General Question

wundayatta's avatar

Should the Democrats focus on punishing the Bushies for torturing supposed terrorists?

Asked by wundayatta (58714points) April 24th, 2009

What are the consequences, both domestically and internationally if punishing the Bushies becomes a focus of Congress? Obama and others say it will distract from his agenda. Is there anything wrong with exposing the torture tactics (say hurting the US reputation internationally even more than it has already been hurt)? Could crucial information have been gotten via torture that couldn’t have been gotten any other way, as Cheney asserts?

For more info, see this NPR article.

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

77 Answers

FrankHebusSmith's avatar

Lets just say I’m happy I don’t have to decide whether or not to push it :) .

oratio's avatar

I am not sure anyone would benefit from a witch hunt, where there would be bucket passing slander, ending up with some scapegoats after tearing up the political and administrative world. I think it’s more important to restore the damage done to the constitution. I think Obama’s interest is in uniting, rather than divide things further.

I would more like to see Bush or Cheney impeached, but I guess they weren’t into blow jobs.

I think Obama is making some mistakes. I think his smiling handshake with Chavez, was a bit too much too early, at the same time as he tries to create a friendly relationship with Cuba, the arab world and Iran. I don’t have a problem with it, but I am of the impression that americans has been fed that Chavez is the devil for many years, and suddenly Obama is kicking back with him and that might make people wonder what to think.

allen_o's avatar

Bush and cheney should be charged with war crimes and shot, they are the worst kind of politicians, lying to their own people about terrorist attacks and WMDs to justify two energy wars. They are sick bastards, what the hell were you thinking electing the son of a bush, how can anyone vote for the neo-cons? It’s fucking sick, Obama should fucking hang the bastards

Russell_D_SpacePoet's avatar

I think this is a witch hunt. These were terrorist that wanted to destroy the US.

Dog's avatar

Personally I think that their attention would be much better spent working on the economy and learning how to budget and cut just like the rest of us.

susanc's avatar

If we don’t go after people who work on destroying us, we’re fools.
This would include people we elected and who then fucked us riight in the ass.

tinyfaery's avatar

Yes. And I’ll tell you why I think so. That is what I am here for.

People have to be accountable for their actions. Much like a discussion going on in the illegal pot thread, just because someone tells you it’s okay, it’s legal. Don’t these people have a conscience? How do they sleep at night? How can you just do what you are told?

And for those that approved these tactics, they need to be held accountable for being hideous human beings, and betraying the fundamental principles of America and humanity.

Qingu's avatar

@Russell_D_SpacePoet, what does the fact that they were “terrorists” have to do with the legality of torture?

Qingu's avatar

I don’t know how the Democrats should proceed with prosecuting the Bush administration. Obviously it should be a bipartisan panel.

I never used to think we should prosecute. But then I read the memos and changed my mind. The ticker was that we waterboarded a guy 180 times while trying to get someone to admit to (nonexistent) links between Iraq and al-Qaeda. That’s a war crime.

cwilbur's avatar

No, I don’t think Congress should focus on it. I think the prosecutors in the Justice Department should consider whether any of the actions were illegal at the time they were committed, and whether they have enough evidence to prove this to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt, and then they should proceed as in every other criminal trial.

What these people did was unambiguously illegal and clearly in the realm of war crimes and human rights violations. And an illegal thing is no less illegal when the President or Vice-President tells you to do it. But this is the United States, and we have things like due process of law and trial by jury—the perfect tools for a situation such as this. Trial by Congress, trial by political partisanship and ‘tu quoque,’ and trial by media are all inappropriate tools here.

FrankHebusSmith's avatar

Hahahaha, this got ugly quick. No one light a match, it might explode.

SuperMouse's avatar

I think it is important to expose the shameful behavior of President Cheney and his underlings. I don’t think we can underestimate the damage this did to our reputation at home and abroad. It is also important to remember the potential consequences this kind of behavior has for our soldiers engaged in armed conflict overseas. If we don’t have to abide by the Geneva Conventions when dealing with their soldiers, why should they when dealing with ours?

Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld, and everyone else involved with setting these policies needs to be punished. Personally I don’t buy Cheney’s assertions that this treatment is justifiable because of the information we obtained. I don’t see how it is possible to say for certain that an attack was thwarted because we waterboarded a detainee over 100 times. Cheney seems to think there are memos out there that prove this, but I am dubious. I also think (as pointed out on NPR this morning) it is incredibly ironic that a man who kept a “man sized safe” in his office and has securely locked and dead-bolted closet full of skeletons, is calling the new administration out for not releasing information.

Should that be the entire focus of an administration with so much to crap from the past eight years? No. Should it be swept under the rug and forgotten? Absolutely not. Give it to Holder, let him prosecute.

Qingu's avatar

@oratio, smiling and handshaking people who don’t like America is a mistake?

Why? Because being a dick to any leaders who criticized us worked out so well for the past 8 years?

It’s truly amazing how cowardly conservatives are that they’re afraid of a country like Venezuela.

Qingu's avatar

@SuperMouse, even if waterboarding provided information that thwarted an attack, that has zero to do with either the morality or the legality of waterboarding.

Let’s say I think you have information about a ticking time bomb or whatever fantasy hypothetical conservatives are frightened about. To get this info, I cut off all of your fingers and toes, and also bring in your wife and family and have them raped in front of you. Predictably, you spill the beans.

Would this mean that “dismemberment and family-rape” were essential to protecting America? No, because traditional interrogation could have also produced that information. It’s an absurd, disgusting argument.

dyannne's avatar

There should be a full investigation by the Justice Department of the facts, i.e., the memos, the statements, the evidence. Truth matters. Laws matter. Morality matters. Honesty matters. Precedent matters. And should there be no investigation and no price to pay for high crimes if they are found such, God help those who follow, like our grandchildren and great-grandchildren. Do we really want to leave that kind of legacy for them? Think about it. Really think about it.

FrankHebusSmith's avatar

I think we’re all ignoring the greater issue here…. The biggest threat our country, or even mankind has ever faced is lurking right underneath our noses!..... I’m speaking of course of…. mole people…... part mole, part people… They’ve been buried beneath the earth for centuries plotting their revenge on mankind, and that time is near!..... I heard they were going to ally up with man-bear-pig! :O

oratio's avatar

@Qingu I shouldn’t have included that, since it has nothing to do with the frame of the question.

What I meant is – and I think it should have come out of what I wrote – that Obama has turned some of the international political “reality” 180 degrees. With Bush, Iran and Venezuela was the devils themselves, and Cuba has been a no-go for decades. Suddenly, not having gone the 100 days, Obama is “pals” with these people.

I agree with all he is doing. It’s amazing. But I think he might be moving to fast for a lot of people, who has believed in a different story for a long time.

cwilbur's avatar

@Qingu: your analogy would be even more appropriate if SuperMouse didn’t actually know anything about the time bomb but told his interrogators everything he thought they wanted to hear just so they would stop torturing him.

What makes me furious about this is that we are the United States of America. We are supposed to stand for truth, justice, openness in society, and government by the people, for the people, of the people. We ought to be ashamed of the terrible things that have been done in our names, and we shouldn’t be defending them in the name of expediency.

Crusader's avatar

Periodic assertiveness and appeasement are the hallmarks of American domestic and foreign policy. Republicans take all the blame for asserting American interests and Democrats take all the credit from the rule of law and stabalization resulting from it.

FrankHebusSmith's avatar

@Crusader You call what Bush handed Obama “the rule of law and stabilization” ?

He, like his father before him (and Nixon/Ford before that) handed a Democratic replacement a complete mess. We can only hope Obama is more like Clinton and less like Carter.

Qingu's avatar

You people really need to get new jellyfish avatars.

FrankHebusSmith's avatar

@Qingu I like the jellyfish :)

oratio's avatar

Peanutbutter jelly fish

Russell_D_SpacePoet's avatar

@Qingu I guarantee we were way nicer to the terrorist than they would have been to our people. It was water boarding. It wasn’t shock therapy or pulling their fingernails out with pliers or burning them. What them being terrorist has to do with it is that they wouldn’t have been in the position they were in, if they had not been terrorist.

