Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

An Obama-Cheney Thought Experiment

Here’s a thought experiment: When you watch excerpts of the Obama-Cheney great debate over national security, try to imagine how these issues would play if America should be hit by another 9/11-level terrorist attack.

You hope the country would unite behind President Obama in crisis, the way it did behind President Bush. But watching the poison darts fly Thursday, I’m not so sure. I worry that this time the country could split down the middle like an empty gourd, with the right blaming the left, and the left blaming the right.

That’s what scared me about Dick Cheney’s sneering, sarcastic attack on the new administration’s national-security policies: He is turning up the heat of partisanship, and thereby weakening the glue that would hold the country together in crisis. He is playing the vindication game, like his pal Rush Limbaugh, pushing for the sharpest, meanest lines to justify himself -- claiming that Obama’s opposition to harsh interrogation was “contrived indignation and phony moralizing” and “recklessness cloaked in righteousness.” Those are bitter words, fighting words. When you accuse a political rival of weakening the nation against its adversaries, you cross a line.

That’s why I liked Obama’s attempt to claim the middle ground in this debate. Cheney may have had the whip hand rhetorically, but Obama’s cool, calm presentation gives him a better chance of uniting the country, if disaster should strike. Or so I would like to think.

If you take Cheney at his word, he does actually believe that another terrorist attack is coming, and that Obama will be to blame because his policies have made the country more vulnerable. He must imagine that he’s playing a sort of Paul Revere role, trying to wake people up to the dangers of easing our defenses before it’s too late.

So let me address Cheney’s argument head on. Is America weaker against its enemies because of Obama’s changes in counter-terrorism policy? I don’t think so, and I would point to three reasons:

First, many of the Obama policies began taking shape during Bush’s second term, without any evident decline in our ability to combat al-Qaeda. It was Gen. Mike Hayden, Bush’s CIA director, who decided to stop using waterboarding; it was Bush who announced a desire to close Guantanamo; it was Gen. David Petraeus who taught the army that winning a counter-insurgency war requires making allies of some of your former adversaries. Cheney made his same anything-goes arguments against Bob Gates, Condi Rice and Steve Hadley during Bush’s second term -- and he lost. And we don’t appear to have been any less safe for it.

Second, Cheney ignores that we are fighting a political war, in which America’s image matters. Even if the former vice president is right that we will forfeit some information by not torturing captured terrorists (and I think we have to give him that grisly point), those losses likely will be more than offset by the gains to America’s image in the world -- especially among the Muslim populations where this struggle will be won or lost.

That’s what the British found during their grim war against IRA terrorist bombers who were terrifying residents of London, Birmingham and Manchester during the 1970s and ‘80s. When pressure from human rights groups forced the British to stop using harsh interrogation methods against IRA captives, I’m told that they initially lost some intelligence. But this was a political war, and a more humane interrogation policy boosted Britain’s image among the Catholics of Northern Ireland, undermined the IRA’s appeal, and gradually opened the way for eventual peace.

Third, successful anti-terrorism policies, by definition, are ones that can be sustained. This isn’t going to be a short battle, with Osama bin Laden surrendering aboard the USS Missouri. Our struggle against terrorism is, unfortunately, likely to go on, in some form, for many years. The ad-hoc Bush-Cheney approach -- where policies were slammed together, despite worries at all of the intelligence agencies charged with implementing those policies -- crumbled because it was lawless, and thus inherently weak. It also wasn't sustainable because it didn't have broad political support. Which brings us to the real damage that Cheney is doing now to the cause he professes to support: He is eroding the bipartisan base that is necessary for a sustained, aggressive, lawful battle against the nation’s enemies.

So that’s the thought experiment: Try assuming the very worst -- in other words, try living in Cheney World -- and think about the conditions under which the country’s security would be best protected. By that test, I don’t think Cheney’s argument stands up.

By David Ignatius  | May 22, 2009; 6:40 PM ET
Categories:  Ignatius  | Tags:  David Ignatius  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Contradiction in Obama's Speech
Next: Who Will Confront Obama? Cheney, Gingrich and...?


While I agree with much of what Mr. Ignatius says, I have to strongly disagree with him when he says "Even if the former vice president is right that we will forfeit some information by not torturing captured terrorists (and I think we have to give him that grisly point)". I believe it has been shown that torture does not get reliable information from a prisoner. Rather, it makes the prisoner tell you what he/she thinks you want to hear. That is why it was so effective when used by the Spanish Inquisition, during Stalin's reign of terror, etc.

Posted by: dfritzin | May 22, 2009 8:06 PM | Report abuse

Wow, What a ridiculous column. Amazes me how some get paid for their Lack of knowlege. Shame on you. Last I remember is your Behind hasn't been blown up and your family has been safe for the past 8 yrs. You better pray your still safe with this Fraudulant, Hate America man they call The President. To think he cares more about Terrorist who want to kill us and our families rather than The AMerican People and especially an innocent baby who survives a botched abortion. Go figure.

Posted by: LANI57 | May 22, 2009 8:06 PM | Report abuse

Hmmmm well for your information, waterboarding kept another 9/11 On Los Angeles.

Posted by: LANI57 | May 22, 2009 8:08 PM | Report abuse

Dick Cheney is an experienced Washington bureaucrat. When you have screwed something up in a very big way, you need to shut down the whistleblowers. This is CYA on a grand national scale.

No one wants to go down in history as a war criminal, so wrapping yourself in the flag and praising yourself for saving the country is a perfectly sensible strategy.

For HIM.

Posted by: | May 22, 2009 8:14 PM | Report abuse

LANI57 says your behind hasn't been blown up! During George WMD Bush's Presidency, thousands of soldiers died in Iraq--a war we now know without question to have been waged as part of an ideological program, not out of necessity. During George W. Bush's Presidency, tens of thousands of U.S. soldiers were injured, only to return to the squalid conditions and cruel indifference of a veterans' care medical system that fell through the cracks of America's for-profit healthcare racket. During George W. Bush's Presidency, the NSA spied on the private citizens, thanks to the willing participation of major American telecom companies, a major violation of the most fundamental Constitutional rights Americans thought protected them from KGB-style domestic surveillance. During George W. Bush's Presidency, the Republican Party launched a national campaign to convince the public that the Democratic nominee for president was a covert adherent to radical Islam with covert ties to domestic and foreign terrorists. During George W. Bush's Presidency--a time lauded and celebrated by the National Rifle Association, who claimed to have "their man in the Oval office"--the largest gun massacre on a university campus occurred at Virginia Tech, resulting in the violent deaths of 5 faculty members and 27 students. During George W. Bush's Presidency, the CIA at the bequest of Dick Cheney tortured prisoners using techniques in direct violation of U.S. and international law, dramatically increasing the likelihood that captured U.S. prisoners in the future will also be subject to torture. During George W. Bush's Presidency, the country was swept up in fear that terrorists were attacking ordinary citizens by sending the anthrax virus in the form of white powder through the United States Postal system. During George W. Bush's Presidency, invasive strip searches coupled with racial profiling were introduced to the act of getting onto an airplane. During George W. Bush's Presidency, a man who looked mentally ill was able to get past airport security, get on a plane, and then light a fuse connected to explosives in his shoes. During George W. Bush's Presidency, a color-coded system was created to tell Americans via broadcast television that the threat of a terrorist attack was high at all times.

Posted by: BornAgainAmerican | May 22, 2009 8:17 PM | Report abuse

LANI57 is suffering terribly from Cognitive Dissonance, probably brought on by listening to Boss Limbaugh, Sean Vanity, Glenn Beck. If you want to live in a country that bans abortion, has no gays, and loves the old time religion, then move to Iran. If you actually believe Obama is illegitimate then get the **** out of this country. Love it or leave it. If you actually believe torture works, then you stand with our former ally in Iraq, Saddam. I supported Bush after Nine Eleven, until he went into Iraq. I supported the War in Afghanistan, not the War in Iraq. I was right, there were no WMD, no ties to Nine Eleven or Al Qaeda. You were dead dead wrong. USA! USA! USA!

Posted by: BornAgainAmerican | May 22, 2009 8:21 PM | Report abuse

Cheney's argument and rationale is so patently ridiculous, that I'm dumbfounded some people are still buying into his contorted logic. To wit: If the only prerequisite for torture is that American lives might be saved, then we should be justified in torturing (even slowly mutilating) each enemy POW in every conflict from now until Kingdom come. MOST enemy POWs can likely offer some shred of intelligence that MIGHT save American lives on the battlefield: related to enemy numbers, armament, or location; or to enemy tactics or willingness-to-fight. It’s reasonable that MOST POWs can offer some data that might provide a competitive edge to American troops in battle; thus saving one or more American lives. So using Mr. Cheney’s line of reasoning, why not torture/mutilate every enemy POW? But in fact, in modern times, civilized nations have punished by death those who torture enemy POWs. But weren’t the torturers merely seeking to gain an edge, to potentially save the lives of their countrymen? Aren’t these torturers patriots? (Incidentally, I served 13 years on active duty—unlike Mr. Cheney—and I’m a service academy graduate.) I’ll likewise argue that the near-term benefits of torturing the enemy (saving American lives), do not offset the longer-term harm done to the morale of American fighting men and women. We are the GOOD GUYS: we do not torture; period!

Posted by: shawn_slayton | May 22, 2009 9:28 PM | Report abuse

It looks to me like Cheney is gambling everything on an all-out attack on critics of Bush era policies and doing his best to bluff and frighten people into submission. He is facing the real possibility of being tried for war crimes and he is confronting this head-on. I have to admire his chutzpa if not his methods or his politics. The more noise he makes the more people he sways to his view which in turn reduces the possibility he will ever face any charges in the US. He remains GW Bush's attack dog, though his own head is on the chopping block as well.

Posted by: meand2 | May 22, 2009 9:46 PM | Report abuse

Cheney is Cheney and has not changed at all in supposed retirement. He still wants to scare us to death so that we will think he is our savior. I'm not buying.

Posted by: chlind | May 23, 2009 12:24 AM | Report abuse

The first priority is establishing a legal framework that addresses the issue of non-state terrorists.

