Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

McCain picks woman for VP slot


Recommended Posts

Those are the facts. Read McCain's own accounts of his alleged torture. Read the reports of Abu Ghraib. Compare the two. Bear mind, too, that while we have facts and pictures of Abu Ghraib, we only have McCain's story about his POW experience. He won't release his military records which includes his POW debrief.

You don't have to take me seriously, but you might want to consider taking the facts seriously.

Here's McCain's story: John McCain's account of Viet Cong torture. Here's Abu Ghraib: Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse.

I see. well aren't you fair and balanced. In McCain's account they almost kill him and others with torture and in the Abu Ghraib there was no beatings at all.

yep.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

But Senator McCain has already held US federal office, making your point moot, even if it had any substance. Any association with Abu Ghraib would be a very amateur "swiftboating" effort anyway. You would have better luck with the Keating Five.

What legal precedents are you relying on to argue my point is moot? Why does it have no substance? Is this your informed or uniformed opinion? Is McCain exempt from the provisions of the U.S. Constitution?

Link to post
Share on other sites
I see. well aren't you fair and balanced. In McCain's account they almost kill him and others with torture and in the Abu Ghraib there was no beatings at all.

yep.

Did you read even the first sentence of the Abu Ghraib information I posted. Apparently not. Either that or you don't understand the meaning of the word "homicide". Clearly, White Doors, there's little point in providing you with the facts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
By his own admission, McCain gave aid to the Vietnamese. That fact is not in dispute.

I think more correctly, by your warped interpretation. No one is expected to endure to the point of death torture or interogation, which is why when you are trained you are explicity told the same. All that you are required to do is to hold out as long as possible. The information that McCain gave under duress, by the time they gave it was virtually worthless and the statement he signed not worth the paper it was written on.

Link to post
Share on other sites
What legal precedents are you relying on to argue my point is moot? Why does it have no substance? Is this your informed or uniformed opinion? Is McCain exempt from the provisions of the U.S. Constitution?

Is Senator McCain not a current holder of federal office? Is his service record not available to the Armed Services Committee if political enemies wanted to gain advantage? Has Senator McCain been impeached? Was he dishonorably discharged?

What are you basing your assertions on....Senator John Kerry's fall from grace?

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think more correctly, by your warped interpretation. No one is expected to endure to the point of death torture or interogation, which is why when you are trained you are explicity told the same. All that you are required to do is to hold out as long as possible. The information that McCain gave under duress, by the time they gave it was virtually worthless and the statement he signed not worth the paper it was written on.

Why do you believe a proven liar like McCain? He's even been caught in lies about his military record, which as you know he won't release for voters' scrutiny.

As for your notion that "The information that McCain gave under duress, by the time they gave it was virtually worthless and the statement he signed not worth the paper it was written on", are you so sure? If so why? "According to retired Army Colonel Earl Hopper, McCain divulged classified information North Vietnam used to hone their air defense system, including “the package routes, which were routes used to bomb North Vietnam. He gave in detail the altitude they were flying, the direction, if they made a turn … he gave them what primary targets the United States was interested in.” As result, Hopper claims, the U.S. lost 60 per cent more aircraft, and in 1968 “called off the bombing of North Vietnam, because of the information McCain had given to them.” [source: John McCain: Privileged 'War Hero', Liar, Colloborator, Traitor Part 1]

Link to post
Share on other sites
Those are the facts. Read McCain's own accounts of his alleged torture. Read the reports of Abu Ghraib. Compare the two. Bear mind, too, that while we have facts and pictures of Abu Ghraib, we only have McCain's story about his POW experience. He won't release his military records which includes his POW debrief.

You don't have to take me seriously, but you might want to consider taking the facts seriously.

Here's McCain's story: John McCain's account of Viet Cong torture. Here's Abu Ghraib: Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse.

What the hell does the level of violence in torture techniques in Vietnam and Iraq have to do with GOP selection of Palin as there VP?

McCain's status as a veteran and pow is relevant to many many americans. President Bush's was not. Since he barely showed up and it was basically a joke. Huge difference from McCain and GWB. Also, what does any of this have to do with VP Palin.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Is Senator McCain not a current holder of federal office? Is his service record not available to the Armed Services Committee if political enemies wanted to gain advantage? Has Senator McCain been impeached? Was he dishonorably discharged?

What are you basing your assertions on....Senator John Kerry's fall from grace?

After you've answered my questions, I'll respond to yours. Until then I'll assume you don't have any answers worthy of name.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm glad the McCain/Palin thread is still on top. Obama has indeed become kind of boring, not in the spotlight anymore and it shows in the polls. All that matters in the end really.

Barts, maybe you should be talking about Obama since you can't effectively argue against McCain. Only the left wing

will find any enthrallment with your defamatory claims.

I'm still chuckling about FDR.

Link to post
Share on other sites
What the hell does the level of violence in torture techniques in Vietnam and Iraq have to do with GOP selection of Palin as there VP?

