This is the album link from which I think Suin drew photographs for her essay at FDL.

http://picasaweb.google.com/sameh.habeeb/PostIsraeliWarOnGaza#

If that url doesn't work, the title of the album within the whole collection is Post Israeli War on Gaza in which there are 211 photographs.

It's not going to happen. You know it, I know it, and everyone reading and posting here knows it. The best we can hope for is that he is about is memorable and Millard Fillmore.

We're not talking about abstract values but rather "My way or I'll shoot you". That is how history is made and internal rule of law enforced.

Riiiiiight. Gotta look out for that internal rule of law (whatever that is).

But looking past your amusingly Freudian typos, let's examine your premise, viz: Might Makes Right.

At the beginning, middle, and end of the Vietnam War the US possessed superior "might" and, indeed, won every battle. And yet lost the war, the consent of a generation, and moral leadership in the world. Discuss.

Mao Zedong, who coined the phrase "political power comes from the barrel of a gun", took over China and his gang of criminals still rules. But that's exactly how it should be, according to Shooter. We should do everything we can to aid China in crushing dissent, because, of course, Might means that Mao was Right. Discuss.

The League of Nations, and the United Nations represent two different attempts last century to buck the "guy with the gun makes the rules" idea. Although flawed, those two organizations were created by generations who had tasted war in a way that Mr. Might Makes Right (aka shooter) only has masturbatory fantasies about. Surely those hard-bitten warriors would be the first to line up behind a universal truth like Might Makes Right, no? Discuss.

Shorter version: Dumb, Dumber, Shooter.

Gaza Update: Everywhere I Look There is Rubble
By: Siun Sunday January 18, 2009 6:00 pm

http://firedoglake.com/2009/01/18/gaza-update-everywhere-i-look-there-is-rubble/

Is, I presume, the FDL piece in which the link to photographs led you to a page Google had "closed." It appears the link is "functional" today. I didn't click on each of the "gateway" photographs to see if every single album was indeed available, but the 4 I tried are.

If it was a terms of service violation, apparently it's been resolved.

http://picasaweb.google.com/sameh.habeeb

wrote: My point was not that prosecutions shouldn't go forward. Although the fact that they didn't go forward 5 years ago gives the whole affair a closing of the barn door after the horses have run away feel.

Hardly. One does not expect the administration now on the way out to have put much effort into prosecuting the guys who authorized the torture. When the AG considers himself the president's personal lawyer, what do you think is going to happen?

When do the rules we officially endorse, that is to say, the rules made for a society merit the status of laws?

Laws must be just prescriptions evenly applied. Most of our so-call "laws" are simply rules prescribed by the powerful supporting their power, to be broken when necessary by these rule makers.

It is essential to recognize the prescription regarding torture are laws and must be applied evenly to all members of society regardless of social status, and regardless of their attempt to invent rules of exception.

..."Precisely, which is why I analogize it to rape. The scary thing is how quickly the moral taboo against justifying torture fell away..."

Dude -- Rape is Clinton, torture is Bush. You need to get your presidents straight.

[Might] does actually [make right], at least in the near term. -- shooter242
Nonsense -- dr rick

Semantic sanctimony I presume? We're not talking about abstract values but rather "My way or I'll shoot you". That is how history is made and internal rule of law enforced.

I appreciate the argument you are making, but I followed your link to the convention against torture, and looked a the signer list. The United States was in the bottom grouping, those who had signed but not ratified the treaty. Constitutionally, I believe it is the Senate which can authorize treaties with other nations, and if the senate did not do so in this case, your whole argument that we are constittuionally bound to prosecute under this treaty falls apart, doesn't it? Could you please follow up to see whether or not a signed but not ratified treaty must be enforced by U.S. courts?

Thanks, and keep up the great work.

I agree with Greenwood's article, but wonder, a little, if a war crimes trail would give us any satisfaction. Thinking back to the Clinton impeachment and the 40 million waisted comes to mind. The republican side will give well made speeches designed to muddy the waters and glorify torture. It might have to be enough that Cheyne has poll ratings worse than any in history and we will forever be on guard against neocon secret and illegal proclivities. And, sadly, while the circus takes place, the publics eye is focussed away from our economic collapse.

[Right] does actually [make right], at least in the near term. -- shooter242

Nonsense

It's indeed refreshing to read the truth, no matter how ugly it can be sometimes. There are the obvious reasons there's resistance to prosecuting these men (and woman) that you have stated, namely the beltway pundits (who are the remoras of the powerful) and the Republican Party (who will condone anything from a fellow rethug, except stall shopping), but there's a larger group of resistors and they are a good many of the population that voted for Bush in the first place. I'm a Liberal and very proud in knowing I don't follow any crowd 100% and never have. That's the prime reason I come here to read about impartial logic and law. But you and I are few and far between, as if this had been a Democratic President, there are legions of Donkey Apologists that would be just as outraged as the Elephants are. Perhaps it's human nature or just American indoctrination, but either way, it's flawed. People hate to admit being wrong. Not that I'm discouraged, it's just that it's important to know all of the obstruction isn't just coming from the top. I think Bush loyalists are most terrified that we'll rub their noses in it and (for me) that's just not what this is all about. This is for my Country's sake and believe me when I say it would apply, just as harshly, no matter what stripe of politician was committing these crimes. In fact, I'd love to see Jane Harman, Nancy Pelosi and Jay Rockefeller sitting in a dock alongside of the Republicans that spit on the Constitution. Yes, indeed. Thanx, Glenn :)