Do we conduct these trials and detentions within our civilian legal system, or is the best route through the military courts? Where do we keep detainees who are convicted?

We have a system where some Al Qaeda operatives have been successfully prosecuted through civilian courts in connection with fully developed plots -- and imprisoned on U.S. soil.

The KSM prosecution, on the other hand, has been tainted by the resort to torture. The Gitmo detentions have created another set of headaches.

As far as interrogation methods are concerned, torture is a non-starter.

De facto President Cheney failed to expose plots in Madrid and London.

Richard Reid was caught by an alert flight attendant and passengers.

The weight of the evidence suggests that the resort to torture does not increase our security -- it undermines it.

Sure, let's have an open debate about torture. Let's formalize legal procedures for dealing with terrorist suspects.

Future attacks are more likely to happen than not. This should be taken as a given.

The main challenge is establishing a system in advance that strikes the right balance between security and civil liberties. If the American people lose some freedoms in the process, or if freedoms are circumscribed that trade-off needs to be made with the consent of the governed.

One branch of government can't decide unilaterally which rules it will follow and which it will ignore -- especially when fundamental American principles are at stake.

As far as finger pointing goes -- any former politician, or news organization that attempts to extract a political advantage in the near-aftermath of a terrorist attack is going to turn itself into a public pariah.

Posted by: JPRS | May 23, 2009 12:38 AM | Report abuse

Cheney goes out of his way to proves that all the vile things that Osama bin Laden says about the US are true.

Posted by: DonJasper | May 23, 2009 12:42 AM | Report abuse

Dick Cheney did not keep America safe. If he did, 9/11 never happened. But 9/11 did happen. To rant about keeping America safe after the fact, is just plain arrogance and denial. One could think quit the opposite, maybe Al Quida know how clueless both Bush and Cheney were about about there plans that the time to strike American would be when these to bozo's took office. After all, when they took office, the completely ingored Clinton's assessmets about an imminent attack by Bin Ladden because both Bush and Cheney had more important things to do than take an imminent attack on America soil invading Iraq.

Posted by: kubrickstan | May 23, 2009 12:49 AM | Report abuse

Most people forget that upon taking office, Bush & Cheney were more interested in completing Reagan's pie-in-the-sky Star Wars missile shield than paying attention to the presidential daily briefing headlined "Bin Ladin determined to strike in US."

9-11 happened on the Bush/Cheney watch. They didn't keep America safe.

Posted by: tperry1 | May 23, 2009 1:08 AM | Report abuse

I'd like to recall a story I heard about information obtained under torture.

During WWII the war lord in Xinjiang, China turned against his former Soviet sponsor and started arresting Chinese Communists. For one of the Communist leaders that he personally interrogated, he was interested in how much money they got from the Soviets.

The initial answer was 100,000 (I forgot what the currency was) that was deemed too low by the war lord. Under torture, the amount was gradually increased to 300,000, still considered to be low. So it was upped to 1,000,000. Now that was considered too high to be believable. Increasing the "enhanced interrogation", it was reduced downward and eventually reached 500,000. At that point the war lord was satisfied. So he made a final comment: had you admitted to that at the start, you would have saved yourself lots of pain.

That could have been Cheney's world.

Still there is one thing I don't understand. Most of us know Cheney is full of it and his right wing followers will always listen to him regardless of facts or reasoning. So why are we paying so much attention to his nonsense instead of simply consigning him to the heaps of garbage in history?

Posted by: steviana | May 23, 2009 1:19 AM | Report abuse

Dick Cheney is a prick, pure and simple. No serious minded person should bother with him.

Posted by: IpiTombi | May 23, 2009 2:10 AM | Report abuse

Is Cheney admitting that he usurped President Bush's power and conspired with all these fly by night lawyers who were more ditto heads than Rush Limbaugh followers to come up with these torturing schemes that were declared illegal by national law, international law and the Geneva convention. Why is former President Bush so quiet can he plead I didn't know because Cheney didn't tell me.

Posted by: mgibbosh1 | May 23, 2009 2:41 AM | Report abuse

I hope there is never another Muslim terrorist attack in America. If there is, the Democrats are toast.

Posted by: ThisIsReality | May 23, 2009 3:00 AM | Report abuse

LANI57 your comment is EXACTLY what the President is fighting.
Your comment promotes fear and nothing else. Please think.
Effectively you are saying we were never safe until the past 8 years. But our laws and our strength have kept us safe for centuries - without EVER condoning torture.

Have you listened to any of Obama's speeches? You cannot possibly believe a man who is so passionate about defending the Constitution of the United States, hates the United States.

I hope that you will consider this.

When I was in the military, every word of our training, over and over, was that we would uphold our country's power, and our moral superiority by using the Geneva Conventions as our compass. We would never break those conventions because as soldiers they are our strongest shield against being treated harshly.

All the countries of the world are bound together by that treaty and we must uphold it and cherish it.

The Geneva Conventions came about because of the atrocities of World War II. The world was united in its vow to end abuse and torture, and aggressive war.

The United States has been holding Cuba in embargo for 50 years - because Cuba tortures prisoners. Now the US has a concentration camp IN Cuba, doing the same thing we have reviled them for.

We must return to the rule of law.

Posted by: TramplingGrapes | May 23, 2009 3:21 AM | Report abuse

In its drive to boost ratings/sell more newspapers by conflating news and entertainment, the media has rescucitated and hyped up the discredited Dick Cheney to seem as if he is somehow the equal of President Obama.

The only worthy place for Mr. Cheney to make his arguments is at his trial for war crimes in the Hague.

Posted by: MJR3 | May 23, 2009 3:22 AM | Report abuse

I agree with dfritzin's post of May 22, 2009 8:06 PM - torture doesn't get reliable information. As an added footnote, don't forget that the techniques we applied to the prisoners were reverse engineered from SERE training, which in turn is based on the techniques applied to U.S. servicemen by the North Korean and Chinese military during the Korean War. During that conflict, U.S. servicemen were tortured for the purpose of extracting false confessions which could be used for propaganda purposes.

I've seen this several times in major U.S. newspapers over the past few years - I wonder why I haven't seen anyone bring it up since Cheney's started talking.

Posted by: apn3206 | May 23, 2009 3:39 AM | Report abuse

I agree, MJR3. He should then serve his sentence in the Rudolf Hess suite of a rebuilt Spandau prison.

Posted by: apn3206 | May 23, 2009 3:40 AM | Report abuse

Presenting a middle way that will work often is more difficult than offering up extremists views, right or left. This is the case with Obama's approach. It's is well-reasoned, and hopeful, but also realistic. Too, for it to work requires more hard work and time than Cheney has shown little desire for doing. No, Cheney has presented the easy, tough-sounding (really weak) answers, which sound good to his radicalized followers but which do not work in the long run and end up making a far bigger mess than appeared initially would be the case, e.g.,Cheney on Irag, 1993-2009. The nation should applaud Obama, not scorn or sneer at him.

Posted by: jleemoore | May 23, 2009 3:53 AM | Report abuse

Presenting a middle way that will work often is more difficult than offering up extremists views, right or left. This is the case with Obama's approach. It's is well-reasoned, and hopeful, but also realistic. Too, for it to work requires more hard work and time than Cheney has shown little desire for doing. No, Cheney has presented the easy, tough-sounding (really weak) answers, which sound good to his radicalized followers but which do not work in the long run and end up making a far bigger mess than appeared initially would be the case, e.g.,Cheney on Irag, 1993-2009. The nation should applaud Obama, not scorn or sneer at him.

Posted by: jleemoore | May 23, 2009 3:54 AM | Report abuse

Strongly agree. Cheney seems to gravitate toward situations in which he can exert influence without having to accept the consequences. For eight years he played armchair general with Bush held accountable for the consequences.

The AEI speech was an unpatriotic and logically flawed conceit. If you don't follow his advice, bad things will happen. They will happen in any event and we'll never be able to prove whether his advice would have changed the course of events. So he can bluster on - safe once again from personal accountability - knowing his advice will not be followed.

What a sad end for a once impressive figure.

Posted by: jack824 | May 23, 2009 5:41 AM | Report abuse

Well said, Mr. Ignatius.Either America has values, or it does not. Thousands of Americans have given their lives all over the world in the defence of American values. They have died for something the whole world takes an example from. I cannot conceive of ANY American President knowingly weakening the security of the nation. Whatever methods President Bush may have used, he wanted to keep America safe. So does President Obama. Cheney is a man who has always looked after his own interests. Including dodging the Vietnam war.He wants to protect his reputation and legacy, such as it is. It is naive in the extreme to believe that terrorists think that closing Guantanamo, and ceasing torture, have made America an easier target. The assumption that terrorists are naive and foolish is the greatest threat to American security.

Posted by: mharvie | May 23, 2009 6:10 AM | Report abuse

imagine being an optimist and having married a bitter pessimist who rants every waking minute on the frailties and imperfections of humankind. imagine being constantly reminded that you will die of a heart attack, stroke or cancer at any given minute and that you will spend eternity in hades for not having read your bible daily or being accused of attempting to change the will of god by choosing blue socks instead of black. imagine how it would be that to have a differing opinion is akin to being disloyal and blasphemous to the marriage and that you, too, are a member of that sinful and perverse group of classless, low-lifes who are bent on destroying your marriage and the moral fabric of the world.

america needs a divorce from dick chaney big time. so do i...

Posted by: glenknowles | May 23, 2009 6:44 AM | Report abuse

For Cheney to claim that Obama’s opposition to harsh interrogation was “contrived indignation and phony moralizing” and “recklessness cloaked in righteousness" is indicative of the man's sociopathic nature.

According to Cheney, everyone who is appalled by torture is simply contriving their indignation and is guilty of phony moralizing -- a needless insult which does absolutely nothing to change people's minds.

All it does is to convince people that they are right in thinking that Cheney is a dick.

Posted by: pali2600 | May 23, 2009 6:46 AM | Report abuse

Hmmmm well for your information, waterboarding kept another 9/11 On Los Angeles.

Posted by: LANI57 | May 22, 2009 8:08 PM


My labrador claims he was responsible; that it is his barking that keeps America safe. Can you prove him wrong?

