Actually that sounds a bit like the Bush admin...

Care to guess at the percentage of the total military which is involved?

What difference does that make? Just because the Bush administration changed US policy in order to employ torture doesn't mean they are not going to require every US serviceman or women to torture someone, are they?

Human nature being what it is, once torture is green lighted, I would guess that there is about the same percentage of tortures in the US occupation forces as there would be in any other military that approves of torture as an interregation technique. It would naturally be a small number of the overall forces because only a small number of the overall forces are involved in interregation.

6. Cranial dislocation: The democrat's head and feet are bound to an inclined board, feet raised and head slightly below the feet. The democrat is forced to stand up as water is poured over him. Unavoidably, there is a loud popping sound and their head is temporarily removed from their arse.

According to the sources, CIA officers could not subject themselves to the technique, because no one could get their head that far up their arse. They said al Qaeda’s toughest supporter, Michael Moore, won the admiration of interrogators when he was able to keep his head up there indefinitely.

Amazing how you can turn away from every big picture argument about torture and the war, and make it about me.

Oh no, you aren't a nut ...

cite/proof … have you guys never read histories of occupations?

Certainly, which prompts the question. We've een lied to too often by people pushing an agenda.

And don't worry, Odo about not being impressed by us... speakingf or me, I've found you totally unimpressive from the get-go.

Care to guess at the percentage of the total military which is involved? By your same math and logic, as a U.S. citizen you should be locked up in an insane asylum. Nice of you to acknowledge the troops feeling bad about it, though.

I won't even adress the other statement. Your summation totally changes the facts of what transpired.

There is incontrovertable evidence that Army soldiers, Marines, SEALS, CIA, as well as the Iraqi police are torturing prisoners. Sometimes they even feel bad about it.

Meanwhile Iragi government leaders gave the green light to the insurgentcy by proclaiming that anyone who fights the US occupaction cannot be considered a terrorist and therefore, by implication, is not doing anything illegal.

They also said they want to know when the occupation forces will get the hell out of their country.

If you feel so strongly, leave the CA Communist party, go overseas and help your buddies expel the “infidel crusaders”.

That's the level of the guys defending this stuff.

Heck, we don’t even know if anyone has been tortured for real.

Where are all the smart OTB readers? Y'all need to quit abandoning the comments, folks. It's looking grim.

From just the latest news item:

Harsh interrogation techniques authorized by top officials of the CIA have led to questionable confessions and the death of a detainee since the techniques were first authorized in mid-March 2002, ABC News has been told by former and current intelligence officers and supervisors.

They say they are revealing specific details of the techniques, and their impact on confessions, because the public needs to know the direction their agency has chosen. All gave their accounts on the condition that their names and identities not be revealed. Portions of their accounts are corrobrated by public statements of former CIA officers and by reports recently published that cite a classified CIA Inspector General's report. * * *

6. Water Boarding: The prisoner is bound to an inclined board, feet raised and head slightly below the feet. Cellophane is wrapped over the prisoner's face and water is poured over him. Unavoidably, the gag reflex kicks in and a terrifying fear of drowning leads to almost instant pleas to bring the treatment to a halt.

According to the sources, CIA officers who subjected themselves to the water boarding technique lasted an average of 14 seconds before caving in. They said al Qaeda's toughest prisoner, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, won the admiration of interrogators when he was able to last between two and two-and-a-half minutes before begging to confess.

You think this is all made up? That's despicable. The burden of proof is HEAVILY on the side on those who would deny these accounts.

Argue that stuff like waterboarding is justifiable if you want, but don't deny that we're doing it, or that it's torture. All you do is make yourself look ridiculous, like we can't KNOW there aren't UFO's in gov't hangars because we haven't gone and looked inside them.

Nut cases also get their news from Comedy Central. They also allege that our guys abduct and torture people for trying to collect rent. Shame on YOU.

Your continued ability to dodge the issues is mind boggling.

And if the nut cases are the last defenders of Bush strategy, what does that say?

Anyway, I think the Daily Show nailed it:

"While the Democrats are focusing on how we were misled to war, Bush is focusing on how to mislead us out of it. ... If we were wrong about why we went in, we have to be wrong about why we're leaving. Otherwise it sends our enemies the message that America lacks the will to remain incorrect."
---Rob Corddry on The Daily Show

The nut cases hare happy to be misled

"...histories of occupations" Like the Germans in Poland, or what? Care to elaborate?

"...off he went."
So you have evidence this guy was tortured for trying to collect rent? That's certainly what you're implying. The original subject "They were not just plucked from the street and tortured"

...and you support the troops! ("Gee I just don't see how getting accountability would affect troop morale...")

...and all of this is based on YOUR assumptions and generalizations, based on what you've read about "Occupations"?

Let me get you on on something about provding evidence/links: In this country we have something called innocent until proven guilty. People like you want to extend it to the enemy, but not our own guys in uniform. It makes me sick. So what this means is, if you have accuasations, YOU have to prove it, or else STFU. I don't have to DISprove anything. I'm still wating for the evidence. Not a poll result. Not "allegations. Proof. Period. There isn't any and you know it.
But hey, way to support the troops with all of your wild accusations...