EmpressPixie's avatar

@Russell_D_SpacePoet: After you are water boarded by a professional, you may speak as to if it is or is not horrific torture. Until then, we shall rely on the testimony of Vanity Fair Dude. My boyfriend says his name is Christopher Hitchens. You may look up his experience online. Prior to being water boarded, he felt the same as you and was in favor of it. Having been water boarded, he feels it is torture. Absolutely. And has post-traumatic stress as a result. (Not the disorder, just weird stress issues having to do with breathing.) He was water boarded for less than a minute. Once. You can watch his experience on the Internet.

Response moderated
EmpressPixie's avatar

@Russell_D_SpacePoet Of course, should you decide to be waterboarded, we would all prefer you retain professional services as there is some danger to doing the procedure incorrectly. Namely, death.

FrankHebusSmith's avatar

To ANYONE who is trying to defend torture here. I don’t care what they did to our people. I don’t care if the information you got from them saved a million lives, or just one. I don’t care if he gave you the god damn cure to cancer.


(Besides, from the looks of it, the info we got was false anyways, they tortured these guys to get them to “make” a link between Iraq and Al Queda. And the “Attack” they “stopped”... turns out they found out about it about 6 months BEFORE we started torturing)

Qingu's avatar


Response moderated
Russell_D_SpacePoet's avatar

@EmpressPixie Evidently he didn’t die. We have to have tools to break the terrorist down to get info. I never said in any way, shape, or form that water boarding was pleasant. The point of it is to make someone tell you the things they don’t want you to know. Info. that could save innocent lives. I am in favor of the innocent over terrorist. You can be in favor of who you want. When dealing with ruthless people, sometimes, many times you must use harsh tactics. That is the nature of terror and war.

Response moderated
FrankHebusSmith's avatar

@Russell_D_SpacePoet You’re aware that the information they got from waterboarding was actually wrong right? Waterboarding is a form of torture historically used to get FALSE confessions from people. It was used by the NAZI’s, the USSR, and Red China, to get people to confess to shit they didn’t do, or implicate people who were innocent. PROFESSIONAL INTERROGATORS from the FBI and the military branches and the CIA ALL SAID when being asked how to waterboard, that htis method WOULD NOT PRODUCE GOOD INFORMATION.

Any professional interrogator will tell you that the ONLY way you’re going to get good information from someone, is the method of relationship building that they have successfully relied on for years.

The only attack that even Cheney says waterboarding prevented, well it turns out we found out about it a solid 6 months BEFORE we started waterboarding.

The United States has HUNG men, and imprisoned members of it’s own military (Most recently a trio of soldiers were sentenced to 10 years during Vietnam) for waterboarding.

We are the United States, we do NOT F*cking torture. We are better than that. By torturing these guys we’re selling out and giving up the very principles we’re supposedly trying to protect.

oratio's avatar

A problem is that you don’t always know the involvement of the person you interrogate, or even if the information of that persons involvement is accurate, i.e. if he is a terrorist at all. Nor do you know what the person knows, and how much, since that is the reason for the interrogation.

This is one of the reasons you won’t let them go if you can show that they are involved and has information, because it’s not possible to know if the prisoner has told you everything, ever.

And since the information from people who will tell you anything they think will stop the torture, you will never be able to trust it before you check it out, and you would need to torture arbitrarily to try to weed out solid information. There are no winners in this.

The US offered money rewards for terrorists and suspects in Iraq and Afghanistan, which led to people selling their neighbors and total strangers, to get money for themselves and families. Sure, I believe there are really bad people in american custody, but there has been proven that there has been a lot of innocent people put through this, on Guantanamo and elsewhere.

One that comes to mind is the sad case of some clueless taxi driver picked up and turned in by an allied warlord to the US for an attack on an american base in Afghanistan, where it actually was the warlord itself that was responsible for the attack.

But hey, better them than us right.

