gerryhatrick

No proof of what? You're incoherant.

So what. He's a criminal just like all the white rightwingers who tried to run down or shoot Muslims after 9/11. Whoa, don't jump to conclusions. Tell us something Jerry, was your whole family killed by Muslims screaming "God is Great!" when you were a child or something?

I think he stated his intention. It demonstrates the hypocrisy of the US leadership. Why do rightwingers constantly use the military for their straw man arguments? It's just disrespectful.

I guess that makes Bush a terrorist for using white phosperous also then, huh?

I knew it! Those Americans... hyuk hyuk!

You mean, up to the opportunistic party leaders who are already getting ready for the next election? You engage in your partisan nitwittery. I'll watch out for Canada and her troops.

As fun as it is going 'round and 'round in your illogical circle of neo-con claims, I'll tell you this only once more. A person being tortured will tell the torturer anything to make it stop. This idea you have that the truth will magically come out and lives will be saved is stunningly naive. I have some proof of my argument: http://www.latimes.com/services/site/premi...tered.intercept Now, got any for your perspective other than "uhhhh its obvious, huh." Don't waste our time with anymore of your "common sense" please, thanks.

What do you know about Canadians? Nothing.

Actually, this has been dubunked. Maybe that's why the MSM isn't picking it up, they do thier homework. The portions reported by that investors website as being from Saddams documents in fact are not. Rightwingers are getting desperate to connect Saddam to terror!

That is not a logical argument. That's like pointing at what are generally considered mistakes in the aftermath of the Iraq war and saying "Well, allowing looting and disbanding the Iraqi army were both good moves because the US did them. Those decisions were intelligence matters, so they must have worked." I guess you think you're being provocative or something, but you're certainly not making any decent argument to support torture.

Another situation that got out of control for the US. Why? Lack of leadership. Confusion over instructions from civilian leadership.

Millions of lives? Really? Provide an example of a single life that's been saved. A policy from the top allowing inexperienced soldiers to engage in these kinds of acts creates an environment where much more evil abuse can occur, as it did. And you obviously have not heard the latest news out of Iraq. It goes a little beyond sleep-deprivation. Your sarcasm is funny, but it isn't hiding your ignorance.

Civilians make policy decisions, not the military. And it's yet to be seen what they are. As per the topic, Cabinet is not even allowed to speak to Canadians about this issue. Stick to the 5 platform issues, that's it. So, it's up to us (and the NDP and the Liberals and the Bloc) to protect the troops from incompetents.

No, I want our PM to show leadership and clearly state our policy in the matter. Given the recent (ongoing) revelations regarding our allies the USA, this would be a welcome move. It has nothing to do with adminishing anyone. Unbelievably, you present ANOTHER false argument in the same breath as you deny them! Do you even realize what one is?

You fail to give any reasons there. I'm supporting the troops in this. Demanding this clarity up front helps protect them all. We are ALL possible "lunitics" betsy if put into the wrong conditions. That's why I'm demanding our government make sure the wrong conditions don't have a chance to exist. You want to pretend the US has not been torturing, because to breath mention of it is "anti-Americanism" in your view. You are demonstrating a spineless cowardice and a willingness to put our troops at risk for fear of offending some neo-cons down South. Despicable.

Or a government trying to give people some confidence in a transition that we haven't seen for 13 years? Yes, or protect his poor defenseless Cabinet ministers from the media! It's control freak behaviour, nothing less. He's taking another hit for this, as he should. We can see here that even sensible Conservatives are not happy about it.

I didn't say they might not have. Why do you keep setting up false arguments? Again, false argument. Go into a room by yourself someplace betsy if that's all your're going to engage in. Harper has shut down the freedom of his Cabinet to communicate. That's evidenced by the memo the G&M report on in the topic article. He's made a mockery of his promises of accountability and transparency. Assuch, I don't expect to hear from our MOD on this issue. I don't expect to hear anything from our government other than "Support our troops you ungrateful Canadians!" Further to that I have asked my questions of second and third party opposition MP's.

I don't have the exact number obviously. Does that mean you win? Read this and draw your own conclusions: As for Abu Gharaib, the DoD has blamed 17 soldiers. From Wikipedia: There was an Executive order in the USA allowing interrogation techniques such as dogs and sleep deprivation and stress positions. If your asking inexperienced guards to abuse people, how surprising is it that it would escalate? Can Canadian troops engage in these interrogation techniques I wonder.....has it been approved at the top as it was in the USA.

No, I think Geoffrey get's it, and assuch he asked me for an example. You missed it totally. But, a gratuitous attack against the media by a rightwinger is never out of place I guess!

He ranted on and on about Canadians not supporting the troops.

How can you not think the pictures from Abu Garaib damaged morale? The entire nation was embarrassed and it's thrown in their face in Iraq all the time. They lost the hearts and minds of the Iraqis over that, something they worked hard to gain. How on earth could you think that isn't morale damaging? I thought the torture in Somalia was partly caused by an anti-malaria drug, but whatever I agree with your point that it happens to other nations soldiers. There has been plenty of testimony and recent news releases indicating that the torture by US troops was a top-down policy. There was certainly no leadership to the contrary. Look at the AG in the USA. Did he not determine that anything that would not cause death is not torture? As for "painting all soldiers with the same brush", I am not doing that. Again, what objection do you have to the policy being vocalized at this point? All you've said is "why do it". It can't hurt, so why not? It will remind all the "bad apples" what the leadership expects of them, and remind commanders that rendering detainees for torture is not allowed.

Congratulations in winning your own straw man argument. You have no proof that all who have been tortured in Abu Garaib (or anywhere else) were terrorists. Often they were completely innocent...just in the wrong place at the wrong time. Or they were thieves. This is supported by US intelligence testimony. Those who claimi that all who are tortured are terrorists are only attempting to rationalize it for weak minds. And besides that, nobody here has said "not hurting a terrorist is more important than saving innocent lives". That is a straw man argument you set up. I don't like torture because it's never been shown to work (often produces false or useless information) and it destroys the reputation of your nation and makes your soldiers targets for people who otherwise would not have targetted them.

You think the US is in charge of our troops and sets policy for them? Stop wasting our time please.

Common sense. You torture someone, they tell you the info to stop the torture. Sounds like a great idea. Well no sh#t. Problem is it's the wrong info. Torture is far more than just inhumane, so all you tough guys can save the typical hard-case act. It's dumb because it's a waste of time. All it does is make a population angrier at you than they previously were (NOT JUST terrorists/Taliban) and cause peaceful civilians to take up arms against you. And ruin any credibility and good reputation you might have had in the world.

The USA thought it was a "given" too.