NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=8799776&src=rss/topNews

now this news is just shocking. (not really)

guantanamo prisoners released found dead or captured in Iraq because they joined the fighting there. So, do we all now realize that it is important to keep that prison open?

(btw, if this is a repeat thread, sorry, didn't see it)

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=8799776&src=rss/topNews

now this news is just shocking. (not really)

guantanamo prisoners released found dead or captured in Iraq because they joined the fighting there. So, do we all now realize that it is important to keep that prison open?

(btw, if this is a repeat thread, sorry, didn't see it)
Are you surprised that someone we imprisoned would when released like to get some pay back?

Release a child-rapist, and you suddenly get someone acting strangely around the school.

Release a terrorist, and he immediately joins his mates, and resumes his campaign of slaughter.

It's funny really.

The Israelis will tear out your finger nails, crush your knuckles, and carve you up, the Chinese will hang you upside down and beat you like a piñata, yet when we give them better food then they have probably ever eaten in their lives, air conditioned living space, their holy book, a fucking arrow that points to Mecca, and every so often a lap dance and some Meth, we get hell for it.

These people are what you would classically call "Barbarians," they are conditioned to be brutal, morally bankrupt, and desperately ignorant but somehow people are surprised when they resist being broken of that. These people are programmed like machines to hate and kill, they are told explicitly to claim torture if captured, their entire life is devoted to an ideal that any nation that could claim to be civilized would abhor, but still these scum get SYMPATHY?!?

Bah!

That only proves that Iraq is acting like a roach motel.

Terrorists check in, but they don't check out (at least not under their own power). :)

Are you surprised that someone we imprisoned would when released like to get some pay back?

no, to me it shows that they were caught because they were fighting against the US in the first place, and now that they have been detained for a few years, they want to continue their fight.

if i was imprisoned wrongly, i wouldn't go about trying to get back at the country that did it by fighting in iraq, i would take the fight to court.

Did you know that about 400 Average Americans are being held at "da Bay" with no charges against them? Not that it has anything to do with Iraqi's held there, but.. meh... :headbang:

Did you know that about 400 Average Americans are being held at "da Bay" with no charges against them? Not that it has anything to do with Iraqi's held there, but.. meh... :headbang:


They're not Americans...

Did you know that about 400 Average Americans are being held at "da Bay" with no charges against them? Not that it has anything to do with Iraqi's held there, but.. meh... :headbang:

no, i didn't know there were 400 americans at g'tmo, how did they get there?

no, to me it shows that they were caught because they were fighting against the US in the first place, and now that they have been detained for a few years, they want to continue their fight.

if i was imprisoned wrongly, i wouldn't go about trying to get back at the country that did it by fighting in iraq, i would take the fight to court.
And what legal recourse would this non resident have?

And what legal recourse would this non resident have?

the same as any other non-resident that sues in the US.

i'm not sure that i trust gonzales as my only source for this information. i'm not saying that it isnt true... i'd just like some corraborating statements from other leaders.

on another note: how would you feel if you were whisked off the streets of new york (or los angeles or chicago or wherever) for no reason other than that some foreigners thought that you did something wrong. how would you feel if you did in fact do nothing wrong. how would you feel if you were held in prison (it doesnt matter how nice) indefinitely without trial.

i'd be pretty pissed. i'm not saying that i'd join a terrorist organization and fight against those who imprisoned me, cuz that isnt how i operate. but we are dealing with a people that are already inclined towards "righteous" violence, so why are we surprised that a place like guantanemo (sp?) bay could cause these kinds of reactions?

and before the zealots come after me for suggesting that some of the prisoners committed no crime... i can't know if they did or did not. in fact, i'm pretty sure that in a lot of cases, no one can know, because these detainees DO NOT FACE TRIAL.

I hope Iraq does attract terrorists, makes it easier to kill them all in one place. Also, those so called 400 Americans are not average, there is only one way to get into Guantanamo, fighting against the US.

It's funny really.

The Israelis will tear out your finger nails, crush your knuckles, and carve you up, the Chinese will hang you upside down and beat you like a piñata, yet when we give them better food then they have probably ever eaten in their lives, air conditioned living space, their holy book, a fucking arrow that points to Mecca, and every so often a lap dance and some Meth, we get hell for it.

These people are what you would classically call "Barbarians," they are conditioned to be brutal, morally bankrupt, and desperately ignorant but somehow people are surprised when they resist being broken of that. These people are programmed like machines to hate and kill, they are told explicitly to claim torture if captured, their entire life is devoted to an ideal that any nation that could claim to be civilized would abhor, but still these scum get SYMPATHY?!?

Bah!


The question is not what China, which is a cruel dictatorship, does to its prisonner, it's how a democracy like teh US treats his prisonners.

A democracy abide by the law. EVeryone, and that includes prisonners, has rights. SOme of this rights are that you should be trated without cryuelty, and that noone should be detained without a fair trial. These rights do not only apply to american citizens, but to all human beings.

That's what the current administration seems to have forgotten when establishing Guantanamo.