Russell_D_SpacePoet's avatar

@westy81585 Not all of it. Just saw this last night. You can say what you want. Kindness gets you no more info. from these people. Kahlid Sheikh Mohammed is the one who gave up the guy who was going to cut the cables on the Brooklyn bridge during rush hour. They caught the guy with the equipment needed and plans with the most effective cables marked on them to cut. They got this info. from water boarding. How many people use that bridge during rush hour? Thousands? Was it not worth it to save those people? I would say most definitely.

Response moderated
FrankHebusSmith's avatar

@Russell_D_SpacePoet They got that info out of him a full SIX MONTHS BEFORE THEY STARTED WATERBOARDING.

They got that info out of him doing the relationship building method, you idiot.

Waterboarding DOES NOT get viable info. It gets anything you want them to tell you. They use waterboarding to get FALSE confessions. They used it largely to get him to “admit” that there was a connection between Al Queda and Iraq (which go figure, there WASN’T).

And no… I don’t care if it saved 1000 lives. We are the US, we don’t torture. I don’t care if he gives us the cure to fucking cancer. It’s wrong.

FrankHebusSmith's avatar

@Russell_D_SpacePoet And besides, do you know how impractical it would be to even try to cut cables on the Brooklyn Bridge? You’d have to cut a dozen of them before it would do ANYTHING (let alone fall). They’re hard steel cables, that would require some SERIOUS equipment to cut. The bridge has it’s own security force, who might question why some random guy is climbing up on the bridge, and then he’d probably be stopped after just TRYING to cut one.

This is like saying they got valuable information about stopping a 12 year old from robbing fort Knox.

Response moderated
Qingu's avatar

@Russell_D_SpacePoet, I asked you for support for your claim that waterboarding Zubaydah 83 times actually yielded information that “prevented an attack” against the Brooklyn Bridge.

Can you provide any support for what you said? Do you have any reason for believing what you said? Or were you just spouting stuff you heard on TV, “bearing false witness”?

I see that they “arrested a man named Faris who was “casing the joint around the Brooklyn Bridge.

What was the threat from Faris? “Faris admitted that upon returning to the US from Pakistan in April 2002, he researched “gas cutters” and the Brooklyn Bridge on the internet.”

When was Abu Zubaydah—the man whose waterboarding you claim saved the Bridge—arrested? He was captured March 28, 2002, Furthermore, why on earth do you think Zubaydah was the only source that led to Faris?

Support your claim, or stop lying.

Qingu's avatar

And explain to me why we should torture these people when we did not even torture the Nazis in World War II. We wouldn’t give up our morals to beat the fucking *Nazis*—you want to tell me why we should give it up to possibly help catch a couple of death cultists researching shit on the internet?

We imprisoned over 100,000 Japanese Americans and nationals during World War II, a war that killed millions of people and threatened the survival of our civilization. As far as I know, waterboarding was not legally allowed at these camps. Even if it were, I certainly wouldn’t support using it on enemy combatants. Would you? Ronald Reagan apologized for the camps.

jlm11f's avatar

[mod says:] Quips with unnecessary attacks were removed. If you have any questions about why a certain quip was removed, PM me after reading the guidelines. Please continue to discuss this matter intelligently and respectfully.

Qingu's avatar

Russel, please-repost your last two posts without whatever personal attacks violate their guidelines (I did this too, not judging you for that, and I wasn’t offended anyway)—I’d like to read what you wrote and continue our discussion

dalepetrie's avatar

Personally, and I haven’t read anything anyone else has said up to this point, but first off all, I’m not going to rely on Cheney’s assertions, because 1) the gist of his argument is that we will risk telling them what our techniques are, but what we are really doing by shedding the light on it is saying what they WERE…these techniques were outlawed by Obama in the first week of his administration, and 2) Cheney has perhaps the most to lose of anyone if this all comes out, because it’s clear to anyone who pays attention that Cheney was calling most of the shots in the Bush White House.

Essentially, I don’t think that the “Bushies” should be “punished”, that to me smacks of a pre determined outcome and though I think Bush, Cheney and many others were complicit in saying “this is how it’s going to be, find me a justification”, and ultimately they probably would be found guilty in a trial, the point is I don’t know that UNLESS we air this out. To my way of thinking, everyone should have their day in court, everyone should be entitled to their defense (in fact, Cheney’s story has now changed to, we should release ALL of it, including what we gained by doing it). But the problem is, the defense seems to be “it was effective”, which can be loosely translated to , “two wrongs made a right,” which we all know is NEVER true.

