Oddly silent

jf1acai wrote:

ZHawke wrote: It would appear that is not the case in this situation.

In your opinion. Our opinions clearly differ.

Out of curiosity, what part of my expressed opinion does not agree with your perceived reality?

Yes....yes they do differ.

The part about "they didn't use torture". The rest of your previous post really has nothing to do with an argument on torture. Beheading is atrocious, that is undeniable. So are drone strikes that are "inhumane". I won't argue those issues with you. They are emotional. They are inexcusable. What we're talking about here, though, is whether the U.S., through their elected and appointed officials, is complicit in using torture as defined by laws both within our own country and within international law. If we condone torture by those definitions, if we condone what our elected and appointed officials did in the use of torture (which it appears they did, in fact, do), then we are no better than any other group/country that engages in atrocious behavior to try to achieve a political end. That's my opinion. If you'd like, I can also provide access to other, more factual information that supports my opinion. But that's something some in this forum seem reluctant to accept as "reality".

The link to the actual Senate Report:

www.intelligence.senate.gov/study2014/sscistudy1.pdf

Reading the first few pages, it's really hard to deny the techniques used by the CIA weren't torture. Waterboarding, rectal rehydration/feeding (no medical need or medical justification), sleep deprivation, and the list goes on.

If we, as a country we want the rest of the world to look up to, cannot rise above these kinds of "methods", regardless of how outraged we may be at what terrorists have done to our country, what, then, makes us any better than they are in the final analysis?

More anecdotal, but straight to the heart of the matter regarding the use of torture:

www.stonekettle.com/2014/12/the-road-to-hell.html

You use torture, you are a torturer. Plain and simple. If the U.S. uses torture, the U.S. is a torturer. Plain and simple.

BlazerBob - I don't know what happened to your post. One second it was there, the next it was gone. What's going on here?

I deleted it . not in the mood right now.

news.sky.com/interactive/1345361/watch-sky-news-live

OK. Thanks.

Zhawke, have you ever lived life on the jagged edge? You seem to look at the world from an ivory tower.

FredHayek wrote: Zhawke, have you ever lived life on the jagged edge? You seem to look at the world from an ivory tower.

Two things: Thanks for using my full screen name instead of just Z. I do appreciate that. In that vein, I'll also address you by yours.

The second thing, FredHayek, is that neither of us knows anything about the other except what we see here in this Forum. Some who post here know more about me as, I'm sure some also know more about you. Without getting into any more detail than that because some have also "accused" me of using my past to put forward an agenda, I'll tell you the "jagged edge" I lived on isn't something I'd wish on my worst enemy. Others have gone through similar "jagged edges" in their lives, too. I'm not saying mine is any more or less than theirs.

I cannot, nor will I, pretend to speak for anyone else on this, but my experience helped me realize if I didn't at least try to stand up for what I believe in, the core values I hold, then the experience I had was just that, an experience I'd rather not even try to remember much less actually remember. So, I choose, much of the time, to engage in discussions in forums like this one. I chose to set up a website still under development. I chose to start writing blogs on a range of things. All of it helps me cope with my own demons. While that course isn't necessarily for everyone, it does help me take some of that jagged edge you mentioned off when I deal with others in every day life.

The ivory tower is something toward which I, personally, try to strive. Naive? Perhaps. Pie in the sky? Also, perhaps. Unrealistic? Also, also perhaps. That list could go on forever. But I strive to address it each and every day. If that's wrong, then I'm guilty as charged.

That is all.

Good answer, aspire to your ivory tower. But know the walls are guarded by men living on that jagged edge. Realize they occasionally have to use methods that appall you to keep the wolves at bay.

One of the biggest mistakes diplomats and negotiators make is believing that the person on the other end of that table has the same sets of values and experiences.

FredHayek wrote: Good answer, aspire to your ivory tower. But know the walls are guarded by men living on that jagged edge. Realize they occasionally have to use methods that appall you to keep the wolves at bay.

One of the biggest mistakes diplomats and negotiators make is believing that the person on the other end of that table has the same sets of values and experiences.

Thank you. I will.

I am also not so naive to "know" what you are talking about in the rest of your post, either. I do not necessarily agree that a big mistake is made by diplomats and negotiators. I just happen to believe, right or wrong, that diplomacy and negotiations for peace is a far better way to approach things in the long run than engaging in and conducting perpetual war. The two are not, from what I've studied, mutually exclusive.

Some would have us believe peace can only be achieved if, and when, our opponents have been completely annihilated and wiped from the face of this Earth. To me, that's just as far fetched a position to take as is the idea that an ivory tower approach to this issue is. If it were true and accurate, groups like Al Quaeda, ISIS, Hamas, and their ilk should have been long gone by now. They're not. They just back up, re-group, and take another run from under the guise of a new group. If we, and our allies, choose to continue our efforts in war as we've done for over a decade now, instead of trying to get to the underlying "core" issues that divide us, I believe we, not they, will ultimately lose this fight.

I'm reminded of a phrase used by President Teddy Roosevelt that I believe applies here: "Speak softly and carry a big stick, you will go far". To me, that would be an art form of diplomacy and diplomatic negotiations. I haven't seen much, if any, of that in our current engagement(s) in the Middle East.