Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Cheney:
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/politics/2012-election/video-dick-cheney-demands-apology-obama
McCain:
http://www.economist.com/blogs/lexington/2011/10/dick-cheney

Both of them videos.

In essence, he's demanding an apology from Obama for his criticism of the Bush administration... and for not using the term "War on Terror". Obama's criticisms that Cheney is bothered with, from what I can tell, seem to be focused around the subject of torture, as well as his killing of the American national Islamic priest recently (see the appropriate thread to talk about that)-- and McCain's response was essentially: "Torture was overwhelmingly voted against in congress, the American people have spoken. It doesn't work, and in fact it only gives our enemies another recruitment tool."

He didn't outright say Obama didn't need to apologize, but it's very clear that's his position. I haven't seen a response from the Obama administration, most of the articles I've seen seem to focus entirely on Cheney's point of view. What's your thoughts on the dispute?

Previous administrations are just set dressing. Nothing is owed to them. We shouldn't make a habit of deciding that previous administrations "deserve" something or we're defeating the whole purpose of term limits.

There's no "respect for your elders" with presidential administrations and there shouldn't be. A president needs to be free to make their years their own.

Seems right to me.
After all the gak about "change" and evil republicans and then Obummer goes and does the exact same things but this time, since the democraps are doing it the leftists pretend not to see it.

It's like Bush said, once he sits in my chair and reads what I am privy to he will make the same decisions.

<text redacted; let's make constructive posts, rather than spammy ones, please --Janthkin>

Bottom line is there is no real difference between todays democrats and republicans, it's the same crap just being presented as different things for the stoopid average voter.

I always liked McCain, im naturally right leaning but am forced to be left leaning in the States cos I just cant stand all the Jesus juice... and I prefer him to Obama.

Its a crying shame he had that grotesque woman forced upon him, he might have won otherwise, and he certainly would have got my vote.

Well... my missus vote.

Cheny's new occupation is defending the actions of the Bush administration. I find his want for an appology rediculous, but unsurprising. Obama came in with a different view of US foreign policy and felt that there were areas in need of change and has acted as such. That Cheney would ask Obama to apologize for being critical of the foreign policy of a president Obama disagreed with is silly.

Didn't vote for the guy, but I have always respected McCaine's stance on torture, often in opposition to his own party. His experience as a tortured soldier gives him an unimpeachable position to speak about the issue with authority. I actually liked how he dodged the irrelavent appology issue while bringing the conversation back to the fundamental question of torture.

As to the Obama administration. I think their best strategy should be to ignore this sideshow. There's really nothing to be gained by publicly arguing -and giving a wider audience- to an ex-vice-president. If it was Bush asking for an apology (I don't think he would ask) then they should respond but Cheney, nah.

Cheney shot someone and had them apologize for it, so you should never underestimate his Sith powers.

Pyriel- wrote:Seems right to me.
After all the gak about "change" and evil republicans and then Obummer goes and does the exact same things but this time, since the democraps are doing it the leftists pretend not to see it.

It's like Bush said, once he sits in my chair and reads what I am privy to he will make the same decisions.

Sorry, we can't take your post here with even the tiniest grain of salt. you just hate democrats. congratulations, you have embarrassed yourself on the 'net.


Also, I agree with Matty, Mcain was a good candidate, I myself am a democrat, but Mcain was just as good if not better than Obama.

If he had just not taken you-know-who as his vice pres...

What malarkey are you talking about, Pyriel?

Really, the biggest complaint I've heard about him and torture isn't that he continued it-- I haven't seen any evidence of that-- but rather that he refused to investigate Bush for the purposes of prosecuting him and/or his staff. Which you'd think would be something that the right-wing would support, but they didn't even seem to notice.

At the moment, Obama requires the CIA to use the interrogation methods outlined in "FM 2-22.3 Human Intelligence Collector Operations", the US Army's field manual on interrogations. Only with the agreement of the Attorney General and appropriate consultation can they use any other interrogation technique, and so far I haven't seen any proof that the current AG has agreed to anything, though I freely admit I'm not exactly the most informed person on that subject.

Melissia wrote:What malarkey are you talking about, Pyriel?

