BF2S Forums See? Torture DOES work!

Dilbert_X wrote:

The European Court of Human Rights seems to agree with the USG's interpretation.

Not entirely.
'The Court found that these were a lesser offense within the Article 3 (art. 3), the practice of "inhuman and degrading treatment"'
Still an offense and a violation of the Geneva Convention.
Not everything is going to be torture, either way its illegal - my point earlier.

And again, those adjectives are open to interpretation.

Dilbert_X wrote:

Which is followed. Because the Act was signed into law by Bush.

The manual was there before, why did Congress need to pass an act requiring that what was already in place be followed?

You either did some poor cherrypicking, poor reading, or you don't understand English.

The manual was there before, and was being followed before. It was rewritten (as directed by the Act in question) to specifically proscribe the activities that caused the problems and to reduce ambiguity in the remainder.

Dilbert_X wrote:

I don't agree with the veto, either.

Good for you, maybe we can be friends?

That would be up to you.

Dilbert_X wrote:

I have no idea what you're talking about here, but that's OK. But for you to call ANYONE self-righteous is the epitome of irony.

I have my values and beliefs, I don't give a toss if you think arguing torture is evil is bigoted or whatever.
I do at least have the Geneva Convention etc behind me.

The only thing you're bigoted against is anything involving the US or the current administration. But I don't recall implying that you were bigoted because of your position on torture.

Strangely enough, we both have the Geneva Convention etc behind us. That is part of the problem.

Dilbert_X wrote:

As for Presidential rankings, read up a bit and get some historical perspective on the difference between incumbent ratings and ratings after history has had a chance to play itself out a bit.

So out of 43 presidents Truman makes the top 10? Woo hoo, what a winner.
I'd like to read up, your link fails.

Since we've only had 43 Presidents, I'm not sure how your comment is in any way relevant.

The link doesn't fail...your ability to read further fails.

Dilbert_X wrote:

History will be the judge on Bush - I dn't think its going to be kind.

I don't necessarily disagree, but since I'm not a psychic, I'll wait to see how things play out.

Dilbert_X wrote:

-Asleep or playing golf while in the knowledge AQ were plotting to attack the US homeland.

Strangely enough, Clinton played golf and slept to. How many attacks occurred on his watch as compared to Bush?

Dilbert_X wrote:

-Presiding over US economic meltdown (despite inheriting a sound base from BJ Bill) and skyrocketing oil prices - thanks in significant part to instability in the ME created by GWB himself.

You need to read a bit more. Bush inherited a forming recession that got rushed into place by 9/11. The economy boomed under Bush up until recently. Though I believe his people have been asleep at the wheel with regard to the economy exactly because it was doing so well.

Dilbert_X wrote:

Not that I in any way think the same thing will happen with Bush, but he's far from the worst we've ever had.

I think he is the worst you've had. At least Reagan was senile so can't really be blamed for much. He did see in the end of the cold war though.

Interesting that you have an opinion. Most historians and political scientists disagree with your Reagan assessment, but don't start letting facts contrary to your opinion stand in your way now.