatable, but not going to), etc. First world troops are usually better trained and more skilled than third world troops.

Most of the 200,000 Iraqis weren't soldiers.

Iraq isn't the only war where more foreign troops have died than American troops. Most of the wars the United States has been in, were involved or took place in third world countries. Somalia, Vietnam, Korea(Debatable, but not going to), etc. First world troops are usually better trained and more skilled than third world troops.

 

 

Most of the 200,000 Iraqis weren't soldiers.

That's my point. Most of those 200,000 were innocent civilians. Unfortunately for them, they were brown people from the Middle East, so oil has more value than they do. 

Edited December 12, 201411 yr by SIR_Sergeant

That's my point. Most of those 200,000 were innocent civilians. Unfortunately for them, they were brown people from the Middle East, so oil has more value than they do. 

Do you have any facts or sources on these 200,000 being civilians?

Do you have any facts or sources on these 200,000 being civilians?

The numbers a a little different here and there depending on the source, but here is a listing of estimates: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War#Overview._Iraqi_death_estimates_by_source

The numbers a a little different here and there depending on the source, but here is a listing of estimates: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War#Overview._Iraqi_death_estimates_by_source

I do appreciate the link, butWikipedia can't be considered a reliable source. If I wanted to I could easily go and change that number from 300,000, to 3 million and who could tell the difference?

I do appreciate the link, butWikipedia can't be considered a reliable source. If I wanted to I could easily go and change that number from 300,000, to 3 million and who could tell the difference?

All the sources are listed at the bottom of the page. http://gyazo.com/a86826f2f0b6a9891f812116d315544c

 

Believe me, I'm aware Wiki by itself isn't a credible source. I'm a student. Professor emailed us today about a grad student that was caught changing data on Wiki as a prank. However, all the links are there for you to examine and verify the numbers for yourself. 

This is why the victims of crime should never be responsible for the administration of justice.  In most societies built on the rule of law, including the US, this the way it works.  I'm well aware of the difference between domestic and international politics, but there's no reason why a state should see fit to enact justice in a similar fashion.  Terrorists certainly do take the lives of innocent people.  Then again, so do our governments.  What's the difference?  Maybe, that the terrorists are honest about it?!

 

 

 

 

Feel free to move to somewhere like China.  I'm sure you won't have to deal with "ignorant fucks" that question their government there.  Heck, maybe they can put you in kangaroo court and shoot you to death in a sports stadium while they're at it!  Its one of the many benefits we have of living in countries like the US and the UK, and it should never be understated, but people like you really don't help anything.  You can tout American brilliance one moment, then ignore, or even support, American barbarianism the very next.

 

I don't need an opinion from someone who is nowhere near the US and has no idea how our country works on a day to day basis. Thanks for your input, though!

 

I don't need an opinion from someone who is nowhere near the US and has no idea how our country works on a day to day basis. Thanks for your input, though!

 

You don't need to be from a country to know how things work or be aware of what is going on.  From what I can tell, Sam is more educated about the United States than a fair number of people that have commented in this thread. To ignore his opinion because you don't like it and blame the fact that he lives in another country is just dodging the argument. 

Edited December 12, 201411 yr by SIR_Sergeant

You don't need to be from a country to know how things work or be aware of what is going on.  From what I can tell, Sam is more educated about the United States than a fair number of people that have commented in this thread. To ignore his opinion because you don't like it and blame the fact that he lives in another country is just dodging the argument. 

 

Lol, I can ignore it all I want. I think I have more credibility than a lot of Americans judging other places because I have lived in England (twice), the middle east, and East Asia. Trust me, no place, in my opinion, comes close to the US.

Lol, I can ignore it all I want. I think I have more credibility than a lot of Americans judging other places because I have lived in England (twice), the middle east, and East Asia. Trust me, no place, in my opinion, comes close to the US.

 

And your opinion is totally not biased by the fact that you're a patriotic american citizen, of course.

 

Seriously though, do you really need to be so aggressive and unpleasant?

