I would have at least focused on finding the people responsible.
Instead of starting a war that cost several billion dollars
with country that had noting to do with it.

And I hope I would have taken the briefings that stated "Binladen determined to strike inside US" a little more seriously.

Or at least listend to the thousands of other peices of intelligence that stated
an attack was being planned.

http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?the_post-9/11_world=denials&timeline=complete_911_timeline

Also, I am smart enough to not repeat historical mistakes.

-----------------------------------------------

I would have gathered the best and the brighest together, and taken suggestions from them.
And I would have talked with every person that would listen.
And found a concencses on what to do.

That is how I would have done things.
And how I try to do things now.

How would you have handled it ???

It wasn't used on people suspected of a crime, it was used to GATHER INTELLIGENCE from people who took up arms against this country to prevent future attacks and save American lives. Nobody gave a flip if these cheese dicks ever got a fair trial, that was not why they were being questioned.

__________________
MB-less

Many of the people that have been detained and tortured have been proven innocent
of any crime.

I want to reply, but this doesn't even make sense.

__________________
1984 300TD

I see no difference between be-headings and bombing wedding parties. Neither of the perpetrators are confined at Gitmo.

What's not to make sense of? What you want is to bring YOUR rule book to the game. Much like say a Canadian Football League Player coming to the NFL and insisting that the NFL plays by CFL rules because that is the rule book he brought with him. If you want to play in the NFL, you play by NFL rules. We play in that theatere of war, we play with the rules that is being used instead of showing them your vaunted GC regulations. If you tried, they would piss on them and use them as butt wipe, like it should be.

In your first statment, you said you could score more if you had a gun and shot those that didn't. I agree with you. If you bring a gun and there isn't a referee to stop you, you will score more. Not sure I saw your point there but I agree with the fact that you brought. If the other side brings a gun and there is nobody that will stop you, why should I limit myself? What part of that is unclear?

In the 2nd statement, you asked who sets the rules. I told you that it is best you see what the rules are in the game instead of trying to force someone to follow your rules. Again, what part is unclear?

__________________
01 Ford Excursion Powerstroke
99 E300 Turbodiesel
91 Vette with 383 motor
05 Polaris Sportsman 800 EFI
06 Polaris Sportsman 500 EFI
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Red
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Yellow
04 Tailgator 21 ft Toy Hauler
11 Harley Davidson 883 SuperLow

So if someone has an accident and kills someone, they should be given the same punishment as if they actually broke into his house and killed him?

__________________
01 Ford Excursion Powerstroke
99 E300 Turbodiesel
91 Vette with 383 motor
05 Polaris Sportsman 800 EFI
06 Polaris Sportsman 500 EFI
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Red
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Yellow
04 Tailgator 21 ft Toy Hauler
11 Harley Davidson 883 SuperLow

Check your facts, the perp for beheading Danny Pearl is at Gitmo.

You can't make suspects of a crime run 5 miles either, if you are going to advance to anything substantive in the US military you will be subjected to waterboarding and a bunch of other no so pleasant interrogation techniques, if we subject our own Soldiers to the so called torture why can't it be done to an enemy combatant?

I've done the long stand, cold isolation, naked sprints, waterboard, iron horse, dieing cockroach, sleep deprivation, dark room, light room, CS gassed and many other unpleasantries but don't have any flashbacks or issues today, a grocery store gives me more anxiety than waterboard memories.

Somehow I doubt the US military waterboards its own troops to the same extent as what was done to some of the terror suspects, if that's even true to begin with. That's like equating martial arts sparring with full-contact competition. Not the same thing.

__________________
2004 VW Jetta TDI (manual)

Past MB's: '96 E300D, '83 240D, '82 300D, '87 300D, '87 420SEL

uhh, two things:

1. We did not torture anyone, if you are referring to EIT. None of those are torture; uncomfortable, tedious, terrifying, etc, but not torture.

2. We interrogated them and were found not to have useful intelligence; they were not being judged and punished for being innocent or guilty, so your premise is completely specious.

All this proves is that when at war, those with a psyche too weak to do what is needed to win and survive need to stay out of the war making. It is not for grownup children who's idea of "fairness" over rules the common sense required to get things done. And I am not talking about torture like breaking of bones, burning, and beating someone. I am not talking about removing digits knuckle joint by knuckle joint; I am taking about using interrogation tactics that produce results without being inhumane. One can say what they will about the tactics we used, but none of them are going to make former detaineees crippled or crazy, unless they started out that way.

umm, unless you have been there, that is a foolish thing to say. SERE training, depending at what level you took it, was extremely intense and effective. It was not a "demonstration" course where you sampled things at a buffet. You actually lived them.....

BS. There are some documented cases of detainee deaths in US custody as well as near death experiences with waterboarding. If it's not torture, you're more than likely to subject yourself to it. Usually those who talk tough and want to wage unnecessary wars are armchair quarterbacks who've never served, like Dick Cheney.

__________________
2004 VW Jetta TDI (manual)

Past MB's: '96 E300D, '83 240D, '82 300D, '87 300D, '87 420SEL

Have you been there? If so, tell us about the waterboarding that you went through.

__________________
2004 VW Jetta TDI (manual)

Past MB's: '96 E300D, '83 240D, '82 300D, '87 300D, '87 420SEL

well, some of those deaths were homicides. the people who perpetuated those homicides should and have been dealt with. a great number of deaths came with enemy mortar attacks on Abu Garhib. Some were ruled justifiable homicide. war is serious business; people die, on and off the battlefield. I dont know about unnecessary wars or talking tough, but i do know about my own personal experiences during my 20 years in the military. I feel what we did was acceptable under the law of warfare. We have acted in a way to limit casualties that we never have before in a war. I submit to you that if this war had been executed by the men who fought and won WWII for us, the casualty count in the AO would be much higher...