Still Hating America.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
in your law school did you miss the days when they talked about the difference between negligent and intentional behaviors?

In your law school did you miss the day when they talked about how, if intentionally grab someone because he has the wrong name, complexion, and religion and then you torture him because all them folks are terrorists or they know terrorists but it turns out you were wrong, that isn't negligence, it's still intentional?

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Diane_Keaton
British members of the military say they were in waters that, it's agreed, are appropriate to be in and that Iranian forces attacked them, rounded them up and imprisoned them in Iran. I haven't heard the Iran President condemn the action of his troops. Is this not an act of war? Or do we give these nutjob countries more slack, since you know, Muslims are upset about Israel existing and such and we wouldn't want to rankle them further?

Are we fighting Britain's battles now?

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
The Pueblo?

I was thinking the same thing about the incident as a whole.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by taxwonk
In your law school did you miss the day when they talked about how, if intentionally grab someone because he has the wrong name, complexion, and religion and then you torture him because all them folks are terrorists or they know terrorists but it turns out you were wrong, that isn't negligence, it's still intentional?

what is with you guys and hypos? I. DON'T. ANSWER. HYPOS.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by taxwonk
only a jackass would not condemn torture or illegal seizure.

Would you care to take a stab at guessing what it means that I'm now commenting?

"Jackass"? Don't you mean "disingenuous"? Their failure to comment isn't at all negligent.

Is the closing riddle a Van Morrison lyric?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by taxwonk
In your law school did you miss the day when they talked about how, if intentionally grab someone because he has the wrong name, complexion, and religion and then you torture him because all them folks are terrorists or they know terrorists but it turns out you were wrong, that isn't negligence, it's still intentional?

Actually, that's still negligent. Whether the policy creates civil rights violations is a different issue.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Actually, that's still negligent. Whether the policy creates civil rights violations is a different issue.

thank you. one would think that being on a lawyer chat board we wouldn't need to go to this level of introductory explanation.

[SlaveNoMore]

Shape Shifter
"Dialogue is not a sign of weakness," [GOP Rep. Joe] Pitts said after returning home [from Syria] Wednesday. "It's a sign of strength."

http://local.lancasteronline.com/4/202534

As I mentioned before, Hamas, the Al-Aqsa Brigades, Hizballah and numerous other terrorist organizations all concur.

Hooray!!!

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
The issue is whether what Iran did is appalling and should be condemned by the Left.

The issue is, should it be condemned, period. Of course it should be. Decent people don't treat other people that way.

It's also significant to note that your "we do much worse in the US" argument is widely rejected by the Left when the Right over here uses the beheadings and other torture utilized by radical Islamists to show the tameness of our interrogation policies. You don;t get to reject an argument on one hand while using on the other.

You misunderstand my argument. I'm saying that it's wrong, period, not that it's wrong because the Right says it's wrong. Maybe some conservatives secretly admire Iran's treatment of the British -- even if so, it would still be wrong.

I'm not appalled by what Iran did. We do similar things and should expect the same from our enemies.

No, we've done much worse.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sgtclub
My point was not to have the torture argument for the upteenth time. It was to point out the deafening silence condeming Iran for actions that are on par with some of the actions in which the US engaged.

Nobody pointed out to me that the sun rose this morning, but I figured it all by myself. I would be astonished if there were more than a tiny handful of wingnuts in this country who think that what Iran did to those servicemen was OK, and I don't think they'd be particularly identifiable by their politics. Who do you think supports Iran's government? Dinesh D'Souza is the only person who might come close, and I don't think he's there.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
The issue is, should it be condemned, period. Of course it should be. Decent people don't treat other people that way.



You misunderstand my argument. I'm saying that it's wrong, period, not that it's wrong because the Right says it's wrong. Maybe some conservatives secretly admire Iran's treatment of the British -- even if so, it would still be wrong.



No, we've done much worse.

In order...

1. The Left will not condemn what Iran did, even though it condemns what the US does. That is the issue. You condemned Iran, but you're not The Left. You're a lawyer on a chat board who, though holding some of the Left's bona fides, would be seen be the most strident lefties as intolerably moderate.

2. I understood your argument and respect the position that it is always wrong, period. But I don't think that argument is properly used here. Club's point that started all of this was that the Left is inconsistent in its criticisms of torture. That's a limited issue, and its hard to reach any conclusion that the Left is not disingenuous on it.

3. You're right, and I think that's the Left's only rebuttal to Club's point. What Iran did to these sailors is not comparable to Guatanamo. In fact, I wouldn't even try to argue that. Were we in court, I'd stipulate to it. But I probably wouldn't have to because the Left would never want to get into the argumene, since the debate would force a squaring of its stance that all psychological torture is wrong with its silence regarding Iran's use of the technique.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Nobody pointed out to me that the sun rose this morning, but I figured it all by myself. I would be astonished if there were more than a tiny handful of wingnuts in this country who think that what Iran did to those servicemen was OK, and I don't think they'd be particularly identifiable by their politics. Who do you think supports Iran's government? Dinesh D'Souza is the only person who might come close, and I don't think he's there.

D'Souza's recent "blame America" drivel is infantile nonsense better used as fire kindling or emergency toilet paper. But he's not supporting Iran's government.

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by Diane_Keaton
Is this not an act of war? Or do we give these nutjob countries more slack, since you know, Muslims are upset about Israel existing and such and we wouldn't want to rankle them further?

This was absolutely an Act of War between Iran and Britain. The UK apparently chose not to declare war.

We condemned it, and worked for the release behind the scenes -- what else should an ally do? (At least wothout being asked. . . )

S_A_M

[Diane_Keaton]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
This was absolutely an Act of War between Iran and Britain. The UK apparently chose not to declare war.

We condemned it, and worked for the release behind the scenes -- what else should an ally do? (At least wothout being asked. . . )

S_A_M

PS-I meant act of war between Iran and Britain (not U.S.). My reference to "our" was speculating whether Westerners are starting to expect this type of crap from countries like Iran. Anyhow, it should be interesting to see how the everyday Brit reacts. And if the soldiers will be pissed that (if) their countrymen don't seem to care about what happened to them.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
In order...

Who is the Left? I can't tell whether you're talking about Noam Chomskey or Jack Murtha, and whether the point is about what they believe or what they say.