1: Why do liberals take the side of terrorists by protesting the US, accusing us of torturing them?

Question

If we were cutting off limbs, applying electrodes and beating themsenseless, I could understand their point of view.

But liberals go farther by redefining torture and by redefining Geneva Convention rights to make their case.

I would like to know what motivates liberals to take the defense of terrorists to this level of passion.

Don't tell me you're right, tell me what motivates you.

Answer 1

They are motivated by learned hate of America and Our Way of Life.

The are Socialist-Communist in their beliefs and deeds. They profit from our system, and then lie,cheat, and steal in their attempt to destroy our Free Society way of Life.

They lie about People who believe in our way of Life, and will defend it with Honor.

They cheat by changing what others say, so as to brand them the opposite of what they are.

They steal even the private emails of those who truly love and wish to preserve Our way of Life.

These are Evil People, who share the wishes of the Muslim Terrorist, and will do all of the above to help them destroy us.

For their actions, they believe that they will then be put in-charge of what is left of our destroyed Country.

Watch the Liberal New Media darlings, and you will see the parade of the ones who want to Destroy the United States of America, for their own gain!

As for the Geneva Convention Article 17. The Terrorists do not conform to article 17. They torture, starve, and mutilate the American Prisoners they capture. This is irrefutable! What We do is similar to a spanking as measured to the way the Terrorists treat Prisoners.

If You were taken prisoner in Iraq or Afghanistan, who would you rather be your Captors?

Answer 2

The current administration was the first to redefine anything, the Geneva Convention was in place even long before 9/11 ever happened, Gitmo is a big loophole that enables us to hold people w/o a trial by having it located off US soil and calling the prisoners something other than POWs, it's a shameful assault on habeus corpus. Our policies in the Iraq conflict and Abu Gharib make us look like we have sunk below our own standards.



It is not defense of terrorists, it's the defense of right vs. wrong. And holding people accountable for their actions. Remember this is the party in the face of a dissenting opinion called the opposition unpatriotic. We are better than that. The guys who called for this war are chicken hawks who are really tough when they are not directly in the fight.

Answer 3

What truly amazes me is that we think that it is possible to avoid civilian casulaties when our enemy uses civilians as cover and disguises themselves as civilians. Then we have whiners who complain that civilians get hurt rather than saving their anger for the cowards who use civilians both as camoflauge and as shields for their terrorist activities. In addition, the terrorists view the killing of those same civilians as a military objective (e.g. bomb explodes in Iraqi city, 43 dead - they are almost always civilians) Our troops do not get to hide amongst civilians. Imagine how effective they could be if that was permitted. Instead we have to wear uniforms, have bases in separate, highly identifiable locations and avoid hurting anyone who hasn't been identified as already having attacked either civilians, the government or our troops. Can you see the kind of strait jacket that puts our troops in? These are the "rules" that people, who want to feel good about our actions, put in place. Then people have the gall to point fingers and call the troops criminals when they prove that, they too, are human, by making mistakes either in identification or targets or in delivery of weapons. Give these poor guys and girls a break. Complain about the terrorists blatant and deliberate use of civilians to hinder out troops effectiveness. Direct your anger there, where it belongs. BTW, saw your point re: the 500 LB bombs and I do not have the knowledge to answer that. You may well be right about the weapon not suiting the use. Do we have other less deadly munitions to accomplish the same mission?

Answer 4

I don't actually consider myself a liberal, we use too many labels around here, but do you think that being rounded up when you may not have even done anything (many actually did not), not charged with anything, and jailed indefinately in some hellhole a million miles from home (Guantanamo) from where you have no idea when you'll be released, is a holiday, or right?



I do not know anyone who defends terrorists, but I do know people who are on the side of human rights, and against the use of torture, even non-Democrats or liberals. The military isn't generally on the side of torture, as they don't want it used on our own soldiers.



Personally, I think they should be treated and tried as military combatants under the Geneva Convention.

Answer 5

So you don't think our torture methods are bad because we're not applying electrodes or cutting off limbs? Have you ever been waterboarded? Maybe you should give it a shot, or at least look into some of the other methods we use on people before you make that assumption.



Liberals are not "taking the side of terrorists". That is you twisting a concept to make it sound worse than it is. What they are doing is being humane by saying "it doesn't matter who you are or what you're involved with, nobody deserves to be tortured like that". It's putting your country a step above, showing them that you will not stoop to their level of torture and death. Unfortunately we do not do that, we're just as bad as they are.