The problem is, we can’t sell our soul and our values as a nation for the purpose of efficacy in trying times…if we really want to be proud of America, then we need to make American something worth being proud of…and just having the most might is not a legitimate source of pride in my estimation, it’s about shared core values, one of which is we don’t torture. We respect peoples’ human rights, and what is clear is that for a time, we did not live up to our own standards. Therefore it is of the utmost important for us to know, was this a blatant disregard of our values for the purpose of expediency…a predetermined action which was justified after the decision had been made, or was this a legitimate misunderstanding about the application of our values based on faulty legal opinions?

Because if we DON’T figure this out, it set a precedent that says, if a(nother) person of questionable morality should occupy the White House in the future, will they have the precedent that America is proud enough of her values that her citizens stand up to fight for them, even potentially at their own peril, or will we set the precedent that our government will be more morally permissive in times of great challenge and our morals will bend to become more situational in nature, because the consequences of violating them even on a grand scale amount to little more than a slap on the wrist. Personally, I believe Bush and Co have gone far enough to be called traitors, I believe they stomped over the values imparted by the Constitution and governed with a blatant disregard for our nation’s values…and we hang traitors…I would have no problem with Bush, Cheney, Ashcroft, Rumsfeld, Rice and the whole lot of them swinging by a noose, but if and ONLY if they were convicted fairly of doing what I suspect they did.

So to me, the only way for me to feel that people haven’t gotten away with high treason is to either prove they haven’t or prove they have and punish them for it appropriately. I can’t say that what I believe is an absolute certainty, and I think there should be an investigation and if necessary a trial…I don’t think ending one’s term should absolve them of the fallout from their decisions. If I as an Accountant cooked the books of a company and left that company, I could still be prosecuted after leaving that company…we can not afford double standards as they relate to our most deeply held values.

Yes, there are bigger fish to fry, but we can’t just drop the ball, we have a responsibility to understand what really happened here, because those who do not learn from history’s mistakes are bound to repeat them, and the consquences of that are much more far reaching than anything else we’re dealing with today. After all, letting sleeping dogs lie is essentially what caused Al Quaeda to become such a powerful force in the first place. When we drove the Russians out of Afghanistan in the late 80s, we didn’t follow through with reconstruction…we let sleeping dogs lie and basically never dealt with the consequences of our military actions. We left the nation in shambles, which fostered a great resentment among the victims of our blind eye, which led to a movement, which killed nearly 3,000 Americans one day. If we let sleeping dogs lie in regards to protecting our American values, who knows what the ultimate consequences, uprising and subsequent fallout might bring one or two decades down the road?

In short, doing the right thing may not always be easy, but it is always necessary.

oratio's avatar

@dalepetrie Good comment. I agree for the most part. I don’t think the techniques are any secret to the real terrorists though, most likely only to us.

I am not sure about exactly what you mean by the US driving the russians out of Afghanistan in the 80’s but assume you mean the weapons, economic and intelligence support to the afghans and Al Qaeda.

dalepetrie's avatar

@oratio – pretty much, we helped the Taliban fight back against Russian aggression, but then did nothing in terms of reconstruction.

filmfann's avatar

Your question: Should the Democrats focus on punishing the Bushies for torturing supposed terrorists?
My answer: Not just Democrats. Independants and Republicans too. Torturing is against everything the US stands for. Shame on Bush.

Crusader's avatar

10,000’s of American soldier were waterboarded as part of their training, Three terrorists were waterboarded to secure information vital to protecting American lives, (and others.)
Not entirely ethical, no. However, perhaps it was your life or your loved ones that was spared do to the intelligence gathered from these Three Proven execution strategists…

filmfann's avatar

Oh, yeah… the only 3 lie was shown last week with the release of torture memos. I think the number was closer to 189.

