Bush, senators divided......

[harleygirl]

It will be interesting to see how this pans out........

WASHINGTON - President Bush will face questions Friday regarding sharp divisions among Republicans about the war on terrorism and disputes over his proposed strategies for interrogating and trying enemy combatants.

The Senate Republicans oppose the legislation because they say it could expose U.S. troops to abusive treatment in future wars. They also contend that barring a defendant from access to evidence used to convict them would undermine the credibility of the court.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060915/ap_on_go_co/congress_terrorism_35

 

[Tinkerbell]

I've always wished that the party lines would just get dropped and people elected into Government would make decisions based on what's BEST for the people/country. (pipe dream -- I know).

But, this is kind of like that. He's a Republican President trying to pass some new "rules" and the rest of the Republicans didn't just fall and line and say "yes sir." Some of them are actually questioning his ideas and whether or not they are a good thing.

Of course, now it'll be a stalemate and nothing will get done... *sigh* just can't win!

 

[chernmax]

My goodness, just drop all parties and make a vote based on right or wrong LOL. Freakin political pompass a$$es...

Just around the corner will be inflated debates and mud slinging until election day is over. All the B/S and once the last ballot is cast, the politicians will once again have amnesia over what Americans really want...

 

[vraiblonde]

For a change, I agree with Bush on this. If we're going to fight, let's fight to win and to hell with what terrorists think about it.

And, as usual, Condi is right and Colin is wrong. That's why I never liked that guy, even when the whole country was bowing down before him - he's a diplomat, not a leader. Sec of State was the perfect job for him, but he is NOT presidential material.

And one more thing:

McCain, a potential 2008 presidential candidate, has become a moral authority in Congress on prisoner of war issues.

He has? Says who?

 

[vraiblonde]

By extending full Geneva Conventions protections to these folks, and thus preventing us from gaining intel from them, there's no motivation to take them prisoner, and plenty of reasons NOT to do so.

You'll get no argument out of me.

I waver back and forth with this Geneva Convention crap. On one hand, we don't want our soliders to devolve into the same animals the rest of the world puts out. Some respect for humanity is needed. On the other hand, I haven't heard of any US interrogation tactics that make me raise my eyebrows. The Abu Ghraib stuff was just stupid and not torture by any stretch of the imagination.

We don't need to be chopping off peoples' fingers and raping their daughters in front of their faces, but a little coercion isn't inappropriate when dealing with captured enemy combatants.