Is this honestly the scenario you want?

[Laura PourMeADrink]

Obama: I want to release the pictures of detainee torture, please.

Generals: We stongly object to that sir, we feel it would put the lives of our men and women in the military in danger.

Obama: But, I said I would. I said I would be transparent.

Generals: But what about the safety of our soldiers?

Obama: Well, I just think it's much more important that I keep my word. Despite what you say, I think they will be ok.

Obama: Release them.

Generals: Yes sir

[polichick]

1. No, I want him to say that we'll all be safer if we stand by our values and laws.

[Phx_Dem]

4. How are we NOT standing by our values and laws, when Abu has

already been investigated and prosecuted. Just because you don't like the results, doesn't mean it we didn't do anything about it.

[polichick]

11. Hiding the truth is how Bush & Co. did business - the ACLU intends to use...

...those photos to prove how widespread and top-down those practices were. Withholding evidence goes against our values and laws.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

13. I hear you. But it sounds like he is acknowledging their existence

just not publicizing in mass because he is being told it will endanger people? He is stipulating the torture.

[polichick]

15. He said that it was "a few people" who have already been dealt with...

He wants this to all go away ~ which is wrong and also foolish because the criminals will come back stronger if we look the other way. (Actually, look how bold Cheney is already.)

[Phx_Dem]

21. THE TRUTH IS OUT. And has been for a few years now.

Memba the investigation? Memba the prosecution? Memba people who went to prison?

[polichick]

23. Are Rumsfeld and Cheney in jail?? Only the scapegoats are in jail so far.

[stillcool]

30. and how will that change..

with the release of these photos? I am disappointed that these photos weren't released..but my reasoning is because half of the American people that are okey-dokey with torture need to see them. Not that it would make a difference..they'll probably get off on it.

[polichick]

40. It's about the truth - the ACLU has been trying to get to the truth since 2003...

History of the FOIA request: http://www.aclu.org/safefree/torture/torturefoia.html

Recent statement, with which I wholeheartedly agree:

"The Obama administration's adoption of the stonewalling tactics and opaque policies of the Bush administration flies in the face of the president's stated desire to restore the rule of law, to revive our moral standing in the world and to lead a transparent government. This decision is particularly disturbing given the Justice Department's failure to initiate a criminal investigation of torture crimes under the Bush administration.

"It is true that these photos would be disturbing; the day we are no longer disturbed by such repugnant acts would be a sad one. In America, every fact and document gets known – whether now or years from now. And when these photos do see the light of day, the outrage will focus not only on the commission of torture by the Bush administration but on the Obama administration's complicity in covering them up. Any outrage related to these photos should be due not to their release but to the very crimes depicted in them. Only by looking squarely in the mirror, acknowledging the crimes of the past and achieving accountability can we move forward and ensure that these atrocities are not repeated.

"If the Obama administration continues down this path, it will betray not only its promises to the American people, but its commitment to this nation's most fundamental principles. President Obama has said we should turn the page, but we cannot do that until we fully learn how this nation veered down the path of criminality and immorality, who allowed that to happen and whose lives were mutilated as a result. Releasing these photos – as painful as it might be – is a critical step toward that accounting. The American people deserve no less."

[Phx_Dem]

42. Last time I check OJ Simpson wasn't in jail for double murder either.

That doesn't mean the truth didn't come out.

As for Rumsfeldt and Cheney, I'm pretty certain you won't see any photos of them standing next to any of the Abu Ghraib prisoners, so releasing more graphic photos won't help with that.

The photos will eventually come out anyway, but the investigation will not be reopened so what's the big rush. At least when they do come out, Obama won't be blamed for causing undo danger to the troops overseas by releasing photos for no good reason.

[RetroLounge]

24. Really?

So if there are 100 more pictures, are they ALL of abuse by Lyndie Englund and Charles Grainer?

Every one? Really?

So EVERYONE has been investigated? Really?

RL

[Phx_Dem]

43. Yes, really. Just because the public didn't get to see EVERY picture

doesn't mean they weren't part of the investigation. When was the last time you saw pictures of a murder scene released by the police?

[RetroLounge]

44. pictures of a murder scene released by the police?

Ah, that does it for me...

GOBAMA!

RL

[stray cat]

28. he has said that. And we don't usually release photos of abuse or murder victims either

[polichick]

29. This is different - it's part of an ACLU request that will lead to accountability...

Obama is now part of the cover-up.

[Phx_Dem]

2. He made the right decision. n/t

[ZombieHorde]

3. Is there any evidence our troops will be in additional danger if the photos are released? nt

[Fresh_Start]

5. they probably would be, but the military leadership would

be in especially more danger (of losing their military leadership positions)

[ZombieHorde]

8. "they probably would be"

What sort of additional danger do you believe they would be in?

[Fresh_Start]

12. the people who are trying to kill them right will still be trying to kill them

and its slightly possible that people that hate them but are not already called to violence may be called to violence
But since I'm not a violent person, I don't think that someone who is non-violent would be called to violence.
Me, I'd call a lawyer or a bunch of lawyers and they to sue them into the poorhouse

[NoPasaran]

35. Is there any evidence that "bring it on" put our troops in additional danger?

We certainly reamed GWB over that little macho outburst.

[ZombieHorde]

37. None that I am aware of. nt

[dflprincess]

38. Call me silly, but I have a feeling those who would do our troops harm

have already heard about the abuse and torture.

