Comments on: Michael Scheuer http://antiwar.com/radio/2009/07/02/michael-scheuer-10/ Interviews of foreign policy experts, writers and activists. Mon, 23 Nov 2009 00:56:04 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: tonylee1973 http://antiwar.com/radio/2009/07/02/michael-scheuer-10/comment-page-1/#comment-6026 tonylee1973 Thu, 27 Aug 2009 09:03:43 +0000 http://antiwar.com/radio/?p=3569#comment-6026 no Shueur thinks the US should not protect Tiawan, Israel, aand Western Europe because this would cause the loss of American lives. American intilligence officers should engage in torture or war if it is necassary to protect American lives. He is a patriot who wants to protect American lives. He wants to put America first. American lives are what is important . I and he can't understand why other Americans first. no Shueur thinks the US should not protect Tiawan, Israel, aand Western Europe because this would cause the loss of American lives. American intilligence officers should engage in torture or war if it is necassary to protect American lives. He is a patriot who wants to protect American lives. He wants to put America first. American lives are what is important . I and he can't understand why other Americans first.

]]> By: tonylee1973 http://antiwar.com/radio/2009/07/02/michael-scheuer-10/comment-page-1/#comment-6029 tonylee1973 Thu, 27 Aug 2009 01:17:31 +0000 http://antiwar.com/radio/?p=3569#comment-6029 He does mention Israel. Go to youtube and put in glenn beck schueur and israel. You will see him denounce Israel hardcore and outdebate some zionist who used to work for netanyahooo He does mention Israel. Go to youtube and put in glenn beck schueur and israel. You will see him denounce Israel hardcore and outdebate some zionist who used to work for netanyahooo

]]> By: tonylee1973 http://antiwar.com/radio/2009/07/02/michael-scheuer-10/comment-page-1/#comment-6028 tonylee1973 Thu, 27 Aug 2009 01:13:25 +0000 http://antiwar.com/radio/?p=3569#comment-6028 He does not want another attack. He wants us to change our governmants policies so we stop angering people and making them want to attack us. He does not want another attack. He wants us to change our governmants policies so we stop angering people and making them want to attack us.

]]> By: tonylee1973 http://antiwar.com/radio/2009/07/02/michael-scheuer-10/comment-page-1/#comment-6027 tonylee1973 Thu, 27 Aug 2009 01:09:47 +0000 http://antiwar.com/radio/?p=3569#comment-6027 It is not good to annihilates a country. Yes that causes blowback. The reason Schueur says we would need to annihihliate a country is because of our governmant is "entangled" with other countries. Lets end our entaglements, mind our own business. However if we need to protect American lives then lets annihilate a country. It is not good to annihilates a country. Yes that causes blowback. The reason Schueur says we would need to annihihliate a country is because of our governmant is "entangled" with other countries. Lets end our entaglements, mind our own business. However if we need to protect American lives then lets annihilate a country.

]]> By: tonylee1973 http://antiwar.com/radio/2009/07/02/michael-scheuer-10/comment-page-1/#comment-6025 tonylee1973 Thu, 27 Aug 2009 00:34:13 +0000 http://antiwar.com/radio/?p=3569#comment-6025 My friend what he is saying is the United States should put in policies that are in the best interest of the American people. For instance, his view is that the US should not aid a warmongering country such as Israel (which causes attacks on Americans). He is saying that Al Quida will bring a bomb over the American border and kill Americans therefore we should protect our border. If a member of Al Quida is looking to attack Americans in the US with a nuclear bomb it is okey to torture someone to get the information to stop it. He is saying that the US should be nuetral in disputes between other countries. Peace to you and the people of Iran My friend what he is saying is the United States should put in policies that are in the best interest of the American people. For instance, his view is that the US should not aid a warmongering country such as Israel (which causes attacks on Americans). He is saying that Al Quida will bring a bomb over the American border and kill Americans therefore we should protect our border. If a member of Al Quida is looking to attack Americans in the US with a nuclear bomb it is okey to torture someone to get the information to stop it. He is saying that the US should be nuetral in disputes between other countries.
Peace to you and the people of Iran

]]> By: Anthony Wicher http://antiwar.com/radio/2009/07/02/michael-scheuer-10/comment-page-1/#comment-5638 Anthony Wicher Sun, 12 Jul 2009 23:28:11 +0000 http://antiwar.com/radio/?p=3569#comment-5638 Michael Scheuer IS Osama bin Laden. Just read his two books, "Through our Enemies Eyes" and "Imperial Hubris". Scheuer's identification with bin Laden is total. He is the creator of the bin Laden myth. The real bin Laden died in late 2001. The "bin Laden" we are chasing is the mythical bugaboo created by Scheuer. Scheuer is the the jolliest bloody fiend you will ever meet. He just loves it that he has the whole country bamboozled with his "bin Laden" shtick. Michael Scheuer IS Osama bin Laden. Just read his two books, "Through our Enemies Eyes" and "Imperial Hubris". Scheuer's identification with bin Laden is total. He is the creator of the bin Laden myth. The real bin Laden died in late 2001. The "bin Laden" we are chasing is the mythical bugaboo created by Scheuer. Scheuer is the the jolliest bloody fiend you will ever meet. He just loves it that he has the whole country bamboozled with his "bin Laden" shtick.