Really, the biggest complaint I've heard about him and torture isn't that he continued it-- I haven't seen any evidence of that-- but rather that he refused to investigate Bush for the purposes of prosecuting him and/or his staff. Which you'd think would be something that the right-wing would support, but they didn't even seem to notice.

At the moment, Obama requires the CIA to use the interrogation methods outlined in "FM 2-22.3 Human Intelligence Collector Operations", the US Army's field manual on interrogations. Only with the agreement of the Attorney General and appropriate consultation can they use any other interrogation technique, and so far I haven't seen any proof that the current AG has agreed to anything, though I freely admit I'm not exactly the most informed person on that subject.

Er...yea... try to prosecute a President and its your ass. Kiss republican style democracy goodbye.

Not really. Former presidents have just the power of a well-off citizen. if he wanted, Obama COULD prosecute Bush.

ineptus astartes wrote:Not really. Former presidents have just the power of a well-off citizen. if he wanted, Obama COULD prosecute Bush.

Yea really.
1. This is a tactic of banana republics, to prosecute your enemies. If you think its ok for Obama to do it, then you wouldn't have a problem with Obama himself being investigated for Libya when the Republicans take over, and Nixon investigating Johnson for Vietnam, and Bush investigated Clinton for Serbia, and Clinton investogating Bush I for Kuwait. How about briery? There's a certain Company that received preferential treatment in the news. That sounds like fun. Lets put the WH in the hoosegow.

2. Its an excellent motivator for those in power to seize power, lest they be prosecuted in turn.

No problem at all.

ineptus astartes wrote:No problem at all.

Mmm... I sense troll...

Frazzled wrote:

ineptus astartes wrote:No problem at all.

Mmm... I sense troll...

Or someone who just doesn't understand the issues involved.

Or he actually believes it'd be a good thing.

Or doesn't like representative government.

I wasn't saying I was joining in that criticism, only that was the primary criticism I saw about Obama on the subject, at least from the supposed left-wing.

Not that Obama supposedly continued the same things Bush did. Which... he didn't.

Sorry, we can't take your post here with even the tiniest grain of salt. you just hate democrats. congratulations, you have embarrassed yourself on the 'net.

So I am embarrassed because I don't share your political views? Wow, a 10 year old troll could not have done it better then you just did. Go grow up or something.

Besides I'm far from pro Republican like you seem to think troll but you could easily have figured that out by asking instead of throwing around you little knee jerk troll tantrums.

Not that Obama supposedly continued the same things Bush did. Which... he didn't.

Well, you didn't walk out from Iraq like the Change-dude promised you would do pronto and you are still in Afghanistan waging war on the poor little taliban, still sucking up to Pakistan and guantanamo is STILL in operation. That's big "change" for you.

Oh I almost forgot, the change-dude is still tight buddy with Israel.

Well unemployment did increase. I guess thats something.

Im not a fan of Obama at all, but if I were him Id just respond with somthing like " I wont apologize simply because with the amount of money you and your company made on the war, you sir, should apologize to America"

That sounds decent enough to me

Im not a fan of Obama at all, but if I were him Id just respond with somthing like " I wont apologize simply because with the amount of money you and your company made on the war, you sir, should apologize to America"

That sounds decent enough to me

Hehe, priceless

Not that I am unbiased (far from it in fact), but I can't help noticing the almost humorous little shots in Michael Allen's report. Cheney never "demanded" and apology. (not in that interview anyways). When Allen writes
"Cheney, who along with President Bush, failed to capture Osama Bin Laden"
there is a disguised, and illogical, attack there. It makes it sound as if Bush and Cheney had Osama in their hands and miffed it, or bungled the entire thing until a great hero like Obama could come and straighten everything out. Kinda like saying a pitcher who pitched the first 8 innings of a game "falied to win" because he wasn't pitching at the end of the game.

I think what has happened here is a mis-representation of what was actually said. It seems, to me anyways, that this is a pretty common trend in "journalism" these days - on both sides of the political spectrum. I'm not spectacular at making a point myself, but I think I can, quite often, recognize 'spin' when I see it.

Honestly, I say to hell with the parties all together. It's making far to much khek for it to be worth it.

