Dawg wrote:Soapy wrote:Governments are governments. They all do what they think they can get away with. No surprise there. Also if you want to chastise Obama for sanctioning torture, you need to be against torture regardless who was in charge when it took place.
hence the irony perhaps not surprisingly missed?
Obama attacked the tactics of the bush administration, and also.......got a Nobel for among other things, promising to end such things and ""
extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.
Thanks to Obama's initiative Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened.
Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population."" (the quotes are from the press release from the nobel committee)
No I get it, but why are the anti Obama dudes up in arms? Are they against torture or for it?
2 kids have a fight in the school yard, one is your son the other someone else's. Does your opinion about fighting depend on which one of the kids wins or is it regardless of who comes out on top. i.e. are you only pro or anti something depending on the results?
Personally, on torture, completely against it, especially state sanctioned. 2 main reasons are that it brings us down to the level of societies that we ( in the West ) are alledgedly against, and secondly, it rarely, if ever provides decent intel. In fact it tends to be counter productive and give us more bad info than good.
You would assume in this day and age we could be more creative and clever with anti terrorism etc. Instead of reverting to stuff that demeans the perpertrator and the state that is behind it, and leaves us all feeling dirty.
