[Vision2020] The Keely Mix/Doug Wilson Debate

[Sunil Ramalingam]

Dick,

I'll leave Nick to capably defend his position, but I'll tell you why I 
think we need to look at what WE do.

We have adopted the Geneva Conventions, and are obligated to follow them.  
It is irrelevant if those we fight have done so.  We have our rules and we 
should follow them.

We now claim to be in Iraq to establish democracy.  I myself think that 
claim is a crock, but that too is irrelevant right now.  If we are there to 
establish democracy, we do not further our stated cause by ignoring the 
rules we have adopted.  It only demonstrates that our political process can 
be meaningless, and that lesson is clear to those who suffer when we deviate 
from our rules and laws.

If we are trying to establish a democracy, then we need to win hearts and 
minds through the moral superiority of our conduct.  Do you think the 
Administration's embrace of torture and running secret prisons enhances our 
moral standing anywhere?

Our government is supposed to answer to us; our enemies do not, and I have 
no expectation of that.  But I have the right and responsibility to expect 
my government to comply with our laws.

Sunil


>From: "rvrcowboy" <rvrcowboy at clearwire.net>
>To: "Vision2020" <vision2020 at moscow.com>, <nickgier at adelphia.net>
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] The Keely Mix/Doug Wilson Debate
>Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2006 05:36:52 -0700
>
>A direct quote from Nick Gier:  "I'm busy writing my commentary on the U.S.
>and Torture (Preliminary title "Beheadings, Hoodings, and Water Boarding:
>CIA Torture from Vietnam to Gitmo"),......."
>
>Nick,
>
>I do not understand your passionate desire to constantly denounce our
>troops, our military and our country, in favor of the tactics of 
>terrorists.
>We all understand that, in a time of war and under pressure, people
>sometimes do things they would not normally do.  We also understand the 
>fact
>that, in the case of our soldiers and military, these times are more rare
>than the standard of actions.
>
>In a hypothetical scenerio, if you were a captured combatant; Would you
>prefer to be a prisoner of war, held captive by any of the Coalition 
>forces,
>or, would you prefer to be a prisoner of the extremist factions, operating
>under no rules of engagement and no rules what-so-ever concerning the
>treatment of prisoners?  Is your commentary going to include some exposure
>of the heinous tactics commonly employed by other side, or, are you only
>interested in exposing the actions of the few, serving our own country, who
>have made an error?
>
>I am not questioning your right to your own opinions as to the war on
>terrorism we presently find ourselves engaged in.  I just do not understand
>how you justify your endless criticisms of the very country that affords 
>you
>the freedom of dissent.  After all, as a university professor, you have
>enjoyed the privileges of being an employee of the very government you
>appear to be unable to tolerate.  Can you honestly say you attitude would
>not be different if Bill Clinton or John Kerry were President, as opposed 
>to
>George W. Bush?  Under the same circumstances, do you really believe their
>options would be any different?
>
>I would like to take the opportunity to apologize to you for some of my 
>past
>actions of calling you names and condeming you for have a different 
>opinion,
>from my own.  I would also like to assure you that I am asking these
>questions in ernest and not to challenge your right to your opinions.  It 
>is
>just difficult for me to understand why you appear to support the enemies 
>of
>our country more than our own troops and your own country.
>
>Looking forward to your reply and hoping you will not make it too long and
>too far over my head for me to understand.  :)
>
>Have a wonderful day,
>
>Dick S.