FrankHebusSmith's avatar

@Crusader It isn’t 10,000’s of soldiers for starters. It’s those that they fear may actually have information that someone would want out of them. And furthermore, they’re given that “training” under the pretense that it IS torture, and they may someday be captured by someone who won’t follow the Geneva convention as we “would.”

In other words, they’re TOLD it’s torture and are trained to resist it.

Furthermore, as any interrogator will tell you, waterboarding is a torture method used to obtain FALSE confessions. When you waterboard someone for a little bit, they would probably tell you that they killed the Dinosaurs if thats what you wanted to hear.

In otherwords, the information they gave was FALSE. Going along with that, the info that supposedly stopped attacks, was actually obtained 6 months PRIOR to when we started waterboarding (via regular relationship building interrogating mind you, completely legal under the Geneva convention). The info they got via waterboarding (which took 189 times?, which raises a question about whether or not it was effective) was the info that “tied” Iraq and Al Queda together. In other words it was FALSE info.

And moreover. I don’t care if the guy gave us the cure to cancer. We are the UNITED F*CKING STATES. WE DO NOT TORTURE. That is what separates us from the evil men that we are fighting.

fireside's avatar

John Stewart and Cliff May had a great discussion on torture the other night. it was too long to air but the full interview is on the website in three parts.

mattbrowne's avatar

The focus should be on the recession and on shaping a better future. People who might have broken laws (both national and international ones) should be tried in a court of law.

FrankHebusSmith's avatar

@mattbrowne I think that’s why we haven’t seen the current president push the matter much. He doesn’t want to get bogged down in prosecuting the last administration (or anyone of high rank on the other side of the aisle for that matter) when there’s so much work to be done, and he needs very badly for the other side to come to the table.

mattbrowne's avatar

@westy81585 – Yes, it’s a pragmatic solution and I agree with Obama’s approach. Future historians will punish Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and the rest of their obnoxious gang. Abu Ghraib happened on their watch and will be forever be tied to the top people who were responsible of installing a system of fear and manipulation. History books will reflect that. And the bully approach has clearly failed. It has isolated the US and made it less secure. The listening and dialog approach will work much better. I’m convinced the Obama administration can undo the damage. The first 100 days were very promising.

filmfann's avatar

I don’t want Obama to be thought of in the same way as Ford when Nixon was pardoned.

Crusader's avatar

US is ‘isolated’ because of oil-subsidized media control abroad. The same autocratic repressive state-media racist, masoginistic homophobic, hegomony’s and their leaders who you indirectly (or directly) support through your liberal agenda.

Indotrinated citizens know nothing else, and coupled with intolerant fundementalism, (the likes of which you libs will Never know or choose to know here in Christian-protected America,) they are Unified against anything Christian US.

US citizens have a choice, yet most who would personally benefit from ‘quotas’ will choose the party that provides such, the future of the country be darned. Granted , many hyposcrite conservatives, and they should and are held accountable, both personally And professionally.

Islam does Not respond to dialogue or nogotiations. We are ‘dogs’ to them, infidels, a dirty, unclean animal in their eyes. They Love libs in general for advancing their agenda, yet Despise you personally for your lifestyle. They Hate Christians for our resolve to thwart their ignoble efforts, but at least Respect us for our belief and personal lifestyle.

Extracting information is Never pleasant, particulary when the individual Hates and does not Respect you. Particularly when they are given considerable financial resources to Keep Quiet about an impending attack. Particularly when they are indoctrinated for life to be intolerant many libs in the US.

tinyfaery's avatar

Who is Islam?

Crusader's avatar


Islam is the Quran. Islam is Theocracy in 23 of 24 countries it is the majority. Exception, Turkey, yet Turkey is only temporarity so to decieve Wester Europe into allowing it EU membership (and unabated massive immigration from indoctrinated nations,) and influence there.

tinyfaery's avatar

Nevermind. shakes head

Crusader's avatar

tiny fairy,

Would you prefer Sharia Law to the current goverment in the USA, (if you are there)two more generations of liberalism and you Will have it, congratualations.

tinyfaery's avatar

What? Huh? lol4rl

Crusader's avatar

What? Huh? Exactly. Willful ignorance is no excuse.