BTW, there is absolutely no valid evidence that waterboarding prevented an attack on or in LA.

Only the gullible, the dim-witted and the paranoid believe what they hear from Cheney or on Fox News.

As has been pointed out repeatedly, the problem with Cheney's story (repeated, gleefully and endlessly, by Fox) is that the waterboarding of Khalid Sheik Mohammed could not have "produced information that allowed the U.S government to thwart a planned attack on Los Angeles in 2002" because Khalid Sheik Mohammed was not captured until 2003.

Posted by: pali2600 | May 23, 2009 7:03 AM | Report abuse

It's easy to see that Cheney won the debate from the number of partisan leftwing columnists twisting themselves into pretzels trying desperately to argue otherwise.

Posted by: gitarre | May 23, 2009 7:28 AM | Report abuse

You say, "If you take Cheney at his word, he does actually believe that another terrorist attack is coming...." Not only does he believe it, his rhetoric invites another attack. He is a dangerous man.

Posted by: go4it | May 23, 2009 7:43 AM | Report abuse

Darth Vader will feel vindicated, and in his perverted mind, happy, if the US is attacked again while President Obama is in office. But, to blame it on Obama is ridiculous when it is bush-cheeney who allowed the leader of Al Qaeda, Osama Bin Laden, the one who planned the 9/11 attack on the WTC, to ESCAPE!

It was bush-CHEENEY who sat on their hands on vacation in August 2001, ignoring the CIA warnings of an impending attack on our country by Bin Laden! NO ONE but bush-cheeney will be blamed if and when we do have another attack! Cheeney can spin it any way he wants, it will NOT sell. He is trying to save his own butt because of all of his past mistakes in judgement!

Cheeney could go back to President Bush '41 and blame HIM for not going into Baghdad in the Persian Gulf War, (he was smarter than his son!), or blame Clinton for not getting Bin Laden even though he tried bombing him! I remember the GOP saying Clinton was "wagging the dog" in order to take our mind off his Lewinsky problems, but he DID catch the terrorists who bombed the WTC in l995, and put them in prison!! He didn't bomb IRAQ!

We can also blame bush-cheeney for ignoring the warnings of Richard Clark and others during the start of the bush administration, warning them of the possibllity of an attack by Bin Laden. No one was interested, not bush, not cheeney, not condoleeza rice!

So, now they are ready to blame Obama for THEIR failures? They must think the American people are naive! Bin Laden is still on the loose because of THEM!

Posted by: cashmere1 | May 23, 2009 7:50 AM | Report abuse

Wow, What a ridiculous column. Amazes me how some get paid for their Lack of knowlege. Shame on you. Last I remember is your Behind hasn't been blown up and your family has been safe for the past 8 yrs. You better pray your still safe with this Fraudulant, Hate America man they call The President. To think he cares more about Terrorist who want to kill us and our families rather than The AMerican People and especially an innocent baby who survives a botched abortion. Go figure.

Posted by: LANI57 | May 22, 2009 8:06 PM |

Bubba cut the military to where he had no ground option for Afghanistan but also kept us "safe". In fact considering the London and Madrid attacks Bubba kept our allies safer. Dubya never had Pakistan make a real effort against the Taliban, can you say 100 million State Dept. dollars for Swat refugees. Try using a little grey matter before you post.

Posted by: jameschirico | May 23, 2009 7:51 AM | Report abuse

Have you forgotten about Murtha...marines killing innocent Iraqis...Reid...the war is lost..Kerry...pillaging villages/home in the middle of the night, NYT giving out intel secrets,WP joining the NYT...Think I will stick with Cheney...Barry is an empty suit and can not say a thing without the TPOTUS...teleprompter in chief!!

Ignatiuus...the truth will set you free!!!

Posted by: stevenelson1 | May 23, 2009 7:53 AM | Report abuse

Cheney's campaign against Obama's security policies includes defiant admission that he was the source of the torture policy pursued for at least a few years by the Bush administration. In other words, Cheney's campaign begins with the admission and defense of war crimes. This is counterintuitive, to say the least, for some one facing the possibility, if not here then internationally, of indictment for criminal behavior. But the logic behind Cheney's campaign should not be lost: it is to preemptively politicize his own war crimes as merely "policy," and, moreover, policy which "kept America safe." If Cheney can hold on to a sizeable block of the American population, then he believes he can effectively avert any criminal investigation of his own conduct, as well as that of those legal ciphers who drew up legal rationalizations designed to insulate criminal acts from legal oversight.

Posted by: orray | May 23, 2009 7:57 AM | Report abuse

If another attack does occur, I believe it will be bucheney's fault. The most unChristian draft dodging fear mongering amoral regime to ever reside in the White House. Shame

Posted by: Oilcan4148 | May 23, 2009 8:04 AM | Report abuse

The administration probably could have avoided much of this debate with Cheney if they had just changed policy and governed like past new administrations rather than continuing to campaign against Bush-Cheney.

Posted by: kwar70777 | May 23, 2009 8:09 AM | Report abuse

It has gotten that Cheney sounds threatening that we will be attacked. Makes me think...just who does he know and is this his plan to do so. Bin Laden and his Co. The very guy who is responsible for 911 and the Bush and Cheney would not go after and lied for us to go elsewhere instead.

They "played" the American people and Cheney continues his fear tactics and won't step aside and show respect to the current president. His fear tactic is about changing America's focus away from what a jerk he really is and the harm that was caused during the past 8 years.

Posted by: mac7 | May 23, 2009 8:16 AM | Report abuse

Cheney, Limbaugh, Rove and Gringrinch pray to their small and shallow god there will be another attack on America to vindicate their hateful views. They hope Obama and America "fails" the attack victims be damned while they hide on a bunker and read "My Pet Goat" They think this kind of attack of failure will put them in power again even though they can't muster even 25% support through their droning, perpetual propaganda on the airwaves disguised as "entertainment" and Fox News.

These ignorant evangelical or O'Reilly Catholic rednecks will be remembered for tearing America apart during the Cheney years and continuing to do it after. Their legacy is that of George the Dumber, one of the most unaware, selfish, arrogant and isolated Presidents in the history of the country.

Posted by: coloradodog | May 23, 2009 8:46 AM | Report abuse

I am sorry to see such an esteemed writer give in to the left's false argument - "Even if the former vice president is right that we will forfeit some information by not torturing captured terrorists..." The whole point here, is that we did NOT torture anyone under Bush. Waterboarding and playing loud rock music were specifically found NOT to be torture. You may disagree with that judgement, but that does not change the fact.

By the way, waterboarding, among many other techniques, is used in training by the US military to simulate torture. SIMULATE. How sad that Mr. Ignatius has adopted the false left talking point as fact.

Posted by: silencedogoodreturns | May 23, 2009 8:53 AM | Report abuse

"Sneering" is indeed the word to use in describing Cheney. If you watched closely, you would see that the left side of his mouth was indeed in sneering mode. Makes me wonder if he has had one or a series of small strokes or if he
is intentionally sneering to show what he thinks of us.

Posted by: Utahreb | May 23, 2009 9:00 AM | Report abuse

If anyone thinks that there have been no terroists attacks in USA because of Bush/Cheney and their torture policies they are 100 percent nuts.

Trust me, if there are determined terrorists with the means to attack, they would have and could have and, most likely, will try, and, be successful, in the future, and Bush, Cheney, Rusmfeld and torture policies had and have nothing to do with it nor will have nothing to do with it..

Cheney's stance is all political, he is fighing for his political beliefs, for the continued life of those beliefs. President Barak Obama's politics and beliefs are Dick Cheney's biggest threat and his biggest fear. Cheney fears that a successful Obama Administration will be the death of Cheney's political history.

Cheney is kidding no-one, to the point of people wondering if he and his fellow political gang of plenty, will even try to do something to instigate a situation that will threaten President Obama's political leadership.

Dick Cheney's direct attack against Presiden Barak Obama's ability to keep this Nation safe is 100 percent political in nature and 100 percent lacking in actual factual backup.

Americans want Gitmo closed because we know it was and is unnecessary in keeping this Nation safe. Americans want tortur stopped because we know that it is 100 percent wrong and unnecessary in keeping this Nation safe from anyone or anything. Americans know we do not have to stoop to the depravity of torture to keep this Nation safe. Americans know how to fight, clean, and win. We are not dirty fighters like those who run drug cartels and torture for fame and success.

Dick Cheney, right now, and his willingness to divide a Nation politically based simply on fear and intimidation of possible terorists attacks is so unAmerican, so politically selfish that I amazed that it is getting so much "serious press." No one is really calling him on the facts or on his motivation. Gee, the Dixies Chicks were crucified for speaking out against Bush/Cheney's war, the are still not being played on the radio on Country stations and Dick Cheney can directly attack President Obama's ability to keep this Nation safe and no one speaks out and tells him to "shut the F up, already."

So, I will.....Dick Cheney...SHUT THE F UP ALREADY.

Posted by: rannrann | May 23, 2009 9:15 AM | Report abuse

America has already been tore apart by Bush and Cheney.

Only the idiots among us believe they "kept us safe." We had the deadliest attack on US soil on US history on THEIR watch. They did NOT keep us safe.

We stood together for that national crisis.
Now we stand together in our rejection of the Bush-Cheney policies of "conservative" government.

Bill Clinton kept us safe for 8 1/2 years after the AQ attack on the WTC in 1993.
Bush and Cheney changed those policies and we were attacked within a year.

And now we're stuck with two full-blown wars in the Middle East and an major economic disaster, instead of the peace and prosperity we enjoyed under the Clinton policies of progressive comprehensive governing.

I believe that Obama is returning to those types of policies -- which are not based on extreme political ideology, but instead on what WORKS.

Proactive government to avert a crisis trumps reactive government in the midst of a crisis anytime. It's called SMART government, but the Republicans Party doesn't know how to manage it.

We will stand together behind this President in a crisis.

But the Republican Party has been put in "time out" by the American people.
They can join the rest of us when they come up with some SMART ideas.

Otherwise, we have no problem with them standing isolated in their own little corner, whining out their hopeless and unchanged message to the world:
"The only thing we have to offer you is Fear itself."

