Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:West is full of crap. The only places where torture works as an effective means of gaining useful information is on TV and in the movies.

An official review of CIA use of torture, reviewing over six million pages of dossiers and files, found that it was in fact not at all useful or effective for information gathering.

A redacted copy of that official report has been published.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/12/09/world/cia-torture-report-document.html

And yet, West and his men are quite alive. Funny that.

And neither have either of us been flattened by a falling satellite. Funny that. Equally valid and relevant conclusion to draw.

Anonymous wrote:

takoma wrote:I have no intention of defending Allen West, but rather than arguing with the respondent(s) defending him, I think we should thank them for actually answering OP's question and explaining what they see in West.

It's the same old answer as always. West confirms their biases. West stokes their fears with his conspiracy theories. And FOX News loves him and repeats what he says. They eat it all up because it's what they want to hear. And since it's on the news, since it keeps being repeated, it's all true and legit, right?

Too bad the fact checkers have proven most of what West has ever said to be at best severely misguided, and at worst, batshit insane. There's frankly very little that West has ever said that was truthful or above board.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:West is full of crap. The only places where torture works as an effective means of gaining useful information is on TV and in the movies.

An official review of CIA use of torture, reviewing over six million pages of dossiers and files, found that it was in fact not at all useful or effective for information gathering.

A redacted copy of that official report has been published.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/12/09/world/cia-torture-report-document.html

And yet, West and his men are quite alive. Funny that.

I'm sure every torturer says the same thing. Wonder if it works in heaven.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:West is full of crap. The only places where torture works as an effective means of gaining useful information is on TV and in the movies.

An official review of CIA use of torture, reviewing over six million pages of dossiers and files, found that it was in fact not at all useful or effective for information gathering.

A redacted copy of that official report has been published.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/12/09/world/cia-torture-report-document.html

And yet, West and his men are quite alive. Funny that.

takoma wrote:I have no intention of defending Allen West, but rather than arguing with the respondent(s) defending him, I think we should thank them for actually answering OP's question and explaining what they see in West.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:West is full of crap. The only places where torture works as an effective means of gaining useful information is on TV and in the movies.

An official review of CIA use of torture, reviewing over six million pages of dossiers and files, found that it was in fact not at all useful or effective for information gathering.

A redacted copy of that official report has been published.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/12/09/world/cia-torture-report-document.html

And yet, West and his men are quite alive. Funny that.

Anonymous wrote:West claims they got information out of the guy. He claims they "avoided being ambushed" as a result.

Yet I have not found a single source that can actually establish whether this was in fact good information. I cannot find a single piece of information saying they caught or dealt with the supposed culprits. I cannot find any tangible evidence whatsoever that he did in fact save lives or avoid ambushes.

The Committee review of CIA interrogation says that yes, quite often the person being tortured will indeed "sing like a bird" - but the problem is, none of the information they give is actually useful. They are just talking, giving up random names and places and info in order to make the pain stop. Again and again and again this was shown to be the case in the CIA files. It really doesn't work. And saying "see, we didn't get ambushed" after you tortured a guy really doesn't prove anything.

Anonymous wrote:West is full of crap. The only places where torture works as an effective means of gaining useful information is on TV and in the movies.

An official review of CIA use of torture, reviewing over six million pages of dossiers and files, found that it was in fact not at all useful or effective for information gathering.

A redacted copy of that official report has been published.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/12/09/world/cia-torture-report-document.html

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again, this was an Iraqi policeman who knew of a plot to assassinate US soldiers. West stopped that in his tracks.

He is a hero. Not surprising DCUM liberals are more concerned about a man who planned to kill than our own so,diets. Same lot were pissed a Marine punched an Afghani commander for raping a child on our base.

A

We're actually concerned about the rule of law as set forth in rules of engagement and the UCMJ. If he was a hero then he should have refused to resign and defended his actions at the court martial. He's a coward who ordered four men to beat another man.

Right. West showed blatant and reckless disregard for well established military law in the UCMJ. He violated his oath of enlistment into the service. He has no business being involved in governance and policy.

Roses?
Chocolates?
US citizenship?

What should we have given the nice assassin?

Your deflection tactics need work. The UCMJ is "a thing" for reason. All soldiers (especially officers) are sworn to uphold it. Yet in all your praises about West, you fail to address the UCMJ issue. Not only did he flout it but he caused 4 other men to flout it on his order. And if you are saying that violations of the UCMJ are ok if the reason is "compelling enough," we can agree to disagree.

Again, what should we give the nice assassin?

I'm saying exactly that. A good commander does not allow his men to be wantonly killed. As a father or mother, if someone was after your children, you would not care what you have to do to protect them. You would not offer an intruder tea and toast.

Don't be an asshole with your roses and chocolate bullshit. There are plenty of ways to get things done that don't involve violating multiple military and international laws. When we start acting brutally and savagely and in blatant disregard of the law like like Al Qaeda, the Taliban or ISIS then we've already lost the war and there isn't any point anymore.

Sure, when you have all the time in the world, that's true. But when you are (a) in a war zone and (b) your life and the life of your men are being threatened, you need the information. Know the difference between West and his men, and ISIS, the Taliban, and Al Qaeda? Firstly, the man lived. Secondly the man was actually guilty, unlike those in the Twin Towers, and those that ISIS and the Taliban routinely kill.

Nonsense. The rest of the US military deals with these kinds of situations all the time, without having to violate multiple laws. What he did is take the law into his own hands in a violent, unjustifiable way. He proved himself to be unreliable and a loose cannon.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again, this was an Iraqi policeman who knew of a plot to assassinate US soldiers. West stopped that in his tracks.

He is a hero. Not surprising DCUM liberals are more concerned about a man who planned to kill than our own so,diets. Same lot were pissed a Marine punched an Afghani commander for raping a child on our base.