And, as far as I'm concerned, the President is not taking advice, and that makes McCain angry. What I don't understand, is why the phrase "War on Terrorism" is mandatory. It's not like Terrorism is a nation you can invade and burn. "Dumbfethistan" is where we're heading at this rate.

/Rant

ineptus astartes wrote:

Pyriel- wrote:Seems right to me.
After all the gak about "change" and evil republicans and then Obummer goes and does the exact same things but this time, since the democraps are doing it the leftists pretend not to see it.

It's like Bush said, once he sits in my chair and reads what I am privy to he will make the same decisions.

Sorry, we can't take your post here with even the tiniest grain of salt. you just hate democrats. congratulations, you have embarrassed yourself on the 'net.


Also, I agree with Matty, Mcain was a good candidate, I myself am a democrat, but Mcain was just as good if not better than Obama.

If he had just not taken you-know-who as his vice pres...

I remember saying something like that a while back.


Got beaten for it. Screw Arkansas.

Kasrkai wrote:Screw Arkansas.

Something said in the OT that i can completely agree with!

there is a disguised, and illogical, attack there. It makes it sound as if Bush and Cheney had Osama in their hands and miffed it

I think this is what most people think inside, that they let the bastard get away for some reason, maybe as one more excuse to staying in afghanistan?

Oh Cheny, when will he learn that his opinions really are that bad?
BUt in all seriousness why support torture it never gets anywhere, it never works. People will break and will admit to anything. The fact is Cheny doesn't know that.

Could Cheney hurry up and die of something horrible and incurable already?

Pyriel- wrote:Bottom line is there is no real difference between todays democrats and republicans, it's the same crap just being presented as different things for the stoopid average voter.

Foreign policy almost never changes significantly from President to President, and honestly that was reflected in the majority of Obama's campaign. His proposals regarding it basically amounted to drawing down Iraq (which he has done), adding troops in Afghanistan (which he has done), closing Gitmo (which he hasn't done), and diplomatically engaging hostile nations (arguable both ways, but certainly more open than Bush).

Change was a slogan, a well chosen slogan, not an explicit promise.

Pyriel- wrote:

there is a disguised, and illogical, attack there. It makes it sound as if Bush and Cheney had Osama in their hands and miffed it

I think this is what most people think inside, that they let the bastard get away for some reason, maybe as one more excuse to staying in afghanistan?

Yeah, this ranks just a bit below "bush flew planes into the twin towers so he could invade Iraq, then blew up the levies in New Orleans because he hates African Americans"

Asherian Command wrote:Oh Cheny, when will he learn that his opinions really are that bad?
BUt in all seriousness why support torture it never gets anywhere, it never works. People will break and will admit to anything. The fact is Cheny doesn't know that.

I don't want jack this thread and start talking about this subject, but I can't help but chuckle when I hear people say this. There is reason torture has been used for, you know, thousands of years. There is a bit more to 'professional' torturing than clubbing a guy til he says something. I'm not saying this to support torture or say its okay, but i do think your reasoning on at least this subject in particular is a bit shallow.

CT Gamer wrote:Could Cheney hurry up and die of something horrible and incurable already?

I hate Cheney too! That's what all the cool kids are doing right?


I think the above linked article is a wonderful example of the propaganda throughout the political media. I'm not trying to defend every choice Cheney has made, but he has been cleverly villanized with clever spin (not my comments above about the way the article was written) and too many Americans are forming their political opinions based on Family Guy and Sephen Colbert. Americans don't know how to think any more. They can express the entire depth of their political insight on a couple of bumber stickers. We blurt out the last thing Rush Limbaugh said or pull the race card if someone disagrees with Obama. Disagreeing and expressing your opinion is great but, just a look at this thread shows how, too often, the hate and discontent are more influencial to us than logic and reason. I'm not innocent myself. I have said my share of boneheaded things like CT Gamer (remember 'ol Ted Kennedy? Yeah, wasn't my favorite person)

I guess what I am trying to say is, come on, we are NOWHERE near as smart as we think we are. Until we can admit this about ourselves, personally, individually, and not just think it about everyone else, I don't see moving away from the drivel we all like to spout.

I think they made this emoticon for me