Posted by: freespeak | May 23, 2009 9:15 AM | Report abuse

The Dick lives in a world of delusion and ideology. He is a neo-con. For those of you that don't understand what that is, you should go online and watch the BBC documentary, "The power of nightmares". In a nut shell they are a group of people that bought the ideology of a man named Leo Strauss, who saw liberalism as something that would destroy, not just American society, but all societies. The neo-con methodology is to create an enemy, with which to unite the masses in fear, and make them more amenable to surrendering their rights and freedoms for perceived security.

The neo-con agenda was written in manifesto form by a group of neo-cons during the 90s as part of PNAC, the project for a new American century, who's stated goals of spreading American military presence around the globe, spreading American democracy and values and confronting countries that are hostile to America. If countries hostile to America cannot be cowed by diplomacy and or sanctions, then pre-emptive military action should be used. They also stated that baring another Pearl harbor type of event, their goals were essentially unattainable.

When Bush was appointed to the presidency, many of these neo-cons found their way into high level positions in our government. Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz being the main players.

These three were the principles during the Nixon/Ford administrations that created the illusion that the Soviet Union was a dreaded enemy by lying repeatedly about their military abilities.

Remember I said that they "create an enemy". Well that's exactly what they did after 911 with al qaeda. The neo-cons in our government, with the help of the Mossad are the ones that perpetrated 911. Anyone that has done any research or has a basic understanding of the laws of physics knows that the government story about the events of 911 is impossible, and at this point, only those living in elected ignorance still believe the official fairy tale.

Dick Cheney was a principle in all of it, and unfortunately he truly believes what he did was in an effort to save mankind from itself, by imposing his kind of order. He is a deluded, mass murdering criminal, who if our justice system still worked, should have been impeached, tried for treason, and after a guilty verdict, should have been stood against a wall and shot. Any who doubt me should go online and watch The Power of Nightmares, before responding to my comment.

Posted by: TRACIETHEDOLPHIN | May 23, 2009 9:17 AM | Report abuse

yeap, let's go back to fighting terrorism as we did during the Clinton years when terrorists were attacking America yearly in Africa, the Cole etc... while Big Bill was getting hummers in the Oral Office. Sounds like a great plan. When America is attacked again because of Obama's weak policies my guess is that we will be incarcerating a lot more than just the terrorists. We will have to round up all the members of the American hating left and their enablers in the media. In effect, the usual suspects...

Posted by: IMBILLY | May 23, 2009 9:39 AM | Report abuse

David, Cheney World may be illegal too as one time Rove claimed, "We can change reality".

Would expand on that, even provide some laughs at statements provided by still interested former Bush/Cheney pawns but knowledge is a commodity in the 21 century is it not ?

Nothing on the internet is really safe from voyuerists run amuck including emails in my opnion.

Posted by: markwpa | May 23, 2009 9:42 AM | Report abuse

according to cheney, only three people were ever waterboarded. according to fbi director mueller, ALL relevant information was gained BEFORE waterboarding. so how does making waterboarding illegal, make us less safe? seems it didn't "stop" a thing.

the claims of stopping plots are overblown and have yet to be supported by any evidence whatsoever (just partisan hearsay). we do have evidence of cheney's plan to invade iraq from BEFORE 9/'s the minutes of his energy meetings in early 2001. if cheney wants declassification of documents, let's start chronologically with the energy meeting(s) minutes. we already know that maps of iraqi oil fields were distributed to oil execs......let's find out what else was discussed.

Posted by: disillisioned | May 23, 2009 9:49 AM | Report abuse

Once again, Barack Obama is showing that he is no more than an empty suit.

He would make a satisfactory Hollywood actor, but as a leader he has proven to be a disgraceful failure.

Abe Lincoln, FDR, Truman, and Kennedy are spinning in their graves.

Posted by: Jerzy | May 23, 2009 9:50 AM | Report abuse

The harsh interrogations were being used on prisoners who had been in detention for some time. Even had they been willing to tell all that they knew their knowledge would be hopelessly outdated. Does Cheney believe that the tactics that the enemy uses is so static that information obtained today, of yesterday's plans, reflects today's terrorist intentions. Wake up America and assign Cheney to a retirement home where he can spew his toxins without infecting us all.

Posted by: mapleleaf2 | May 23, 2009 9:56 AM | Report abuse

Ever since Cheney started his Torturous Torture Tour I've wondered what's behind it. Maybe you're right that he is trying to save the country. But I have my doubts. In fact, I've concluded -- tentatively at least -- that Cheney is really trying to save himself. My obeservation is that Bush has basically said to Cheney: You're on your own. Cheney know that sooner or later -- and probably sooner -- his actions in the early post-9/11 days will be revealed. And my further guess is that Cheney was worse than even his critics think (perhaps torturing to gin up false confessions to persuade Americans to support the Iraq War). In any event, my guess is that Cheney has concluded that his only hope for escape is to ignite a partisan war over torture and related issues so that, whatever eventually comes out, enough diehard Republicans will support Cheney just because they hate Democrats.

Posted by: wbgonne | May 23, 2009 10:01 AM | Report abuse

This event was an entirely media manufactured one. Dick Cheney is no longer regarded by the American people as a serious analyst on this question. It does not matter what he says or how he says it or even how much truth there is in what he says.

Look. Dick Cheney has been throughly discredited. Every single major tenet of his ideology has been shown to be demonstrably false. He assured us that Iraq would be a bit of a cakewalk, that we would find WMD stockpiles, that we would find evidence linking Sadaam to the attack on 9-11 and to Al Quadea, that the war would last only months and that Iraq would quickly form a free, democratic state that would be a model for the rest of the Middle East.

Even after all of these faith based beliefs on his part turned out to be transparently false, he still clung to them and even to this day considers the entire misadventure a success. Even when the insurgency turned into a deadly nightmare that bogged us down he insisted that it was all just a bunch of deadenders in their last throes.

Now he comes forth again using this same silly, stupid, sympathetic mainstream media--the very media that slept through the period when we should have had this debate and joined the right wing in condemning those who warned of the potential for disaster--to once again assure us in that creepy, fake, calm exterior of his which masks a raging fury within, that everyone, including the current President of the United States, who does not accept in toto 100% of what he says on this subject is wrong and worse is an appeaser of the enemy.

Dick Cheney is rather like his present toy dummy, Rush Limbaugh, who has said in typical idiotic fashion : "I am not going to stop until every American agrees with me!" My advice to dick and Rush is: Hold your breath. I would very much like to see them both turn blue in the face.

Posted by: jaxas | May 23, 2009 10:15 AM | Report abuse

Cheney was called out as a sociopath a long time ago and people ignored it.

Why are we in Iraq?

How much money has he made from Halliburton?

Posted by: vigor | May 23, 2009 10:25 AM | Report abuse

All things being equal, appealing to reason is unfortunately the more difficult task than appealing to fear. Cheney's buzzwords are like fingers poking ingrained emotional buttons in the far reaches of his listeners' brains. To support Obama, you must consciously use reason to beat down an emotional response, and that takes time and effort.

Let's fervently hope that reason winds, though. The last eight years have clearly demonstrated that policy based on fear is a failure over the long term.

Posted by: Bguhl | May 23, 2009 10:30 AM | Report abuse

so we have come to this as a nation: a "great debate between two men." one a duly elected president in a democratic election and a peaceful transfer of power (well, that was then, this is now) and a former vice president who resided over the worst attack on american soil which resulted in 3000 innocent men, women and children who were not kept safe.

as pundits, newspapers and voters dissect these two talks, it is also important to remember: 8/2001 nie memo entitled, "bin laden determined to strike in the u.s." ignored and derided; richard clarke pleading for a meeting with c. rice - also ignored, clinton administration urgings to not "take your eye off al aqaeda. also derided.

it is also important to remember "slum dunk" "we know for certain" nigeria yellow cake, aluminum tubes and now proudly affirmed, torture; and thus almost 4500 young men and women killed in a lied and cherry picked war with tens of thousands more young men and women severely damaged because of properly up-armored humvees and deficient body armor.

what we saw and heard the other day was not a debate; it was the clear, intelligent, honest, determined president speaking while another - beginning his talk deriding this same president - going on to defend torture.

president obama said himself he inherited a mess from the guy who himself never served in battle' but as one comic said, "perhaps the only gun we americans will ever really know ever shot anyone."

Posted by: sbvpav | May 23, 2009 10:32 AM | Report abuse

I wonder what Cheney will say if God forbid we are attacked again and it is found that the terrorists were born from the ashes of the Bush farce in Iraq?

Posted by: AverageJane | May 23, 2009 11:14 AM | Report abuse

(Lets Do the Time Warp, Rocky Horror Picture Show)

Sing along link:

It's astounding, political legacies are fleeting
Madness rules the polls
But listen closely, not for very much longer
We Neo-Con geeks got to keep control

I remember doing the Neo-Con Warp
Drinking those moments when
The blankness would hit me and the intellectual void would be calling
Let's do the Neo-Con warp again...
Let's do the Neo-Con warp again!

It's just a big kick to the left
And then a big step to the extreme right
With your hands on your Neo-Con hips
You bring your knobby knees in tight
But it's the public trust that really drives you insane,
Let's do the Neo-Con Warp again!

con't on William Banzai 7 Blog

Posted by: williambanzai7 | May 23, 2009 11:16 AM | Report abuse

Have you ever wondered why the nation has been "tortured" with Cheney's insane McCarthyism? The answer is quite simply. Whether it be WP's editorial page, Fox News or CNN, Cheney's psychotic "terrorist" fearmongering is utilized as nothing more than a red-herring to "hopefully" manipulate public opinion in order to promote Israel's interests by the Jewish lobby (AIPAC) and it non-Jewish neocon allies!

What is so surprising is the INANITY of this propaganda campaign, but what can we expect from our "unbiased" media and the "shills" of the Beltway?