Having a president that appeared willing to prosecute those responsible for it might actually make the troops safer.

[rvablue]

6. How about the flip on that scenario -- do you want that?

That despite what career soldiers, diplomats and bureaucrats working in government think based on facts and professional experience, the President is always the "decider" and never takes into account reason, conflicting opinions, etc in forming his judgements and decisions?

Cause, uh..., we just suffered through 8 years of that. Just sayin'.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

10. I must be dense because it sounds like you are saying the same thing?

help me out

[rvablue]

16. What I'm saying is that maybe Obama

did receive briefings from the generals and others and he changed his mind. Based on new information. Based on further thought. Based on input from professionals on the ground.

What I'm saying is that while some on DU might be pissed he's "breaking a promise" there is the possibility that he is actually making a more informed and careful decision based on what he has learned and heard since getting into the White House.

On one hand, you can see this as "caving" or "breaking a promise."

On the other hand, you can see this as potentially a President who is aware that there are many in his administration who know more than he about certain issues and he needs to gather all opinions and then decide what is best based on that information.

[bluestateguy]

7. Some things are more important than keeping campaign promises

Do we really want a president who never, ever, never reverses course on an issue?

[namahage]

9. "Stay the course!" n/t

[Laura PourMeADrink]

14. low blow. I thought bush didn't listen to generals, anyway - the ones

calling for more troops, right?

[namahage]

26. Um, I agree with you.

Perhaps I should've used this: :sarcasm:

I, for one, am perfectly fine with Obama changing his stance based on additional information from other sources. It makes very little sense that he would release memos, intending to release the photos--knowing that he always planned never to release them.

Not to do so--to pursue a flawed strategy despite valid additional information--is something that Bush would do.

[cherokeeprogressive]

36. Must be a lot of them.

[phantom power]

17. Yes, because the "safety of our soldiers" argument is bullshit.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

18. It is?

So when Nick Berg was decapitated over Abu Ghraib photos... that has nothing to do with these photos?

Or are you one of those "Nick Berg was secretly decapitated by a cabal of Blackwater mercenaries and Illuminati" types?

[phantom power]

20. Let's review what the world already knows.

They already know that we've been torturing. Heck, the rest of the world has known that for a while, it's just us Americans who are catching up.

They know that we have photos. They know that whatever is in those photos must be damned bad, or we would have just released them. So, we can either release them and demonstrate that we really are turning over a new leaf, or we can continue to hide them, and (a) demonstrate that we aren't changing anything, and (b) allow everybody's imaginations to run wild about what might be in those photos.

Not releasing those photos is going to increase anger at America, not reduce it.

Furthermore, it's the right thing to do. Once upon a time, we used to believe doing the right thing was worth a certain amount of risk. If we ever had any moral authority with the rest of the world, that was where it came from.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

22. So...

not releasing the photos is going to increase terrorist attacks on Americans in exactly the same way that Abu Ghraib/Nick Berg didn't?

:crazy:

[Cha]

19. Obama's doing what he thinks

is best and that's what we hired him for. I sure as hell trust him more than a bunch of armchair strategists who think they know what's goin' on.

[Lint Head]

25. The soldiers were put into harms way by Dick Cheney and George Bush.

Torture photos won't inflame a damn thing! The terrorists already hate us. The photos will be of torture from the Bush Cheney reign of terror not from the Obama administration! I think the photos should be released and Cheney made to look at them in a court of law. This situation is damn ridiculous!
:dem:

[Raster]

27. Oh please. How disingenuous.

Try again.

[stillcool]

31. everyone likes to prescribe..

motives behind a persons actions. I don't see how that is anymore disingenuous than whatever motives you prescribe.

[neverforget]

32. Photos of civilians killed by American airstrikes can be viewed but

pictures of tortured detainees can't be viewed. The killing happens in the open while the torture happens in the dark, out of sight, out of mind.

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

This week is our second quarter 2009 fund drive.
Donate and you'll be automatically entered into our daily contest.
New prizes daily!



No purchase or donation necessary. Void where prohibited. Click here for more information.

[MasonJar]

34. As was discussed on Keith tonight, this is not to protect our soldiers. The

Iraqis already know what we have done, and so does much of the world (that part which receives clear and honest reporting.) This is to protect the Bushista and the military (generals, esp., such as ones advising Obama.) How could the photos benefit Petraeus, for example? This move is designed to keep the American people in the dark.

[TexasObserver]

39. He doesn't work for the generals. He, like the generals, work for us.

This reverence for what the generals think or want is nonsense. Their job is to carry out orders from their civilians bosses, and if they don't want to do that, they should fired. Our military needs a good purge of all the rightwing nuts that populate so much of the top brass.

The meme "but it might put the troops at risk" has been used ad nauseam for decades, and it is complete and utter bullshit.

If the military doesn't want their dirty laundry aired, don't commit atrocities and call it military activity. Their conduct is an abomination to our ideals and the perps should all be forced out of the military.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

41. Just sayin....If he works for us than it would follow logically that he

would do what we want. Last I heard 70% of the people do not want the photos released. Tell me if you heard another number. Just sayin.

[newinnm]

45. Absofuckinglutely

Why would Obama make a campaign promise and then blatently choose to just throw it out the window. He works for us and we hired him under a certain set of conditions. This is one of the many conditions we hired him. In this country the military is controlled by civilian authority.


-nnnm