You don't need to be from a country to know how things work or be aware of what is going on.  From what I can tell, Sam is more educated about the United States than a fair number of people that have commented in this thread. To ignore his opinion because you don't like it and blame the fact that he lives in another country is just dodging the argument. 

 

Now this I can agree with you on. Quite frankly no matter which side they are "on", it's good to hear a foreign opinion for sure.

 

But on another note, I do disagree that you are using the 200,000 killed in the Iraq war in this argument. I don't see why it is needed in the argument. Yes that many people and possibly many many more were killed (including civilians, women, and children), it happens. Part of war. Look at the death tolls of WWII. However I don't think it is entirely relevant because this argument is about the CIA and interrogation and the CIA is absolutely not solely responsible for that much loss of life in the Iraq campaign.

 

So since you brought up the 200,000, I'm going on a tangent, but think about the thousands of people Saddam tortured and killed before the Gulf War and after it (including innocent people who he claimed had helped the Americans in 90-91). And I think you can make a viable argument that the CIA was very helpful in bringing him to justice with or without Enhanced Interrogation Techniques. Was bringing him to justice worth it? 

 

Also Sam what you mentioned earlier about the comparisons is accurate, and you make a valid argument. I do believe the US has a lot to learn in the representing itself department.

 

Now on another note, I still want to bring up the point I made earlier that no one mentioned. The politicians who released this report were told that releasing this report would very likely result in backlash and attacks on Americans overseas and endanger many more American lives. However they still decided to release it. Personally I'm glad that we finally have clarity but at what cost? If there is an attack next week and it costs 500 American lives was it worth it? 

Also I would like to add that this report was made solely on the testimony from the Lawyers for the people that were detained, and no interviews were conducted with the CIA agents in charge of the camps and detainees. That's another talking point that needs to be addressed. 

And your opinion is totally not biased by the fact that you're a patriotic american citizen, of course.

 

Seriously though, do you really need to be so aggressive and unpleasant?

 

Yep. I do. I'm sick and tired of people having no faith in their country. The grass is always greener on the other side, but nobody appreciates that.

 

Now this I can agree with you on. Quite frankly no matter which side they are "on", it's good to hear a foreign opinion for sure.

 

But on another note, I do disagree that you are using the 200,000 killed in the Iraq war in this argument. I don't see why it is needed in the argument. Yes that many people and possibly many many more were killed (including civilians, women, and children), it happens. Part of war. Look at the death tolls of WWII. However I don't think it is entirely relevant because this argument is about the CIA and interrogation and the CIA is absolutely not solely responsible for that much loss of life in the Iraq campaign.

 

So since you brought up the 200,000, I'm going on a tangent, but think about the thousands of people Saddam tortured and killed before the Gulf War and after it (including innocent people who he claimed had helped the Americans in 90-91). And I think you can make a viable argument that the CIA was very helpful in bringing him to justice with or without Enhanced Interrogation Techniques. Was bringing him to justice worth it? 

 

Also Sam what you mentioned earlier about the comparisons is accurate, and you make a valid argument. I do believe the US has a lot to learn in the representing itself department.

 

Now on another note, I still want to bring up the point I made earlier that no one mentioned. The politicians who released this report were told that releasing this report would very likely result in backlash and attacks on Americans overseas and endanger many more American lives. However they still decided to release it. Personally I'm glad that we finally have clarity but at what cost? If there is an attack next week and it costs 500 American lives was it worth it? 

Also I would like to add that this report was made solely on the testimony from the Lawyers for the people that were detained, and no interviews were conducted with the CIA agents in charge of the camps and detainees. That's another talking point that needs to be addressed. 

The point I was attempting to construct is as follows: 3,000 Americans died on 9/11. Everyone cares. Our invasion of Iraq results in upwards of 200,000 people killed. How many people give a damn? The argument I'm drawing from this is that many opinions espoused about the torture report are ethnocentric. I think people don't have a problem with the torture, like with the dead Iraqis, because of the ethnic and national backgrounds of those being tortured. I think a lot more people would have a problem with it if it was a prototypical American being tortured, or if such things occurred in our civilian criminal justice system.