Answer 6

The Geneva Convention is there to protect those taken prisoner during a time of armed conflict. As a veteran (vietnam, '69) I always hoped that if worse came to worse and I was captured, I would be treated with some respect. When we treat those we capture with such disrespect as we did at Abu G, what can we expect if American soldiers or sailors are captured by an enemy force. And, I'm betting the question was not written by a veteran.

Answer 7

It is not just the liberals that protest this practice. As a Constitutionalist, I believe in the first ten amendments which are called the "Bill of Rights". With the "Patriot Act" the government has overridden our Constitutional rights and those who are legitimate American citizens.



The 4th Amendment states: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."



The Fifth Amendment further protects property, by stating: "No person shall be ... deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

Answer 8

Because liberals are putting America's interest as number 1 instead of Republican ego .



Liberals can can see that the way the war has been handled has simply increased enemies and has led nowhere. There will be no victory. It has all been futile. Bush got distracted with Iraq - instead of following through on Al Qaeda.



He was more concerned with finishing off his father's unfinished business - when he should have been concentrating on what was best for America. Iraq became an obsession - and he spent recklessly.

Answer 9

I believe it was YOUR party who changed POW's status to 'unlawful enemy combatants' so that we wouldn't have to adhere to the Geneva Conventions.



From the Geneva Convention:

(Article 17): "No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion, may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them information of any kind whatever. Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may not be threatened, insulted or exposed to unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind."



The fact is, I am not worried, specifically, about how we treat people who are our enemies....

I AM worried about how our enemies will treat OUR soldiers if we refuse to follow the basic procedures and rules of law. We signed the treaty because we know it is the ethical way to do things....and we are America and we want to portray to the rest of the world that we will not piss on our moral highground just because of a military conflict. We are in Iraq to 'bring democracy' and 'freedom' to Iraqis. How can we do that when we don't stand by our own policies? How can we expect them to return the favor when we don't offer it to them.

Answer 10

when i criticize the US for stooping to the lows of torture, for using the same methods that we prosecuted the japanese as war criminals for using during wwii, i am in no way standing up for terrorists. i am standing up for the us. standing up for the idea that the us is the last best hope for freedom and justice for all. i hold the us to a higher standard than i hold terrorists or other countries. to lower our standards is to become just another ordinary nation, to be no better than the terrorists. to allow torture on our watch is unpatriotic.

Answer 11

I think it's the concept of treating POW's like humans... not trash.



How can we "win the hearts and minds of the people" as Bush wants us to when we have pictures like this to antagonize the Muslim fundamentalists?



http://spiiderweb.blogspot.com/2007/11/just-followed-orders-guantanamo-mission.html



http://www.forusa.org/programs/iraq/images/abughraib.jpg



http://reidreport.com/images/iraqabuse7.jpg



Keep in mind that the people in Guantanamo are not even the "terrorists"... They are people whose neighbors gave them up for easy cash...

Answer 12

this is not some compassion move, this is really about strategy, i could care less what happens to some religious fanatic terrorist



i want taliban to think if they surrender they will be headed to some luxury resort in the caribbean, not a sweat box malaria pit where they will slowly rot while being water boarded for the rest of their lives.



what you conservatives don't get is that a dead terrorist doesn't talk. If they have no reason to surrender they won't, they will fight US troops to the death, placing our forces at greater risk and making intel gathering more difficult.

Answer 13

There are many ways of torturing people, not just the ones you mention.

Besides Not everybody believes in the Sith point of view: If you don't agree with me, you're my enemy/You're with us you're against us.

Answer 14

Well listen, first of all not all "liberals" protest against torture.



Just like not all "conservatives" think that the teaching of evolution should be banned from schools.



There are extremes on both sides.



Deal with it.

Answer 15

their motivation is the same as right wing radicals. They both think they are right, when in reality, truth is somewhere in the middle. By sticking to a radical side they are compelled to believe it more and fight for it more on the grounds that not doing so would mean that they dont have the conviction to stand for anything.

Answer 16

Blah blah blah they hate us for our freedoms. USA all the Way, Love it or Leave It.



America F**K yeah!

Answer 17

Obsessed with 'liberals' much?

Answer 18

Dr. Michael Savage says: "Liberalism is a mental diosorder." Makes sense to me big time.

Answer 19

And why do they hate the US? I don't get them either.