Posted by: dgward44 | May 23, 2009 11:19 AM | Report abuse

Dear Americans,

Cheney v/s Obama debate : Its not so much about waterboarding, Guantanamo, 9/11 and all that Cheney wants to take our focus off the main issue - that he should be tried, like the Nazis were, at Nuernburg.
Perhaps Bush really didn't know most of what went on and if he did, he couldn't quite comprehend - that's why his dad got Dicky Cheney at his side.
One way to enable Cheney to make his points relevant, will be to take full advantage of his White House Operative skills - give him an office - say, National Security Coordinator but to be base in Afghanistan, Torra Borra hills.
He maybe lucky, that Osama may invite him for dinner.

Posted by: kmarkt | May 23, 2009 11:24 AM | Report abuse

there are two Guantanamos, second in Cuba first in Anadolu, John's Lands. Cheney has come to Northern Iraq and has attained the acknowledgement that there are a lot to do in education around here, at least in "scarf carpenter" case. so we thank Cheney for equilibrium and balance in confident agreement.

another message is that President Obama acted as President 1890 had acted on Cuba and Communism.

Posted by: taksimbirki | May 23, 2009 11:35 AM | Report abuse

Cheney's way is the coward's way. Letting fear rule all our decisions until there is nothing left but our fear and the enemies that our fear has created. My hope is that we, the American people, will show enough backbone to just ignore him.

Posted by: ElJocko | May 23, 2009 11:36 AM | Report abuse

we greet Jupiter Louis Ignatius "inkman" Luna Da Silva of Brasil for the Agreement in Anadolu and Petrolium in Black Sea, Gift of Pope Benedictus the German, where MArmara is the Sea of Saint and MAry and in the Ionian Sea are the Twelve Islands to Mediterranean Sea to Italy and the Ocean.

Posted by: taksimbirki | May 23, 2009 11:41 AM | Report abuse

I beleive that Chenney and Bush know some huge insider information about 9/11 attack. Bring them to my basement so I can ask them some questions.

Posted by: BOBSTERII | May 23, 2009 11:45 AM | Report abuse

What debate? I don't remember Obama mentioning Cheney once, while Cheney makes it a point to do so.

Cheney is the only one directing attacks.

Please use the term "debate" responsibly.

Posted by: wlockhar | May 23, 2009 11:46 AM | Report abuse

and for Joe Biden's Lebanon, here is the news we thank for language and alphabet.

from wikipedia "Lebanon was the historic home of the Phoenicians, a maritime culture that flourished for more than 3,000 years (3700-450 BC)".

Posted by: taksimbirki | May 23, 2009 11:47 AM | Report abuse

if the Gift is from Russia Medvedev Putin, we thank to Russia too. and i thank David Ignatius for this beloved room to speak and review beloved United States of America and Middle EAst.

Posted by: taksimbirki | May 23, 2009 11:51 AM | Report abuse

the budget for Guantanamo Plant, it is a matter of spring, sun and water, provided with the seed had been seeded into the earth.

in Guantanamo, folk around intake mud and white of egg as far as i know, seeds are vital. Guantanamo Plant budgotten is due to education and selfrespectrum.

Posted by: taksimbirki | May 23, 2009 11:56 AM | Report abuse

selfrespectrum : self refresh pact trumm, the agreement on wide piece should be taken after refreshment.

Posted by: taksimbirki | May 23, 2009 11:59 AM | Report abuse

for inhabitance and to dwelve in peace and wisdom,

i love Archimedes Pi Theory Ionian John's Prince "Race" Way, or St Thomas Arabian Indian, named as also "the orion conspiracy" or wolf rama alpha!

Posted by: taksimbirki | May 23, 2009 12:02 PM | Report abuse

this is much of dignity for ignition capable, and we thank one more time for elevation of consciousness of folks to talk and spread the word.

Posted by: taksimbirki | May 23, 2009 12:05 PM | Report abuse

The author makes some good points, but misses the larger picture. Obama/liberals continued criticism and focus on blaming the Bush administration for "torture" has been without letup. The "we are more moral" attitude, every chance Obama gets, was bound to provoke a well thought out response by one of the main targets, Dick Cheney. Why Obama finds this necessary is beyond me; he won the election. Cheney made great points and made very valid arguments.

It would not have happened if Obama was not such a insecure little s4it with a well deserved inferiority complex.

Posted by: columbus1947 | May 23, 2009 12:06 PM | Report abuse


Posted by: frenchbyrnes | May 23, 2009 12:08 PM | Report abuse

This man is pure evil. How many times, and in how many ways, does the public have to reiterate the message of the last two elections?


Posted by: drjillshackford1 | May 23, 2009 12:21 PM | Report abuse

"It would not have happened if Obama was not such a insecure little s4it with a well deserved inferiority complex."

The mentality displayed by the above quoted comment is why our country faces so many problems today. Too many people don't debate the issues based upon facts or logical arguments. Instead, they resort to calling people names and attacking their character. Whenever I see this people resort to such name calling and character attacks I know there is no merit to what they are arguing. asserting.

Posted by: rclab | May 23, 2009 12:21 PM | Report abuse

The columnist speaks to what disturbs me the most about Cheney right now: he is attempting to undermine the President of the United States. He is attempting to divide the country and prevent the President from doing his job. If another terrorist attack happens on Obama's watch, Cheney hopes the country will NOT unite behind the President and will, therefore, be unable to respond effectively. Whose side is he on, anyway?

Posted by: cms1 | May 23, 2009 12:35 PM | Report abuse

if waterboarding is torture and torture constitutes a war crime didnt cheney admit to at lleast conspiracy to commit on national television? JUSTICE DEPT where are you?

Posted by: donaldtucker | May 23, 2009 12:37 PM | Report abuse

Williams Bush had built a space center in BAghdad and there were people astronauts and experts from NASA in BAghdat.

also the air in the space lab, provided with air is inspiration and thoughts, is the human on EArth. the space laboratory in space is the EArth in the space too!

Posted by: taksimbirki | May 23, 2009 1:03 PM | Report abuse

so the Army of United States of America, Resident Presidence in USA and Present President of USA, You may take back the weapons and we ask You courier the we-pens, authors teachers and columnists, as You had scheduled, in case of proper time.

Williams Bush had already verbalized about "authors" in Middle EAst to grow and nourish soon in the next years.

Posted by: taksimbirki | May 23, 2009 1:07 PM | Report abuse

as it is in the Space Laboratory, and so it is on EArth! we thank Russia Europe and USA for Space Advance in Wisdom, Practise and Application, also Philosophy Human Signs and Agriculture : )

Posted by: taksimbirki | May 23, 2009 1:09 PM | Report abuse

I wonder when you idiotic Americans are going to think about the safety of the Iraqis, Afghans and Pakistanis whose countries you have destroyed and when you are going to remember one thing "it's Palestine stupid".

Posted by: shepherdmarilyn | May 23, 2009 1:09 PM | Report abuse

we enjoy a play with words as "give the straw-fodder to the donkey from below and the donkey shall give the steam from above". milkyway is "straw-fodder way".

then what is the difference between a cow and a man? SAturn the God's Sickle? are there fodder-hats on cows also as are there on donkeys?

is it about the donkey shall turn out to be an "ark", as Sebastians (Sivas) talk about Noah's Ark! are elephants known with St Thomas the Indian?

what about Moses Bush the Strawberry in Light and Noah's Ark on the Mountain? let me elevate more about this.

Posted by: taksimbirki | May 23, 2009 1:21 PM | Report abuse


Lebanon is "switzerland" of africa, and a region in afghanistan is known as "switzerland" of afghanistan. so what is the relation?

Posted by: taksimbirki | May 23, 2009 1:24 PM | Report abuse


Ever since Obama took office, his administration has been anything but gracious when it comes to the prior administration. Everything is Bush's fault, Bush's mess, and the Dems in general - as if they can't just get over the fact that their side won and get on with governing - have to constantly smear and insult the past administration as "criminal", "torturers", "incompetent", etc. As someone who voted for Al Gore, I was not a happy camper when George W. Bush won his first term, but I sure don't remember a non-stop vilification of Bill Clinton's administration like we've seen under Obama. Had Obama and the Dems acted like the grown-ups we expected them to be, Dick Cheney would've gone off into the sunset with nary a peep. I, for one, do not fault him one bit for explaining and defending his time in office.

Posted by: coffeetime | May 23, 2009 1:25 PM | Report abuse

Imagine if Vice President Gore, defeated candidate for President in a contoversial loss to W & Cheney in 2000, chose to undermine W's administration in a fashion similar to Cheney's scorched earth method? Gore showed class and character. Is it unconscionable and unprecedented that former Vice Pesident Cheney undermine so forcefully the new President given the legacy of unresolved issues bequeathed? What has division and discord done for the United States lately?

Posted by: lescaine | May 23, 2009 1:47 PM | Report abuse

Imagine if Vice President Gore, defeated candidate for President in a controversial loss to W & Cheney in 2000, chose to undermine W's administration in a fashion similar to Cheney's scorched earth method? Gore showed class and character. Is it unconscionable and unprecedented that former Vice Pesident Cheney undermine so forcefully the new President given the legacy of unresolved issues bequeathed? What has division and discord done for the United States lately?

Posted by: lescaine | May 23, 2009 1:49 PM | Report abuse

I cannot imagine living in Cheney's world... Heaven forbid! What kind of a world will that be? full of pessimism negativity, intolerance? Nothing about Obama's administration will ever be good enough for Cheney's world. After all, Cheney's administration was cut short! He "wanted to be President" for life. Cheney is a control freak who can't believe that he has lost his grip on power. I think President Bush gave him free reign for eight years and now that's gone, and he doesn't know what to do with himself. Well, Cheney, back off! This is a new America... and I am willing to predict that there will be no terrorist attack on our soil during this current administration, because we're willing to defend our country from all corners of the globe.

Posted by: tintin081 | May 23, 2009 1:50 PM | Report abuse

shepherd of navy, of marylines

tao+lebanon = joe+biden, forbidden or for request! (to bid)

it is joke of this subject. here is the main subject, is "svat" of afghanistan "phalestine" of russia?

Posted by: taksimbirki | May 23, 2009 2:09 PM | Report abuse

steam of donkey is through the chimney of the hearth. or better say "thick chimney", how long it takes to ride on donkey from Sivas Sebastian to Nicaea Bursa?