 

In regards to Saddam Hussein, sure, he was an awful guy, but we helped him become that. Pumped him up with aid during the Iran-Iraq war. Shit, the man has a key to city of Detroit. Furthermore, I'm not so sure his capture and execution was necessarily a net gain for Iraq. I am in no way justifying his crimes, but I think the point that Hussein's regime kept Iraq stable, and contributed to the stability of the region is worth considering. What happened after he was ousted? A massive power vacuum was created. Power vacuums are hotbeds for conflict. There was no insurgency in Iraq before the U.S. invasion. I think it could be argued that had the U.S. invasion not occurred, ISIS would not exist. and the mess we see in Iraq today would cease to exist.  

I fail to see why so many are so angry about it all. Given the chance, the 'victims' of the torture would have done far worse to an American. People are getting angry at torture (that's lets face it, isn't even that brutal compared to techniques used against us) considering the recent beheading.

The point I was attempting to construct is as follows: 3,000 Americans died on 9/11. Everyone cares. Our invasion of Iraq results in upwards of 200,000 people killed. How many people give a damn? The argument I'm drawing from this is that many opinions espoused about the torture report are ethnocentric. I think people don't have a problem with the torture, like with the dead Iraqis, because of the ethnic and national backgrounds of those being tortured. I think a lot more people would have a problem with it if it was a prototypical American being tortured, or if such things occurred in our civilian criminal justice system.

 

In regards to Saddam Hussein, sure, he was an awful guy, but we helped him become that. Pumped him up with aid during the Iran-Iraq war. Shit, the man has a key to city of Detroit. Furthermore, I'm not so sure his capture and execution was necessarily a net gain for Iraq. I am in no way justifying his crimes, but I think the point that Hussein's regime kept Iraq stable, and contributed to the stability of the region is worth considering. What happened after he was ousted? A massive power vacuum was created. Power vacuums are hotbeds for conflict. There was no insurgency in Iraq before the U.S. invasion. I think it could be argued that had the U.S. invasion not occurred, ISIS would not exist. and the mess we see in Iraq today would cease to exist.  

 

Okay I lament, I have no argument for that. Well done.

 

However I will say that Americans are being detained, may or may not be being tortured, and are then beheaded, and it seems like the American public cares more about Dancing with the Stars than that.

 

I adjourn for now, good debate *reaches for handshake*.   

Okay I lament, I have no argument for that. Well done.

 

However I will say that Americans are being detained, may or may not be being tortured, and are then beheaded, and it seems like the American public cares more about Dancing with the Stars than that.

 

I adjourn for now, good debate *reaches for handshake*.   

Hahaha, thank you. 

 

I think  you're definitely right that people are way too preoccupied to pay attention to the things that really do matter. 

This is turning out to be a very good debate, me like. Now listen, this is to Tom, okay this is how I would do it, like what you said what if a terrorist was threatening to blow a elementary school or carry out a massive genocide on a city like New York, unless you valid evidence and I mean valid, that he/she has the bomb, instead of torutuing the suspect, you break them psychological and get into their heads, something more efficient, again torture has been proven to be ineffective many times.

My opinion: don't get yourself in the government's business because you have no right in knowing everything in the fucking world. Hell, I'll use this example - aliens could be spying on us as we speak, but if the government told us about it, we'd flip shit. Further, I'm sure if someone killed your first born child, you'd want them to torture. Terrorists take the lives of our loved ones and now all of a sudden it's "aww, poor terrorist. We shouldn't make him suffer!"? That's bullshit in my opinion. This is becoming a bias against the government. Anything our government does upsets people because they're ignorant fucks who have nothing better to do than bitch about what the government is doing. Enjoy life as it is, don't fantasize about what it could be.

 

</rant>

So what you're saying is, we should all be controlled and do whatever they say? It's not our business to know what the government does? Oh yea, real smart there, buddy. Not like that could turn into total tyranny.

Edited December 13, 201411 yr by OfficerLund