]]> By: Marcus http://antiwar.com/radio/2009/07/02/michael-scheuer-10/comment-page-1/#comment-5572 Marcus Fri, 10 Jul 2009 08:51:39 +0000 http://antiwar.com/radio/?p=3569#comment-5572 Another point; he has often said that the enhanced interrogation techniqies (read torture) has been approved by senior politicians, the President etc. and thus legitimate, and therefore people who used these techniqies can't be responsible. In my view, this reminds me of the Nazis who were just "following orders", but were convicted anyway (many were hanged), because there are norms of conduct in war (Geneva convention) which needs to be respected. It also sound like Nixon: "When the President does it, it's not illegal". A Swedish journalist made a good point regarding this issue. He argued that if an intelligence officer torture suspects and gain information which stop terrorist attacks, make a court rule on whether his actions were legitimate or neccessary. If not, the officer should be convicted and sentenced to prison. In sum, I do agree now, after had listen to the show, that Scheuer doesn't provide a good answer to why his argument is not turned over because of his position on torture. Marcus/ Sweden Another point; he has often said that the enhanced interrogation techniqies (read torture) has been approved by senior politicians, the President etc. and thus legitimate, and therefore people who used these techniqies can't be responsible. In my view, this reminds me of the Nazis who were just "following orders", but were convicted anyway (many were hanged), because there are norms of conduct in war (Geneva convention) which needs to be respected. It also sound like Nixon: "When the President does it, it's not illegal".

A Swedish journalist made a good point regarding this issue. He argued that if an intelligence officer torture suspects and gain information which stop terrorist attacks, make a court rule on whether his actions were legitimate or neccessary. If not, the officer should be convicted and sentenced to prison.

In sum, I do agree now, after had listen to the show, that Scheuer doesn't provide a good answer to why his argument is not turned over because of his position on torture.

Marcus/
Sweden

]]> By: Marcus http://antiwar.com/radio/2009/07/02/michael-scheuer-10/comment-page-1/#comment-5573 Marcus Fri, 10 Jul 2009 08:51:30 +0000 http://antiwar.com/radio/?p=3569#comment-5573 Concerning Scheuers' position on torture; I think that if the US military or Intelligence torture people this will not only make more terrorists, but make muslims hate America more. So this is a contraproductive strategy in the long run. Therefore it's somewhat inconsistent of Scheuer to argue that torture is a good method to keep America safe. For the sake of Scheuers' argument, logically speaking, he should be arguing against torture. Then again, he doesn't consider water-boarding torture... In such case, his argument is sound. Concerning Scheuers' position on torture;

I think that if the US military or Intelligence torture people this will not only make more terrorists, but make muslims hate America more. So this is a contraproductive strategy in the long run. Therefore it's somewhat inconsistent of Scheuer to argue that torture is a good method to keep America safe. For the sake of Scheuers' argument, logically speaking, he should be arguing against torture. Then again, he doesn't consider water-boarding torture… In such case, his argument is sound.

]]> By: Marcus http://antiwar.com/radio/2009/07/02/michael-scheuer-10/comment-page-1/#comment-5487 Marcus Mon, 06 Jul 2009 20:36:33 +0000 http://antiwar.com/radio/?p=3569#comment-5487 A comment to "Cliff". Mike Scheuer said on FN; "None of these politicians are prepared to deal with this threat because none of them accept that AQ's hatred is based on our policies such as ___. Not that Im saying we should necessarily change our policies." This is not a contradiction: AQ:s hatred is based on US policies according to Scheuer. He's simply saying that politicians in power should know what's motivating their enemies. Then when they understand what's motivating them, the politicians can start to think about what actions to take. If the US wants to change their policies towards the middle east it's up to them to do so. Scheuer doesn't argue for US policies to change, he's just making a small hint. A comment to "Cliff". Mike Scheuer said on FN; "None of these politicians are prepared to deal with this threat because none of them accept that AQ's hatred is based on our policies such as ___. Not that Im saying we should necessarily change our policies."

This is not a contradiction: AQ:s hatred is based on US policies according to Scheuer. He's simply saying that politicians in power should know what's motivating their enemies. Then when they understand what's motivating them, the politicians can start to think about what actions to take. If the US wants to change their policies towards the middle east it's up to them to do so. Scheuer doesn't argue for US policies to change, he's just making a small hint.

]]> By: Lester_Ness http://antiwar.com/radio/2009/07/02/michael-scheuer-10/comment-page-1/#comment-5477 Lester_Ness Mon, 06 Jul 2009 11:52:29 +0000 http://antiwar.com/radio/?p=3569#comment-5477 The Taliban offered to extradite O. b. L., if given a fig-leaf of evidence. It ought to have been easy to have him tried and hanged in Pakistan. But it would not look dramatic on TV, and, in the USA, power grows out of the barrel of a TV camera. A war in Afghanistan offered the opportunity of pushing the "Unitary Executive" (=Byzantine Autocracy) view of the presidency. A war in Iraq offered the prospect of either stealing a lot of oil or speeding up the Rapture. Perhaps both appealed to GWB. The Taliban offered to extradite O. b. L., if given a fig-leaf of evidence. It ought to have been easy to have him tried and hanged in Pakistan. But it would not look dramatic on TV, and, in the USA, power grows out of the barrel of a TV camera. A war in Afghanistan offered the opportunity of pushing the "Unitary Executive" (=Byzantine Autocracy) view of the presidency. A war in Iraq offered the prospect of either stealing a lot of oil or speeding up the Rapture. Perhaps both appealed to GWB.

]]>