Posted by: taksimbirki | May 23, 2009 2:10 PM | Report abuse

Shepherd of Merrylines,

First LAdy and Daughters with Faither President are together on Table on time for Supper Meals.

in the mornings First LAdy takes the Portuguese Dog to a Walk and at nights President takes the Portuguese Dog to a Walk.

in the Port of Jesus, in the Port of Gal, with Whom shall we be in Hospitality of?

Posted by: taksimbirki | May 23, 2009 2:14 PM | Report abuse

Pre-sent Pi-resident is Kinder Surprise : )

Posted by: taksimbirki | May 23, 2009 2:17 PM | Report abuse

i have purchased yoghurt-almond-apricot shower cream for dry skins (almond apricot wikipedia asia korea armenia "barack").

i have dry skin to scratch for it hurts after the shower with other ingredients, President Obama : )

also there are cups of yoghurt with apricot and "magnetic flux" "flexible lexicon" "(flug)zeugma" linseeds : )
"flugzeug" is airplane

Posted by: taksimbirki | May 23, 2009 2:27 PM | Report abuse

it is 21:28 here local time, i wish good night to every one, and i am about to leave the building, Seattle : )

Posted by: taksimbirki | May 23, 2009 2:29 PM | Report abuse

Dear Mr ignatius
Why don't you write about unocal and gas pipelines in afghnistan , I guess that will justify the 17 thousands innocent lives.

Posted by: nandf21 | May 23, 2009 2:48 PM | Report abuse

Cheney is a discredited has-been. While in office, he showed disdain for the US constitution and for the public he was elected to serve. His opinions are two clicks below meaningless on the scale relevancy.

Posted by: exco | May 23, 2009 2:57 PM | Report abuse

oh, crayon is in my hand. Shakespeare was born in Izmir. and Elvis was Melungeon. Pope John PAul Poland was in fond of boxing. Melungeons are from Portugal and Middle EAst. this is somehow awkward in Civil War time and Presidents Lineage.

Louis Ingantius Da Silva, Sea Hake's Pearl and Lunge. horse trainment, sword movement also in boxing, "namaycush" trout, lungs. or in other means, "the will from water to land".

Brasil, the Cross and Jesus in Port of Brasil, Portugal, Fatima, VAlongo, MAry, JEsus, FAtima Hasan Huseyin Ali 12 Grandsons of Ahmet the PAthsetter.

Posted by: taksimbirki | May 23, 2009 3:01 PM | Report abuse

ignatius happened to appear as "infantius", in the beginning of the path.

and sow it is, frankly.

Posted by: taksimbirki | May 23, 2009 3:04 PM | Report abuse

is it infandous? have i talked much? Houston, is there any problem here : ) ?

Posted by: taksimbirki | May 23, 2009 3:05 PM | Report abuse

Well reasoned and correct. Cheney, no longer in office as VP, can shoot his mouth now that the country was not attacked since 2001. His credibility does not amount to a can of beans after his assertions on WMD's and links between Iraq and Osama bin Laden. A terror attack is likely to take place but it will not be because we stopped using "enhanced" (torture) interrogation techniques.

What Cheney fails to see is that water-boarding was considered torture and illegal by the US and the world and people were executed for using it. The Cheney-Bush administration perverted the law in the name of national security. I can understand the distress and panic that followed immediately after 9/11, but this still does not justify the re-interpretation of the law to justify using torture.

Cheney is poisoning the political atmosphere. Shame on him.

Posted by: morryb | May 23, 2009 3:08 PM | Report abuse

the message above is

Posted by: taksimbirki | May 23, 2009 3:05 PM

may 23 2009 3:05

bon appetit! some cheese into the bread? or Moses in the Basket on the Egyptian Sirius African Nile?

Posted by: taksimbirki | May 23, 2009 3:09 PM | Report abuse

st john's wort 1001 and st phillihp. greetings and namaste. now, will You dance Richard Gere in Antalya, the homeland of St Nicholas?

Posted by: taksimbirki | May 23, 2009 3:10 PM | Report abuse

How does this work? Do you just write in and Cheney is evil etc and laugh and sign out. Mr. Ignatius Pres Obama always says he is being unbiased and nuetral but he calls the Obama Admin evil and says its interogation methods were absolutely not effective and caused harm to the country and danger even now. You now all the harm he attributes to Bush and the Republicans. Why do you write such a one way article acussing Cheney of splitting the country. Is that not silly even if these folks do not know whats is going on and write in and say its great what you are saying. If Obama has points to make he should approach them honestly. Its obvious he has been wrong on many things because he is changing his approach and using Bushs methods. These are not things he should have been surprised about. Think how much better this country could have done world wide had not the dems and people like you united instead of trying to BS all the time. Be honest make your point and but cut the )"*%^, grow up. Have a nice one. Bill

Posted by: Hawser | May 23, 2009 3:32 PM | Report abuse

It seems ironic to me that Cheney talks about the war on terror and all the measures they took against it, while at the same time initiating the twin foreign policy disasters via the war in Iraq and taking their eye off Terror Central in Afghanistan.

Posted by: ripvanwinkleincollege | May 23, 2009 3:36 PM | Report abuse

Where's Osama Bin Laden???

Posted by: jeffc6578 | May 23, 2009 3:46 PM | Report abuse

Obama, the left, and the mainstream media fear the simple truth that Cheney lays out.
Why did Obama rush to schedule a dueling appearance against Cheney's long-planned speech? Worrying about his approval ratings, Obama had to wrap himself in flags and document imagery at the Archives while Cheney could calmly lay out the case in a simple conference room.
Obama had to read yet another speech by his young speechwriter from the twin teleprompters while Cheney could confidently refer to notes on a podium.

The left may attack Cheney all they wish but Obama's policies tell another tale. He fiddles around the edges with so-called "policy changes," but with each passing day, his actions agree more with those laid out by Richard Cheney.
Obama's policy will soon be indistinguishable from that of Bush.

Posted by: parkbench | May 23, 2009 3:49 PM | Report abuse

Perhaps Cheney is a casualty of the paraoid Cold War and the shadow governmental role he and Runmsfeld had. They now think entirely in the box and think they are special in their knowledge of the secret bunkers.
They don't even realize the untidy truth that all of their rationales have been debunked and the lives of our soldiers, they and their families sanity, our countries fiscal integrity, our international reputation, and millions of innocent foreign people have been colaterally damaged because of their paranoid world and the trust in the weapons of war to accomplish anything.
Most likely Cheney feels it absolutely necessary that he be elected president in the next election. If that were to happen the gloves of civilization would certainly be off and we would have a darkside paranoia run rampant.
The real intelligence, however, was the pre-9/11 intelligence that was ignored and there are no do-overs!

Posted by: cgillard | May 23, 2009 3:52 PM | Report abuse

here is a concept in statistics called the "False positive/False negative". We all should have been vaguely aware of this from the drug testing problems, for example, with Vioxx. A statistical trial is designed and run, then the results are examined mathematically. Normally there are three possible outcomes, OK, Not OK and we can't say. Is the OK answer really not true, a false positive? Is the Not OK answer really OK, a false negative.

Newspaper reporters face the same problem "Is this leaked story true?" or "Am I being scammed?"(a false positive). Could I suggest that interrogation is a data gathering exercise that produces OK answers, False answers and we can't say. Experts appear to be saying that torture produces a high probability of a false positive, ie "Is there a connection between Al Qaeda and Saddem Heusen? Yes" False positive.

We spend many, many millions of dollars every year in drug trials and when a company gets it wrong there is hell to pay in court and public confidence.

Beyond the moral and legal ramifications, we conducted a data gathering exercise using techniques known to produce false positives that has cost this country several trillion dollars of our own money pursuing a false positive. We will never know the cost of missed opportunities because of lost trust and hostility.

This amoral capitalistic analysis puts into stark relief what our historical national and religious moral values have told us for centuries. In other words, no matter how we slice enhanced interrogation techniques, the result is highly toxic torture.

Posted by: stanassc | May 23, 2009 3:54 PM | Report abuse

By saying America is less safe Cheney is encouraging our enemies to attack us.
If this were a Democratic ex VP saying this the Republicans wouldn't stop talking about how making such irresponsible statements is aiding and abetting the enemy. And they would be right.

Posted by: amercrutio100 | May 23, 2009 3:59 PM | Report abuse

Dick Cheney is a small, frightened man, wholly consumed by his own fear and paranoia. I have read elsewhere that he is shopping his memoirs around; I wonder if his reemergence is for the good of the country, or, for the good of Dick Cheney?

Posted by: hadenuff1 | May 23, 2009 4:00 PM | Report abuse

Cheney is and has always been an EVIL man. It is as simple as that.

Posted by: lcarter0311 | May 23, 2009 4:12 PM | Report abuse

A viper sprays venomous poison as it springs from the coiled position to strike mode. The legacy of Cheney is that of a snake. Surely there must be a slot for him in the 'Halliburton' pit...

Posted by: senatorsun | May 23, 2009 4:40 PM | Report abuse

President Obama and Predecessor Williams Bush, could Ministry of Health take Mesrob II Head of Armenian Apostelic Church to USA to heal? He was praying for me and for us.

Posted by: taksimbirki | May 23, 2009 4:54 PM | Report abuse

"taleb" is "to request", "taleban" is "students".

Posted by: taksimbirki | May 23, 2009 4:57 PM | Report abuse

It is ridiculous, LANI57, how long more are you going to pretend not to know what the entire world knows very well? Okay, I repeat it to you again, "Al Quaeda is no great power to attack USA. Al Quaeda is the organization or Muslim radicals - mercenaries, sponsored and developed by the USA. USA government used the services of these mercenaries when they needed to. WTC buildings were DEMOLISHED on 9/11/2001. That is the opinions of all experts around the world, who even once watched video records of how these buildings collapsed. If Obama really does the new fair investigation of this issue, Clintons (especially, female) and Bush - Cheney should be tried and executed. Some more people of the top should accompany them. Obama does not want to do it. I-personally have the different opinion on the subject, but I am no politician with the executive power. I think that you, and others, like you, would do the immense favor to your favorite ex-leaders, if they are Clintons or Bush-Cheney, by keeping your mouth shut pertinently, instead of accusing Obama in any and every nonsense you can come up with.