FrankHebusSmith's avatar

@crusader You sir, are an idiot. Most Islamic countries don’t even practice Sharia law, nor do the majority of muslims even have a positive view of it.

And liberalism leading to sharia law? I don’t even know where to begin. Get off your computer you troll, go read a book and educate yourself. We don’t need your bigotry and hatred here.

filmfann's avatar

I love it when people say ignorance is no excuse, after failing to spellcheck their recent posts. If you turned that in to a 6th grade teacher, it would be covered in red marks.
You’re a joke.

mattbrowne's avatar

@Crusader – Have you ever personally met a Muslim? They are people and most of them don’t see us a dogs. Yes, US citizens have a choice and they chose Barack Obama who will engage in a dialog with the Muslim world. Intelligent people everywhere are able to distinguish between extremism and moderate good faith. Yes, the extremists in charge of Saudi-Arabia and Iran and a couple of other countries are a problem. We have to deal with it. But portraying all Muslims as evil is very short-sighted and hinders progress and dialog. This type of thinking follows George W. Bush’s black and white, evil and good perception of the world. Crusades are basically nothing else than flying airplanes into skyscrapers committing mass murder.

wundayatta's avatar

I’ve found that when talking to @Crusader, he always makes wild assertions, but never offers any evidence other than his say-so. I don’t think it’s worth talking to him. He’s not a serious person—or at least, so far, he hasn’t been.

dalepetrie's avatar

It’s not hard to spot 10 pounds of shit in a 5 pound sack, which is why I never jumped in to rebuff any of this garbage

Crusader's avatar


I realize that your position and mine are diametrically opposed, and that, though you try to appear moderate, you will Never exhort the extreme postions of your cohorts. Thus you are an extremist yourself.

Anyway, If there was One true democratically elected Islamic Republic having separated church and state with civil rights, (other than one that has an agenda to join the EU-Turkey, Never will truely separate church and state, but will give temporary Appearnce to do so…) with a significant population, then I May re-evaluate my postion, not until then.

FYI, Arab/Persians initiatd to aggression in Asia, Africa, and Europe, were it not for Charles Martel ‘the hammer’ of France we would all be speaking arabic likely, and women would be property of wealthy well-conected men as harems, and all else, as 2nd class citizens to their husband. Homosexuals would ‘not exist’ like in Iran. I would suggest you think before you make such assertions as Crusaders being the extremist bombers, unless you are a Muslim shill hiding behing an American Constitution and army, slowing, and inexorably eroding the fabric of society for your personal benefit..typical.

filmfann's avatar

Pull my finger.

Crusader's avatar


Typical, off-topic, irrelevant, liberal toilet humor, surprise me with an intelligent response, and I might just pull your finger…

filmfann's avatar

Which is exactly how I see your responses.

oratio's avatar

Dear, Angry Man!

Yes. The french saved us from those green goblins who under a guise of superior architecture and scientific knowledge, also had the nerve to return the lost cultural rewards of ancient Greece to Europe. These animals didn’t stop there, but they also used shampoo.

You are right. They most certainly would have forced us say difficult words in Arabic. Also, hadn’t the US saved Europe in WWII we would all speak German now, and if the US hadn’t been there for us in the cold war, we would all speak Russian. Not to mention the hordes of wild-eyed Mongolians in the 1200’s! Can you imagine how many languages we could have been speaking in Europe? (besides the current 23)

Yes. The heroic french, who desperately tried not to show how much they cared about what you call potato in the US – but we all know they did – went and became sissy men calling for a unconditional surrender to these human-like people who hates everyone who is not a muslim, or anyone who can make cheese.

You are right. These muslims want what all muslims want. Their own harem of caucasian women. Hundreds of women who can also function as a football team.

Yes, they should stand trial for what they did approximately a thousand years ago. It’s good not to forgive. It is productive. Let it stand as an example of what their agenda is today, and between us today when tutu dressed men try to overcome our differences instead of giving them democracy.

mattbrowne's avatar

@Crusader – I won’t be provoked by the last comment. I will end my participation in this discussion effective immediately.

