Obama in trying to look the nice guy to many terrorist will reap the fruit of his popularity contest. It is amazing how the press have been silent about the many civilians killed in Afghanistan by US troops. Bush was accused of a murderer with blood on his hands when these events happened. The sickening left wing press have little to nothing to say about OBama's leadership and the stuff ups (which are mounting quickly) under his administration. It will be interesting how long it takes Mr Obama to sell Israel sown the tube.

Dear csteele,

Thanks for that quote. I tend to agree with it
regarding torture - perhaps partially because
I'm biased. I've got a family history. My
uncle was tortured to death in a prison under
the Soviet Regime. He was a high school student
at the time.

As I wrote in another thread - if we don't start
to talk to each other and look for diplomatic
solutions and if more and more nuclear weapons are
built, and if more sophisticated means of delivering
them are devised, and if more and more nations get
control of these devices - then surely we risk our
own destruction.

Foxy,
You seem to be equating the waterboarding of terrorists with the torturing to death of your innocent uncle.
Is this rational?
How many people have been tortured to death by the Americans?

<<if we don't start to talk to each other and look for diplomatic
solutions>> sounds noble but I'm not convinced that even one of your special cuddles would stop people like Ahmadinejad, Kim Jong-il or Al Qaeda or the Taliban from pursuing their agendas.
There have always been wars and there will always be wars.
The danger is in not being prepared to do what is necessary to minimise the damage.

It's interesting to note that the holier-than-thou Democrats knew all along about how information was being extracted from prisoners: http://frontpagemagazine.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=34776

Dear KMB,

I don't know if I'm being rational or not.
I was simply explaining why I was against
torture in any shape or form against any
human being.

I agree with you - we have to be prepared
against terrorist attacks - but I really
feel that bombing the hell out of people
is not going to persuade them we're not
the enemy. Food and medical supplies might
do the trick though - especially for poor
people that have little resources.

The principal foreign enemy of the Islamic
fundamentalists is the United States. The
fundamentalists find it politically helpful
to have an alien enemy. The solidarity of
any community is enhanced if it perceives a
common outside threat. Obama is an intelligent
Leader - he knows this. And if he can change
the image of the US - to not being viewed
as an enemy by diplomatic means - he just may
reach the moderates. Also despite their antipathy
to the US the fundamentalists are concerned with
conditions mainly in their own countries. Most
Mulsims are desperately poor, for their nations'
oil wealth has often been unequally shared.

That's why using other means - might just be the
answer to reach them - apart from a military
solution - that's all I'm saying. Bombing the
heck out of them hasn't worked - other tactics
are needed - and the US President relaizes that.

KMB may I ask you a question?
What if Australian or American prisoners fell into terrorist hands?
Would water boarding and such upset you?
Can you be sure if America is not, every prisoner was a terrorist?
Have you any concerns some may not have been?
Torture is wrong, just as wrong no matter who does it or to whom.
I am pro America, very concerned about Islamic fundamentalists and terrorists in general.
But nothing justifies torture.
Hitler we know,trained people who killed without mercy and said we only followed orders.
We each must understand we make new terrorists by being so wrong those photos from that prison shamed America we must learn from our mistakes.

Obama has released details of enhanced interrogation techniques so that terrorists now know exactly how far the US will go to extract information.
He did this against the advice of his own appointee to the CIA Leon Panetta, as well as over the protestations of four former CIA directors on the grounds that it would compromise national security.
He refused an application from former vice-president Dick Cheney to release to the public the results of those interrogations and how they have helped to stop subsequent terrorist attacks.
He has alienated CIA operatives who now face the dilemma of potentially acting within the current law only to face possible future criminal charges should those laws be later changed.
He has made it harder to recruit moles amongst the enemy as they cannot be certain of their future situation with respect to the USA.
http://app2.capitalreach.com/esp1204/servlet/tc?cn=aei&c=10162&s=20271&e=10762&&espmt=2
Has the crack cocaine that he admits using in his youth permanently addled his capacity to make sound judgements?
Or is he deliberately trying to compromise US security?