Posted by: aepelbaum | May 23, 2009 4:58 PM | Report abuse

I do not pretend to be able to read Cheney's mind. However, he appears to be stuck in a fixed mindset. There is no right and wrong. No logical argument makes any difference. He appears to be stuck in a pseudo-messianic mindset where he is the only thing standing between us and total disaster. George Carlin had a prescription for dealing with people like that: Do not argue with them, just say BS.

Posted by: viking54 | May 23, 2009 5:00 PM | Report abuse

Richard gere, MAriah CArey, Seal, Sheron Stone, Tom Jones, Monica Bellucci, PAris Hilton are in Antalya this saturday and sunday.

Posted by: taksimbirki | May 23, 2009 5:00 PM | Report abuse

There will be more terrorist attacks regardless of what O'Bama and/or Cheney say. When it happens I would not want to be a Democrat.

Posted by: ravitchn | May 23, 2009 5:02 PM | Report abuse

There is another reason for Cheney's defense of torture and unpatriotic attack on Obama. One would think even bringing it up would make him and the past administration look bad, but it sure isn't as bad as being the administration that completely ignored the warnings about the 9/11 attack which lead to the deaths of over 3,000 Americans. An intelligence failure unmatched in US history.

Cheney and the Republicans have been conducting this little diversion since the attack which happend on their watch. Remember the Republicans had been in the White House and controlled both branches of congress for over 9 months at the time.

Obama has only had 4 months in office. So far he hasn't come close to screwing up like they did.

Posted by: rshea2 | May 23, 2009 5:38 PM | Report abuse

David, while I agree with your points, you miss the thrust of The Coward Cheney's arguments. TCC is running for President in 2012 and hoping feverishly that Al Qada will launch another attack before then so that he can say "See? I told you so! Only I can protect you! Forget about the fact that I committed war crimes and give me the power to turn this into a fascist state and only then will you be safe!"
At that time the citizens of the U.S. will have to make a choice: are we the people our ancestors were or are we Germany in the 30s? History awaits our answer.

Posted by: Ryuho | May 23, 2009 6:30 PM | Report abuse

Cheney is a rancid traitor. This piece of garbage orchestrated the outing of a covert CIA agent in a time of war and he has the gall to present himself as some kind of national security oracle. If there was any justice Deadeye Dick would be giving his little speeches and interviews from the inside of a jail cell. At least his boss the ex-president and his buddy Rumsfeld have enough sense to stay out of sight and keep their traps shut. Perhaps Dickie-boy is "scaring up" some publicity to peddle the rotten little book he wrote.

Posted by: Glimpy | May 23, 2009 6:41 PM | Report abuse

The left and most media have been bashing Cheney and Bush mercilessly for 6 years! Now Cheney decides to give a speech at the AEI. Not an open forum!

Obama turns around and upstages Cheney with a very Public speech prior to Cheney's, and in Fact he runs over Cheney's speech ausing Cheney to sit and wait till he was finished!

And you think this is some right wing attack on Obama????

Get over it!!

Posted by: hotdad14 | May 23, 2009 6:55 PM | Report abuse


Minor point -- when you say "the left" -- let's be clear that you mean "the left of the extreme far right".

When a politician sits at a 25 percent approval rating it means that the overwhelming majority of Americans left, center, and perhaps even some on the right -- do not approve of the man.

Posted by: JPRS | May 23, 2009 7:29 PM | Report abuse

A prayer for tomorrows evangelical and O'Reilly Catholic church services:

Our father, who is only on our side and no one elses, please make Obama fail. Please, oh lord let their be another attack on America so that you and your holy followers can be vindicated. We know people would die, oh got, but we just know it is well worth it to sacrifice a few thousand Jews and unbelievers again to unify our cause, which, by the way, oh god, is in deep despair at they mercy, now dwindling to only 22%.

Bless, oh lord thy leader Rush Limbaugh, Fathers O'Reilly and Hannity and the Fox News Channel, which thou has given us to spread thy word. Bless, oh lord our Cheney who saved us from the bedwetting commie, homosexual liberal before. We just know, oh god you will restore in him thy power to smite our enemies and the evil magic-negro Muslim obama. In the name of Saint Ronald Reagan we pray, amen.

Posted by: coloradodog | May 23, 2009 7:32 PM | Report abuse

Obama turns around and upstages Cheney with a very Public speech prior to Cheney's, and in Fact he runs over Cheney's speech ausing Cheney to sit and wait till he was finished!

Posted by: hotdad14

Oh boo hoo hoo hoo hoo! The President made private citizen Cheney wait.

Who the "fu*k" do you think Cheney is - still George the Dumber's evil Prime Minister?

We voted him and his dynasty out last November even though you 22% loses can't accept it.

Get over it!

Posted by: coloradodog | May 23, 2009 7:40 PM | Report abuse

I heard a commentator the other day say that Cheney in essence is arguing against Bush Administration policy which was to do away with torture in I believe 2004 (could be wrong on the year) So his argument is against the policies of an administration that he was a member of.. The man is just blowing hot air and hoping that noone really pays attention to all the nonsense that he is spewing. He is however searching for a book deal so maybe all of this hoopla is just to conjure up interest in his new best seller.. Titled...I lie therefore I am...Evil man..

Posted by: sabrina2 | May 23, 2009 8:26 PM | Report abuse

Sure - by all means - let's torture. But we probably ought to keep our mouths shut from now on about other countries and their human rights abuses.

We are no better than any other country if we continue down this path. There is no 'shining city on the hill', just a country that sees that the end justifies the means, no matter how brutal.

Oh, snd the next time a conservative squawks to me about how liberals are destroying the moral fabric of the nation because of their moral relativism, I'll probably feel compelled to spit in his face.

Posted by: EnemyOfTheState | May 23, 2009 9:20 PM | Report abuse

This is all fine and good but I hope the NSC is still tapping the phones of the NeoCon former administration and compiling the conspiracy files for charges against Limbozo & his Comrads whom seek the destruction of the Constitution.

Posted by: BUFFALOHUNTER | May 23, 2009 9:41 PM | Report abuse

We're sure Cheney is cookin' up an attack with Mossad.

Posted by: Pitt_Muscle | May 23, 2009 10:25 PM | Report abuse

Cheney? Cheney? Is his name Lon and is this about the characters he used to play?

Posted by: MTgrassland | May 23, 2009 10:32 PM | Report abuse

It is quite obvious that Cheney and those who follow him were successfully terrorized by al-Qaeda.
'Nuff Ced

Posted by: ACD-pa | May 23, 2009 10:50 PM | Report abuse

Cheney is a right-wing authoritarian lunatic, who had an agenda to recreate the imperial Presidency, or the unitary executive, or whatever you choose to call it. He tried to capitalize on the 9/11 terrorist attacks to impose his agenda on America. In the process, he screwed up just about everything he touched and Bush let him destroy whatever chance Bush had for even a semi-successful Presidency.

Posted by: ejs2 | May 23, 2009 11:02 PM | Report abuse

Cheney is playing politics with America's future in a way that suggests that he doesn't give a darn about America, just himself and his precious "Haves and Have-mores". . . . . . . Most everyone agrees that in the future America might well be hit again and hit hard like 9-11. Then when the inevitable comes, Cheney along with other Republican talking heads like Rush Limbaugh [ whom the Fat-cats have sponsored to be there ] will attack Obama and the Democrats screaming that they let America down. . . . . . . . . . Let's face it Cheney's actions are just another one of the Republicans dirty political maneuvers.

Posted by: Here2day | May 23, 2009 11:12 PM | Report abuse

Cheney is playing politics with America's future in a way that suggests that he doesn't give a darn about America, just himself and his precious "Haves and Have-mores". . . . . . . Most everyone agrees that in the future America might well be hit again and hit hard like 9-11. Then when the inevitable comes, Cheney along with other Republican talking heads like Rush Limbaugh [ whom the Fat-cats have sponsored to be there ] will attack Obama and the Democrats screaming that they let America down. . . . . . . . . . Let's face it Cheney's actions are just another one of the Republicans dirty political maneuvers.

Posted by: Here2day | May 23, 2009 11:16 PM | Report abuse

The double standard is obscene: infinite tolerance for the unspeakably vile histrionics directed for years at President Bush; zero tolerance for criticism of the precious little Boy Messiah. Disgusting

Posted by: zjr78xva | May 23, 2009 11:22 PM | Report abuse

Curious how Obama's sycophants obsess endlessly over Rush Limbaugh but are utterly mute when it comes to Koz and all the rest of the sick, vicious haters on the radical far left.

(Actually, not so curious.)

Posted by: zjr78xva | May 23, 2009 11:27 PM | Report abuse


Your memory is selective. Bush got something close to a free pass until the Iraq War.

His numbers weren't great, but he got his nominees; no mainstream voice in the Democratic party was saying publicly that they wanted him to fail.

His numbers hit the high 80s thanks to Al Qaeda.

Al Gore didn't go public against the Bush administration's policies until the Iraq invasion -- that was over two years into the Bush presidency.

In contrast, you have mainstream GOP voices questioning Obama's citizenship; saying they want him to fail; blocking pretty much every nomination he puts up.

It's amazing how selective the memories and principles are of Rush's sycophants.

Any criticism of the president during a time of war is treason a few years ago, according to the GOP.

Now that the tables are turned?

Not only are mainstream GOPers criticizing the president (which is fine in my book -- even during a time of war), but they're wishing that he and America fail.

They're talking about secession.

It's not ironic; it's hypocritical.

Posted by: JPRS | May 23, 2009 11:42 PM | Report abuse

Seems to me the last 4 years of Bush's term are vindication of Obama's views, as water boarding wasn't used in that time.

I think Cheney is just as angry at Bush as he is at Obama, he went from thinking he was running the country to a bit player.

This latest move is ego and trying to increase the value of his biography. Again, a self absorbed person that really doesn't care what happens to the country.