A

We're actually concerned about the rule of law as set forth in rules of engagement and the UCMJ. If he was a hero then he should have refused to resign and defended his actions at the court martial. He's a coward who ordered four men to beat another man.

Right. West showed blatant and reckless disregard for well established military law in the UCMJ. He violated his oath of enlistment into the service. He has no business being involved in governance and policy.

Roses?
Chocolates?
US citizenship?

What should we have given the nice assassin?

Your deflection tactics need work. The UCMJ is "a thing" for reason. All soldiers (especially officers) are sworn to uphold it. Yet in all your praises about West, you fail to address the UCMJ issue. Not only did he flout it but he caused 4 other men to flout it on his order. And if you are saying that violations of the UCMJ are ok if the reason is "compelling enough," we can agree to disagree.

Again, what should we give the nice assassin?

I'm saying exactly that. A good commander does not allow his men to be wantonly killed. As a father or mother, if someone was after your children, you would not care what you have to do to protect them. You would not offer an intruder tea and toast.

Don't be an asshole with your roses and chocolate bullshit. There are plenty of ways to get things done that don't involve violating multiple military and international laws. When we start acting brutally and savagely and in blatant disregard of the law like like Al Qaeda, the Taliban or ISIS then we've already lost the war and there isn't any point anymore.

Sure, when you have all the time in the world, that's true. But when you are (a) in a war zone and (b) your life and the life of your men are being threatened, you need the information. Know the difference between West and his men, and ISIS, the Taliban, and Al Qaeda? Firstly, the man lived. Secondly the man was actually guilty, unlike those in the Twin Towers, and those that ISIS and the Taliban routinely kill.

Please take your love of Allen West and go somewhere. No one gives a shit about him, but you!

No idea who the guy is, but is that truly how you choose to speak about an American soldier?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again, this was an Iraqi policeman who knew of a plot to assassinate US soldiers. West stopped that in his tracks.

He is a hero. Not surprising DCUM liberals are more concerned about a man who planned to kill than our own so,diets. Same lot were pissed a Marine punched an Afghani commander for raping a child on our base.

A

We're actually concerned about the rule of law as set forth in rules of engagement and the UCMJ. If he was a hero then he should have refused to resign and defended his actions at the court martial. He's a coward who ordered four men to beat another man.

Right. West showed blatant and reckless disregard for well established military law in the UCMJ. He violated his oath of enlistment into the service. He has no business being involved in governance and policy.

Roses?
Chocolates?
US citizenship?

What should we have given the nice assassin?

Your deflection tactics need work. The UCMJ is "a thing" for reason. All soldiers (especially officers) are sworn to uphold it. Yet in all your praises about West, you fail to address the UCMJ issue. Not only did he flout it but he caused 4 other men to flout it on his order. And if you are saying that violations of the UCMJ are ok if the reason is "compelling enough," we can agree to disagree.

Again, what should we give the nice assassin?

I'm saying exactly that. A good commander does not allow his men to be wantonly killed. As a father or mother, if someone was after your children, you would not care what you have to do to protect them. You would not offer an intruder tea and toast.

Don't be an asshole with your roses and chocolate bullshit. There are plenty of ways to get things done that don't involve violating multiple military and international laws. When we start acting brutally and savagely and in blatant disregard of the law like like Al Qaeda, the Taliban or ISIS then we've already lost the war and there isn't any point anymore.

Sure, when you have all the time in the world, that's true. But when you are (a) in a war zone and (b) your life and the life of your men are being threatened, you need the information. Know the difference between West and his men, and ISIS, the Taliban, and Al Qaeda? Firstly, the man lived. Secondly the man was actually guilty, unlike those in the Twin Towers, and those that ISIS and the Taliban routinely kill.

Please take your love of Allen West and go somewhere. No one gives a shit about him, but you!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again, this was an Iraqi policeman who knew of a plot to assassinate US soldiers. West stopped that in his tracks.

He is a hero. Not surprising DCUM liberals are more concerned about a man who planned to kill than our own so,diets. Same lot were pissed a Marine punched an Afghani commander for raping a child on our base.

A

We're actually concerned about the rule of law as set forth in rules of engagement and the UCMJ. If he was a hero then he should have refused to resign and defended his actions at the court martial. He's a coward who ordered four men to beat another man.

Right. West showed blatant and reckless disregard for well established military law in the UCMJ. He violated his oath of enlistment into the service. He has no business being involved in governance and policy.

Roses?
Chocolates?
US citizenship?

What should we have given the nice assassin?

Your deflection tactics need work. The UCMJ is "a thing" for reason. All soldiers (especially officers) are sworn to uphold it. Yet in all your praises about West, you fail to address the UCMJ issue. Not only did he flout it but he caused 4 other men to flout it on his order. And if you are saying that violations of the UCMJ are ok if the reason is "compelling enough," we can agree to disagree.

Again, what should we give the nice assassin?

I'm saying exactly that. A good commander does not allow his men to be wantonly killed. As a father or mother, if someone was after your children, you would not care what you have to do to protect them. You would not offer an intruder tea and toast.

Don't be an asshole with your roses and chocolate bullshit. There are plenty of ways to get things done that don't involve violating multiple military and international laws. When we start acting brutally and savagely and in blatant disregard of the law like like Al Qaeda, the Taliban or ISIS then we've already lost the war and there isn't any point anymore.

Sure, when you have all the time in the world, that's true. But when you are (a) in a war zone and (b) your life and the life of your men are being threatened, you need the information. Know the difference between West and his men, and ISIS, the Taliban, and Al Qaeda? Firstly, the man lived. Secondly the man was actually guilty, unlike those in the Twin Towers, and those that ISIS and the Taliban routinely kill.