McCain's status as a veteran and pow is relevant to many many americans. President Bush's was not. Since he barely showed up and it was basically a joke. Huge difference from McCain and GWB. Also, what does any of this have to do with VP Palin.

I have no idea, but I don't think I started the diversion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think more correctly, by your warped interpretation. No one is expected to endure to the point of death torture or interogation, which is why when you are trained you are explicity told the same. All that you are required to do is to hold out as long as possible. The information that McCain gave under duress, by the time they gave it was virtually worthless and the statement he signed not worth the paper it was written on.

Agreed..there is no evidence that Senator McCain violated Articles of the Code of Conduct absent torture and military interrogation. All that is required is a will to resist in future sessons to the extent that resistance is possible. McCain refused early release and privilege as a POW, which is consistent with the requirements of the Code (Articles I - VI).

Edited by bush_cheney2004
Link to post
Share on other sites
Why do you believe a proven liar like McCain? He's even been caught in lies about his military record, which as you know he won't release for voters' scrutiny.

Could you in the future quote the passage you are linking to.

As for your notion that "The information that McCain gave under duress, by the time they gave it was virtually worthless and the statement he signed not worth the paper it was written on", are you so sure? If so why?

Because of the training I received.

"According to retired Army Colonel Earl Hopper, McCain divulged classified information North Vietnam used to hone their air defense system, including “the package routes, which were routes used to bomb North Vietnam. He gave in detail the altitude they were flying, the direction, if they made a turn … he gave them what primary targets the United States was interested in.” As result, Hopper claims, the U.S. lost 60 per cent more aircraft, and in 1968 “called off the bombing of North Vietnam, because of the information McCain had given to them.” [source: John McCain: Privileged 'War Hero', Liar, Colloborator, Traitor Part 1]

What evidence doe this man (who was not with Mcain offer?

Link to post
Share on other sites
"According to retired Army Colonel Earl Hopper, McCain divulged classified information North Vietnam used to hone their air defense system, including “the package routes, which were routes used to bomb North Vietnam. He gave in detail the altitude they were flying, the direction, if they made a turn … he gave them what primary targets the United States was interested in.”

The idea that the US Air Force used the same altitude and flight path in attacks is patently ludicrous. If that was so, then McCain was certainly not giving them anything new, the Vioetnamese would have figured that out by the second attack.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Did you read even the first sentence of the Abu Ghraib information I posted. Apparently not. Either that or you don't understand the meaning of the word "homicide". Clearly, White Doors, there's little point in providing you with the facts.

Can you show me where the Vietnamese government prosecuted their own guards over the abuse?

no?

Does that not nullify your whole asinine argument?

Yes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
After you've answered my questions, I'll respond to yours. Until then I'll assume you don't have any answers worthy of name.

I have answered your questions with the irrefutable facts of Senator McCain's federal office. Your point is moot. Further, I suspect you are not familiar with Code of Conduct provisions during the Vietnam War, Geneva Conventions, or Senator McCain's selection for promotion during/after his POW experience.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I have answered your questions with the irrefutable facts of Senator McCain's federal office. Your point is moot. Further, I suspect you are not familiar with Code of Conduct provisions during the Vietnam War, Geneva Conventions, or Senator McCain's selection for promotion during/after his POW experience.

Can you remind me which section of the Code of Conduct, "removes the disability" mentioned in Section III of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Maybe Congress passed the necessary resolutions mentioned. Do you know?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Does that not nullify your whole asinine argument?

Yes.

No. We're talking about McCain's alleged treatment at the hands of the Vietnamese. But I do think a thread that compares Vietnamese and United States treatment of prisoners would be interesting and informative. What would be really interesting would the treatment of Vietnamese prisoners by the U.S.. You know the ears as trophy thing, throwing people out of helicopters. You know that stuff.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Can you remind me which section of the Code of Conduct, "removes the disability" mentioned in Section III of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Maybe Congress passed the necessary resolutions mentioned. Do you know?

If it were at all relevant.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
Can you remind me which section of the Code of Conduct, "removes the disability" mentioned in Section III of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Maybe Congress passed the necessary resolutions mentioned. Do you know?

Your swiftboat is sinking fast...is that all you have to impeach Senator McCain's record? Not only did McCain retire as an O-6 with full benefits, he is also a member of Congress. How do you reconcile these facts with the 14th Amendment?

Or more directly, how did Senator Kerry rise to federal office as well?

Link to post
Share on other sites
So just to clarify: "executive experience" is a must but, in a pinch, having your arms broken by Charlie is an adequate substitution. Is that about right?

Cute. However the Republicans have done a stellar job at neutralizing the Obama star factor by nominating Palin.

The very fact that the Democrats have, in their infinite wisdom, actually taken the Palin bait on the "experience" debate, all the while turning the spotlight on their own Candidate's weak credentials (and he's at the TOP of their ticket) speaks volumes of their (and your) stupidity.

Say what you want about Palin, the nomination has so far been stroke of political genius by McCain.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...