Posted by: don1one | May 24, 2009 12:23 AM | Report abuse

If another terrorist attack does occur, and the reason they got away with it is because we softened our policies in some way, why should we all "get behind the president?" It is critical that the Dems do nothing that would increase our vulnerability, and if they do, and if we are attacked, they deserve the blame.

Posted by: ire266 | May 25, 2009 8:14 AM | Report abuse

If there was so much danger and anxiety about terrorist attacks back in 2001, as Cheney asserts, why did Cheney et. al. fall asleep at the wheel when they were being advised by their own National Security advisors of an impending strike? They didn't keep us safe at all, their rhetoric to the contrary. The people who allowed 3000+ Americans to die haven't a lot of credibility when it ccmes to talking about prevention. And even after being attacked, they went after the wrong culprit for the wrong reasons, so their credibility in fighting a war on terrorism is nil!

Posted by: cybyoung9 | May 25, 2009 8:21 AM | Report abuse

That’s what scared me about Dick Cheney’s sneering, sarcastic attack on the new administration’s national-security policies: He is turning up the heat of partisanship, and thereby weakening the glue that would hold the country together in crisis.
Cheney does?! Not the libtards with 8 years of "Bush is Hitler" and Obama "Bush created mess, Bush lied, blah blah blah BS"?! Are you kidding?!

Posted by: pihto999 | May 25, 2009 8:25 AM | Report abuse

What Hitler did was for ther German people and the fatherland, What Stalin did was for Mother Russia.

Just think of everything Cheney has done for us.

Posted by: interactidiomas | May 25, 2009 9:28 AM | Report abuse

Mr. Ignatius is basing his premise that enhanced interrogation tactics don't work on incomplete information. We've been given the opportunity to read about which EI tactics have been used, but NOT about how well, or if, they worked. The memos with the results aren't open to our scrutiny. What one would like to MAKE true because one THINKs it's true--a common error in liberal quarters--is, unfortunately, often NOT true. All this high faluting moralizing, when examined as your own loved ones are actually targets of terrorism, is a crock. Surely, deep down, wordsmiths (I hesitate to use the term ideasmiths with any untested liberal)know it's true. God help them if they really have to find out.

Posted by: persugram | May 25, 2009 9:42 AM | Report abuse

They're out there and they're bad. They want to kill us. And some of them even look like us. Homegrowns, as well as foreigners, prowl about, fangs adrip, waiting for their chance to kill us all.

Meanwhile, we've become a nation of lilly-livers. We boo-hoo over the chance that the CIA might have told a fib. Where are our true American heroes who stand ready to lie to the US congress choosing "lies over lives."

We wont mollify the evil doers by going soft. I say, lets have a national campaign of national voluntary water boarding. Let every American man and woman volunteer for a water boarding interrogation.

Then lets get everyone who doesn't volunteer, and find out the reason why. When they cry like babies, we'll just tell 'em, "Stop your blubbering. This ain't torture."

After all, it's lies vs lives.

Posted by: mrottman | May 25, 2009 10:21 AM | Report abuse

To be very honest, we real Americans forget party lines in time of crisis and focus on the country. Unfortunately our elected officials in DC forget that they are there to serve us and not their silly stupid political party.

Posted by: zendrell | May 25, 2009 10:46 AM | Report abuse

Memorial Day brings to some of us, a realization that life ends for us all, but that we are part of a continuum that should bring comfort and peace to those of us who can sustain love, hope, and a belief in a better tomorrow for those who follow.

Dick Cheney would tear away that hope, that sense of meaning, that we are all in this together. The message of fear, vengeance and immanent violence is closed off to the progress of mankind and the limits of nationalism to ever address the great truth: We are all in this together. "We" is the sensible, the scientific, the higher consciousness that knows we are a planet of human beings, seeking a way to govern ourselves without predation and separation, but a way to address and solve the most vexing of problems-- the inequality and injustice borne of narrow-minded and violent acts of war and economic domination.

Inside the message of Dick Cheney and his extremist "us and them" is a blind realization that the very reactionary and pugilistic approach is the same one that produces jihadists-- (are they not just a variant?)

Hate, Fear, and fomenting of petty rebellion over such trivial matters as taxes (or the non-trivial matters of torture in the name of the USA) seeks only to motivate the narrowist of sell-interest in the uneducated, the ignorant, the bigoted, and the HOPELESS.

Repent, you idiots on the Right. Your message is poison in a world that needs hope and confidence that our American dream can make the world a better place.

Posted by: rowens1 | May 25, 2009 10:48 AM | Report abuse

My question to Cheney, and those who think like him: You claim that these techniques are effective and get answers. Presumably one of the first questions asked was about Bin Ladin. So, Where is Bin Ladin?

Posted by: AMviennaVA | May 25, 2009 11:04 AM | Report abuse

My question for Cheney is: why stop at waterboarding? Why not iron maidens, mutilation, a cage of hungry rats fastened around the head? Cheney doesn't have the courage or capacity to address this question, and so he doesn't...why the press lets him get away with it is another question entirely.

Posted by: Seytom1 | May 25, 2009 11:27 AM | Report abuse

Hmmmm well for your information, waterboarding kept another 9/11 On Los Angeles.

Posted by: LANI57 | May 22, 2009 8:08 PM

No, not really.

Posted by: dijetlo | May 25, 2009 11:46 AM | Report abuse

Here's a thought experiment for you Ignatius, how about the non partisan support President Bush received during his struggle with the Islamist killers, I'm sure you were there to provide the solidarity that we needed as a country to present a united face to the world. Ooops, I forgot, the press was too enamored of Cindy Sheehan and the worldwide outcry against Bush-Hitler to worry about non partisanship. And another thing, no use trying to take any measures for our security, the NY Times was praised and lauded for exposing our attempts to track the plotters via their financial transactions and electronic communications, destroying our ability to preempt their plots and activities. Thanks, we know where you stood during this time, you were so reasonable and supportive. Yes, Bush's policies were not sustainable, and so, so lawless. They were particularly unsustainable in the face of relentless criticism and howling from the press and your type of associates, accusing the administration of lying, trashing the military and the country to obtain personal power and money, this surly promoted a rational, common sense, sustainable dialog. Do you honestly think you can print your columns and then pretend that the past eight years never happened, that opposition to Bush was based upon anything but unreasoning hatred. If so, you need to get help, professional help.

Posted by: MikeMcLamara | May 25, 2009 12:23 PM | Report abuse

Perhaps Cheney is just trying to get Obama to pull his head out of the sand - before it is too late.

Posted by: pkhenry | May 25, 2009 1:27 PM | Report abuse

Give me a break! If this country split "left and right" it would be 80/20 not down the middle.

Posted by: noGOP4me | May 25, 2009 1:42 PM | Report abuse

David, this is one of your weakest attepts to defend Obamma. Doesn't it really boil down to either being a) tough on terrorists or b) soft on terrorists? I prefer the former. Would you really have wanted to read KSM his "rights"?

Posted by: lschrank | May 25, 2009 4:11 PM | Report abuse

Don't you liberals see that we had to waterboard them! Otherwise, they just wouldn't admit that Saddam was planning to use WMD on the US!

Posted by: gzuckier | May 26, 2009 1:32 AM | Report abuse

"That’s why I liked Obama’s attempt to claim the middle ground in this debate."

How is prosecuting former bush justice dept officials for giving advise on law for the Obama's middle ground! Don't you wonder why Cheney came out in the public in the first place.

Of course, right is always partisan and left is always looking for middle ground - where have heard that before. Unbelievable apparent PostPartisan Ignatius.

Posted by: cdulam | May 26, 2009 9:52 AM | Report abuse

Cheney is correct.

If America is hit again it will be on the democrats and their feckless "leader".....and I would hope the citizens take them out of power as a result.

Posted by: georgedixon1 | May 26, 2009 10:23 AM | Report abuse

We should have let California be attacked. Then what would the Far left have to say about torture?

But hey, they kill babies(abortion rights) and let terrorists(don't torture) run free. What do they care about a few more American lives lost. Remember, it is the far left that pushed to stop executions of convicted criminals. Look at Manson as a primary example. Again, they would rather have more Americans dead then persecute the true criminals.

To be American is to be a criminal in the eyes of the Far left.

Posted by: LiberalBasher | May 26, 2009 12:59 PM | Report abuse

Give me a break! If this country split "left and right" it would be 80/20 not down the middle.
Even though your too stupid to look up the information to backup your comment, I did it for you. But that's a typical far left num nuts for you. lazy, stupid, arrogant, hateful, and just full of it.

You got lucky num nuts... Want to look at this same map next election to see how you fare? Jesus, when the hell are you liberals going to start doing your own work for a change instead of hard working Americans doing it for you.

Posted by: LiberalBasher | May 26, 2009 1:18 PM | Report abuse

This is the reason Cheney is doing this-- he wants to set up the press corps to frame the discussion as if it forfeiting torture is responsible for any attack.
When Bush/Cheney were asleep at the switch in 2001 in spite of clear warnings, the Democrats could easily have pointed that out but instead, patriots that they are, Democrats united the country [just imagine what the Republicans would have done to Gore if it had happened on his watch--- of course it likely would not have, as he wouldn'thave cut anti-terror funding and taken the whole month of August off].

So now, instead of suggesting that perhaps 8 years of diverting resources to attack Iraq and away from the hunt for Bin Laden. away from protecting our ports, away from tracking the money trail etc, might be responsible for any attack, Cheney has the press ready to debate whether it was adhering to the rule of law that made us vulnerable. How dare he.

I do hope that the press is more awake than that, but, after how they responded during the run up to the war in Iraq starting from Cheney's speech in August 2002, I am not optimistic. Cheney is a master of manipulating the press.

Posted by: bethechangeyouwant | May 27, 2009 4:37 PM | Report abuse

Let me get this straight--- Cheney is talking about an administration that disregards urgent warnings from its predecessor, thereby putting our nation at risk. Has he been waterboarded? Slammed against the wall once too often? I'm no legal scholar, but if such tactics were used to pry this confession from him, it will never be admissible in court.

Posted by: psst_limbaugh_keep-ranting_satan | May 28, 2009 12:28 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company