That seems to be a rather basic idea....

It appears that "Zeno Pad" don't read to well or comprehend what he's reading. That's a Lefty for ya.

Right-wingnuts seem to enjoy name calling as opposed to logical argument, so here you go, Foosball. We're back in 4th grade.

Go listen to some more Rush Limbaugh, drop a Viagra or two and continue to pleasure yourself, and imagine we're winning the war on terror in the inept manner the Admin has chosen. It's a real conservative wet-dream.

Enjoy!

And, talking about smelling coffee, he has his nose up the sore losing Dems. rear end so far that it would be a wonder if he had the ability to smell his own rear end let alone coffee.

Archie had a name for people like him "Dingbat"

I'm not so concerned about THEM, I'm concerned about US. As you claim to be an anti-Communist fighter, I'm sure your sense of righteousness vis-a-vis the Reds was based on the knowledge that we weren't like THEM, that we were better, much better.

These current extremist counter-terror measures are brutalizing our troops in the field and demoralizing the population here at home, leading to the question: exactly how are we better than them? We don't lop off heads, just drop cluster bombs indiscriminately? A Gitmo here, an Abu Ghraib there?

And please please don't even bother to tell me we take prisoners and don't kill them on the field of battle. C.f., Falluja, Haditha, etc. Gitmo IS terrorism. We're trying to TERRORIZE the world in self-protection. That's the only reason these fellows at Gitmo are kept alive to the point of being forced fed if they try to starve themselves to death. However, all these efforts just seem to swell the ranks of terrorists and inflame world opinion against us.

I see nothing but flawed logic in such policies. And a once-great nation being led by inferior intellects.

Enjoy discussing whatever topic you wish amongst yourselves; you've turned a blind eye and deaf ear to the rest of the world and are talking to yourself.

The whole world is watching what's happening and not listening to your empty rhetoric.

...another media darling that is thrust upon the Right acts like a nancy-boy.

Hmmmm, so human rights are nancy-boy concerns, while torture, rendition, and no-trial, no-end-in-sight imprisonment are like what? Butch, skinhead values? Real men love sadism?
America as some 3rd Reich spin-off?

This sick crew, including the macho-post writer above, are such prime examples of chicken-hawks: grown men who are really little boys who who have never been in war or indeed in the military, who strut and posture like little Pattons given a keyboard and anonymity. But, unlike Patton, they have no code of conduct, just some weird FOX-news jingoism.

Just call me Nancy-boy, but our actions at Gitmo and in Iraq have damaged America's very soul, let alone our relationship with the rest of humanity.

Time to smell the coffee... in reality, it is YOU who are actually empowering the terrorists.

What part of Commander in Chief is difficult to understand?

Well, apparently, I missed the part giving him unlimited power. In any case, I don't believe we should release these people, and that was exactly my point. However, I do believe we should give them due process. If only to shut the left up, and mostly because I believe it's the American thing to do.

the point he stressed time and again, even in a bonus comment after the official program session had ended â?? the Western world, notably the United States, was doomed unless it reclaimed â??the moral high ground.â?? By the end of the Cold War, he said, there was no dispute world wide about which side held the moral high ground. As a professional spy master, he said that reality made it so much easier for him to recruit operatives â?? they would volunteer to come to him, because they believed in the cause. Therefore, as a matter of pure strategic necessity, the United States needed to behave according to its best traditions, not the exigencies of an open-ended wartime emergency. (Iâ??m paraphrasing a little, but not taking too many liberties.)

So much for the "waah, the terrorists are evil so we have to be evil too" refrain only too common in OTB comment threads (and not just there, alas).

Dearlove incidentally "suggested that just about everything in the American approach to the war on Islamic terrorism had been ill-conceived," a point of view held across the board by conservative, moderate, and liberal foreign-policy experts in Foreign Policy's recent survey, about which more here.

The majority of people in Islamic nations aren't terrorists, aren't even fanatically religious, and would doubtless like to see some American values in their own repressive, impoverished societies ... at least, if "American values" meant something nowadays other than "invading countries under false pretenses, abusing their residents at whim, and detaining whomever we want however long we want without due process of law."

But then, if you're the kind of person who has to have the value of "the moral high ground" explained to you, then all the above is wasted typing.

Good post, JJ.

If Bush 41 had done the job right, then, we would be long gone from Iraq by this time.

P.S. Powell gao sick a a big Democrat doings yesterday or the day before. That tells you something about Powell and his politics.

Bithead and Herb: The problems with Gitmo are manifold. First, the ones captured in Aghanistan should simply have been housed there. Transporting them to U.S. territory creates all manner of legal problems. Second, there does not seem to be a process in place to determine that those imprisoned at Gitmo are who we say they are.

Possibly. But even assuming such charges are true, those levels of problems don't even approach the level of problem of maintaining a prison of high security inside Afghanistan. Given all offers a number of advantages in this since the likelihood of attack on that prison is as close to nil has no matter.

Also, giving these guys back to their home countries aon't work because haven't they said they won't accept them anyway?