Comments on: Guilt By Jon Stewart

By: That Joke Isn’t Funny Anymore « Around The Sphere

That Joke Isn’t Funny Anymore « Around The Sphere — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 20:59:03 +0000

[...] Scott H. Payne at The League: The myriad of arguments against torture aside, do pro-torture advocates really want to place themselves in the same camp as folks who can’t tell that The Daily Show is satire? If there is a more relevant argument to demonstrate why the mindset of folks who support torture is not worthy of American ideals and values, I’ve not seen it. [...]

By: chris

chris — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 20:02:09 +0000

Look at the interview with pro-torture advocate Cliff May back in the spring. Sub-humans like May don’t seem to care, as long as they get their talking points out to as many people as they can.

By: Barry

Barry — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:49:07 +0000

“The myriad of arguments against torture aside, do pro-torture advocates really want to place themselves in the same camp as folks who can’t tell that The Daily Show is satire? ”

I would guess that most pro-torture folks don’t understand that; probably half of them cheer the Colbert Report.

By: Jaybird

Jaybird — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 01:55:14 +0000

You’ve heard stories about how Dallas brought down Communism?

Maybe The Sopranos will bring down Islamic Fundamentalism.

By: Scott H. Payne

Scott H. Payne — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 23:33:51 +0000

As far as Maziar Bahari, if he was stupid enough to go back then he got what he deserved.

Scott, are you honestly suggesting that Bahari deserved to be illegitimately imprisoned and tortured because he was in Iran reporting on the disputed elections that have lead to a popular uprising against the government you are so keen nuke? I mean, are you truly and seriously making that argument publicly?

By: Koz

Koz — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 22:41:20 +0000

Ok, let’s note deterrence is not the same as diplomatic engagement. In fact, it could very well end up being that deterrence = bombing. Ie, we bomb Iran, and they are deterred from building nukes. Even forgoing military options, deterrence could involve sanctions and interdictions, in which case we will be collaborating with the major industrial powers, not the Iranians themselves.

By: Scott

Scott — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 22:31:12 +0000

Maybe from an air bust, (which is how most nukes are planned to be used to damage the most surface area) I think a delayed ground burst would do the trick nicely. However, a ground burst would cause a bit more fallout as surface material is vaporized and sucked into the fireball.

By: Mark Thompson

Mark Thompson — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 22:24:28 +0000

“The guard seemed to believe sex and alcohol can be enjoyed easily in New Jersey. “I think the words ‘New Jersey’ sounded to him like the most American place that you can be in your life,” said Bahari, who was held captive for 118 days in an Iranian prison. “He hated me and he was jealous of me at the same time because I had been to New Jersey.”

Clearly, this man had no understanding of New Jersey’s asinine liquor laws, which make it impossible to buy even beer or wine from anyplace other than a “package goods,” err, liquor store. (Wegman’s, however, has managed to find a way around this in recent years, it would seem).

By: North

North — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 22:20:59 +0000

Scott ol’ boy. A quick heads up. Nukes wouldn’t even scratch the places the Iranians have sequestered away their program. The heat, radiation and blast of a nuke would be relatively ineffective against the deeply buried and hardened bunkers the Iranians are using. In fact it’s an open question as to if even our state of the are (non nuclear) bunker busters could break in. That’s setting aside the fact that the Iranian anti-air system is far from toothless.

By: Dan Miller

Dan Miller — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 22:03:27 +0000

So why is the deterrence solution inappropriate for Iran? It certainly seems a lot cheaper and more attractive than a ground invasion followed by a protracted occupation.