Crusader's avatar

Thank you all for your participation.
Particularly Oratio for the kernals of truth presented.Ibelieve Oratio, was included many relevant historicalperiods in Western European history responsible for the preservation of said culture. That of Republic government, and basic human rights, as well as Christianity-which is, in itself, the predecessor of many basic human rights many in the West takes for granted today.

Greece was the bulwark against the persian and middle asian hordes,Rome defended Europe from Carthage, (northern Africa,) and delayed many eastern incursions for 1000 years. France defended Europe against the Persian/Arab/African Isamic aggression. Germanies Teutonic Knights defended Europe against the Mongolian Khans-who had a practice of razing entire cities to the ground and murdering entire populations..Quite likely many of you would not be alive to speak Any language now, your ancestors would be Dead before having a chance to sire the next generation.Many other example of sacrifice to defend liberty for the masses, these are just the more obvious. after that, Europe went on the offensive, tired of near destruction, and has secured its rightful place as administrator of world economies.

Finally a unified Europe, but a porous one…Virtually all other countries are virtual dictatorships. Shame on you who would scorn the courage, sacrifice, and honor of your ancestors to gain personal advantage in this generation and abandon all sense of values other than your own benefit. You have this opportunity because of the sacrifices of your anscestors, not because of you demographic, education, or means. This voice can and Will be silenced by authoritarian extremists masquarading as benefactors now…Heed my words, and know you destiny, is is coming very soon..

oratio's avatar

@Crusader With all the wars and pillaging in Europe throughout history and our – still ongoing – ruthless exploitation of the rest of the world since 500 years, I would hardly call us heroic saints. Most countries in Europe has been each others aggressors in wars waged back and forth against each other. I am not sure what differs between the european empires and non-european ones, other than the name and era. They have certainly all one thing in common, and that is Greed.

Some of my best friends are muslims. They are good people. Very normal. I studied with some wonderful iranians when I lived in Moscow.

Most people around the planet are just that. Good people. The bad people you talk about exist, but they are not the Muslims. They are hateful people who should not be confused with the common muslim who just want to get by, and have a good peaceful life with a family.

Crusader's avatar


I agree that the West, along with the rest of the world,
has been responsible for atrocities at periods throughout history. The fundemental difference is perhaps based on geography, the West has been rather isolated. And not inclined to aggressive expansion until threated First. Examples; Alexander the Great After near annihilation by Persia Twice from both God-King Xerses and God-King Darius. Crusades After Islamic expansion Into Europe, (Spain,) and All middle east and northern Africa.

Incursions into the Americas and reluctant acceptance of conquered africans (conquered by other african tribes and hand-delivered to the ivory coast,) for labor in there and the Carribian. The previous as a last resort option soon after near-annihilation by the Khans just a few decades before. This is historically accurate. The ‘Heroic Saints’ impression is not completely accurate, nor is it completely inaccurate. All societies are governed by imperfect Humans, yet the West has, and continues embraced an individualism coupled with collective responsibility like no other in the world, and a willingness to fight for what is right, remember the Magna Carta? How about Martin Luther? 1/3 of the German population were Slaughtered in 50 years of establishing Protestantism, eventually leading to Puritans, who were Not slave owners, that was th English Bristol-Bay company dominated Mercantilism.

Thus, when self-preservation was no longer as much an issue, like Every Where Else in the world, corruption infiltrates, and the original premise of the Puritans and the Protestant movement was obscured.

About Islam, I agree that their are many individuals who are pleasant enough of all faiths, however, if Islam was so wonderful, why do they all want to live in the West, and not vice-versa? Answer, they benefit from the sacrifice and freedoms of the Republic they live in while living in an exclusive manner amongst themselves. They benefit from Not integrating, while the other citizens are expected too.

However, in Isamic countries, it is different, harsh laws are often employed to discipline those who Do not follow the customs, thus non-muslims are Penalized, futhermore, honest business dealings are suspect as the Quran makes allowances for being dishonest to non-Muslims. There are many other reasons too, too many to elucidate, Leave it at this, people are often good, but attitudes are only the outside of the onion, underneath is belief, the core is values. I look at values and belief first, then attitude, that way I am not surprised.

Answer this question




to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther