Tatter Tots, and the election
I'm curious, are Tatter Tots a magical fusion of potato and nostalgia? What is it that makes these hash brown barrels so delectable? I suppose I could look up when they were first invented, and what really came together to form them - but I’m not going to bother. Suffice it to say that there’s something inherently magical about their nature. Of course they’re not always the best choice for every situation, but there’s something bout their bite-size-ness…
Of course, don’t ever let me hear you ruined them in the microwave. That’s a crime.
Speaking of crimes, I was thinking today about Clinton’s impeachment and how it’s absolutely a byproduct of our more sexually repressed culture. Now, don’t get me wrong - I’m not saying that having an affair is okay. (Please, don’t ever think that) I’m just saying that we all probably know it would be no big thing if it had happened in Europe. We may of gasped at the indiscretion of those crazy foreigners, but it’d be a passing gaff. This is of course, example one - Europe is a sexually desensitized continent as a whole.
We as Americans are desensitized to violence far more then they are. I’m curious if that’s why we ignored the flaunting of the Geneva convention so soundly in this country. If the Monica affair was an impeachable offense, then what was the decision to ignore this:
“Prisoners of war must be humanely treated at all times. Any unlawful act which causes death or seriously endangers the health of a prisoner of war is a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions. In particular, prisoners must not be subject to physical mutilation>, biological experiments, violence, intimidation, insults, and public curiosity.”
Quick note: I am not blaming the soldiers, at all. They’re in a terrible situation, and are working like hell to make things better for the Iraqis. They’re their for their duty to our country and I respect them in everyway. (Extra love to my cousin!)
Being that I was in Europe at the time that the Abu Gharib prison story broke I was put on the defensive for the actions of my country - I also had to explain to people why when I saw those pictures my immediate reaction wasn’t dropping the paper and flinching with horror.
Was I mortified? Definitely. My defense for the entire Iraq war was that Bush believed in his heart that he was doing the right thing, and he believed what he told us. When the weapons weren’t found, that’s not his fault, he had actionable information from credible sources. (I really feel he did, based on all I’ve heard.) The weapons didn’t matter when they didn’t show up, because at the end of the day we did it for the right reasons - to liberate the Iraqi people.
I think the problem is when the lines began to blur. Was this person an Iraqi, or a Terrorist? Or was he an Iraqi terrorist? If he’s in jail does that make him a terrorist? And I blame the administration for the hand waving of the Conventions that trickled down to the actions of individual soldiers.
Do I think the soldiers should be tried for their crimes?
Absolutely.
Do I think the Administration knowingly fostered this behavior?
Without a doubt.
It’s reported that Bush said in a memo they prisoners in the war on terror should be treated “humanely” but also “consistent with military necessity”. (No argument from me there) He went on to argue though that the Geneva Convention's guidelines for treatment of prisoners of war did not apply to terrorists.
It’s Pandora’s box. You decide to throw the gates open, and ignore all the rules in a extreme stress environment - things are going to start breaking. Alright, so lets treat them nice - but the international rules to define what nice is, we don’t need to use that definition.
Man, it blows my mind. I think Rumsfeld new exactly what was going to happen, the only question in my mind is whether Bush thought through the repercussions. Did he really feel that you could say be nice, but you decide what nice is? Rules are made for a reason, and it’s not to be broken.
Would it be better if he thought it through, and hoped the end result would pay off with good information at the cost of people’s dignity and lives - or if he was to naïve to figure it out?
All that to say, that’s the main reason why I don’t trust the current administration. If they hadn’t tossed out the Geneva Convention they’d have my vote right now - instead, I’m waffling on the fence. Your friends influence you, and unfortunately George spends to much time with Dick and Don, and not enough with Colin in my opinion.
Alright, that’s all I got right now.
-Dave
Of course, don’t ever let me hear you ruined them in the microwave. That’s a crime.
Speaking of crimes, I was thinking today about Clinton’s impeachment and how it’s absolutely a byproduct of our more sexually repressed culture. Now, don’t get me wrong - I’m not saying that having an affair is okay. (Please, don’t ever think that) I’m just saying that we all probably know it would be no big thing if it had happened in Europe. We may of gasped at the indiscretion of those crazy foreigners, but it’d be a passing gaff. This is of course, example one - Europe is a sexually desensitized continent as a whole.
We as Americans are desensitized to violence far more then they are. I’m curious if that’s why we ignored the flaunting of the Geneva convention so soundly in this country. If the Monica affair was an impeachable offense, then what was the decision to ignore this:
“Prisoners of war must be humanely treated at all times. Any unlawful act which causes death or seriously endangers the health of a prisoner of war is a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions. In particular, prisoners must not be subject to physical mutilation>, biological experiments, violence, intimidation, insults, and public curiosity.”
Quick note: I am not blaming the soldiers, at all. They’re in a terrible situation, and are working like hell to make things better for the Iraqis. They’re their for their duty to our country and I respect them in everyway. (Extra love to my cousin!)
Being that I was in Europe at the time that the Abu Gharib prison story broke I was put on the defensive for the actions of my country - I also had to explain to people why when I saw those pictures my immediate reaction wasn’t dropping the paper and flinching with horror.
Was I mortified? Definitely. My defense for the entire Iraq war was that Bush believed in his heart that he was doing the right thing, and he believed what he told us. When the weapons weren’t found, that’s not his fault, he had actionable information from credible sources. (I really feel he did, based on all I’ve heard.) The weapons didn’t matter when they didn’t show up, because at the end of the day we did it for the right reasons - to liberate the Iraqi people.
I think the problem is when the lines began to blur. Was this person an Iraqi, or a Terrorist? Or was he an Iraqi terrorist? If he’s in jail does that make him a terrorist? And I blame the administration for the hand waving of the Conventions that trickled down to the actions of individual soldiers.
Do I think the soldiers should be tried for their crimes?
Absolutely.
Do I think the Administration knowingly fostered this behavior?
Without a doubt.
It’s reported that Bush said in a memo they prisoners in the war on terror should be treated “humanely” but also “consistent with military necessity”. (No argument from me there) He went on to argue though that the Geneva Convention's guidelines for treatment of prisoners of war did not apply to terrorists.
It’s Pandora’s box. You decide to throw the gates open, and ignore all the rules in a extreme stress environment - things are going to start breaking. Alright, so lets treat them nice - but the international rules to define what nice is, we don’t need to use that definition.
Man, it blows my mind. I think Rumsfeld new exactly what was going to happen, the only question in my mind is whether Bush thought through the repercussions. Did he really feel that you could say be nice, but you decide what nice is? Rules are made for a reason, and it’s not to be broken.
Would it be better if he thought it through, and hoped the end result would pay off with good information at the cost of people’s dignity and lives - or if he was to naïve to figure it out?
All that to say, that’s the main reason why I don’t trust the current administration. If they hadn’t tossed out the Geneva Convention they’d have my vote right now - instead, I’m waffling on the fence. Your friends influence you, and unfortunately George spends to much time with Dick and Don, and not enough with Colin in my opinion.
Alright, that’s all I got right now.
-Dave