Moreover, torture is not only outlawe, not only inhuman, it's only innefficient, like hundreds of years of history has proven.

If people criticize the Us for Gunatanmo bay, and not China (mind you, people DO critic china though) it's because they have a high standard for US

What credible sources do you guys have that, pretty much according to you, random people are whisked off the streets in Iraq to serve time in probably the best prison these guys have been to. So Im talking it that you lefties that think Gitmo is a horrible place, and should be closed due to humanitarian violations, have never seen of Saddam's, or even his son's private, shall i say exclusive torture chambers. There was no radical lefty running into Iraq about their horrible, unspeakable death chambers and places of utter horror, but now that we got some terrorists (and you guys are forgetting to mention the vital information we are getting from them at Gitmo) locked up, you start screaming.

You lefties just never step back and look at the big picture, and see how hypocritical you really are.

the same as any other non-resident that sues in the US.
But he is not IN the us ... he has no real legal recourse

The question is not what China, which is a cruel dictatorship, does to its prisonner, it's how a democracy like teh US treats his prisonners.

A democracy abide by the law. EVeryone, and that includes prisonners, has rights. SOme of this rights are that you should be trated without cryuelty, and that noone should be detained without a fair trial. These rights do not only apply to american citizens, but to all human beings.

That's what the current administration seems to have forgotten when establishing Guantanamo.

Moreover, torture is not only outlawe, not only inhuman, it's only innefficient, like hundreds of years of history has proven.

If people criticize the Us for Gunatanmo bay, and not China (mind you, people DO critic china though) it's because they have a high standard for US


Well since you seem to know what doesn't work, what do you sugest we do to get information out of terrorists? I'm pretty sure tortue is actually a very effective tactic. Obviously they don't respond to the best treatment of their lives. I wonder how much sympathey you will have for these animals once they hurt someone close to you.

What credible sources do you guys have that, pretty much according to you, random people are whisked off the streets in Iraq to serve time in probably the best prison these guys have been to. So Im talking it that you lefties that think Gitmo is a horrible place, and should be closed due to humanitarian violations, have never seen of Saddam's, or even his son's private, shall i say exclusive torture chambers. There was no radical lefty running into Iraq about their horrible, unspeakable death chambers and places of utter horror, but now that we got some terrorists (and you guys are forgetting to mention the vital information we are getting from them at Gitmo) locked up, you start screaming.

You lefties just never step back and look at the big picture, and see how hypocritical you really are.

well said. i believe that we should just lower the standards for every nation. after all, the US didn't get to where it is today by rising above the rest.

It's funny really.

The Israelis will tear out your finger nails, crush your knuckles, and carve you up, the Chinese will hang you upside down and beat you like a piñata, yet when we give them better food then they have probably ever eaten in their lives, air conditioned living space, their holy book, a fucking arrow that points to Mecca, and every so often a lap dance and some Meth, we get hell for it.

These people are what you would classically call "Barbarians," they are conditioned to be brutal, morally bankrupt, and desperately ignorant but somehow people are surprised when they resist being broken of that. These people are programmed like machines to hate and kill, they are told explicitly to claim torture if captured, their entire life is devoted to an ideal that any nation that could claim to be civilized would abhor, but still these scum get SYMPATHY?!?

Bah!


An you are an ignorant bigot.

You dont' think we employ these forms of torture ourselves ? We do. And you would be naive to think that we do not.

Plain and simple, the US found a loophole to hold these people without due process. That is really what is wrong with this picture. You want to hold them, then try them. You want to excute them, then do so after a fair trial. We claim to be democratic, and then do crap like this. The problem with the US is that democracy is great, when it applies to the US, but when it comes to the rest of the world, no way.

We have overthrown governments and installed regimes and dictatorships becasue frankly they are easier to control. We support a monarcy in Saudi Arabia. We support a military dictator in Pakistan. We supported a military coup in Algeria. We created Saddam Hussain because we needed him to fight Iran. And , yes we created Iran, because we supported a dictator there before he was overthrown in 1979. We created Osama bin Ladden because we needed him to fight Russia.

I dont' agree with what happened on 9/11, but lets look at what this country contributed for 9/11 to occur.

An you are an ignorant bigot.

You dont' think we employ these forms of torture ourselves ? We do. And you would be naive to think that we do not.

Plain and simple, the US found a loophole to hold these people without due process. That is really what is wrong with this picture. You want to hold them, then try them. You want to excute them, then do so after a fair trial. We claim to be democratic, and then do crap like this. The problem with the US is that democracy is great, when it applies to the US, but when it comes to the rest of the world, no way.

We have overthrown governments and installed regimes and dictatorships becasue frankly they are easier to control. We support a monarcy in Saudi Arabia. We support a military dictator in Pakistan. We supported a military coup in Algeria. We created Saddam Hussain because we needed him to fight Iran. And , yes we created Iran, because we supported a dictator there before he was overthrown in 1979. We created Osama bin Ladden because we needed him to fight Russia.

I dont' agree with what happened on 9/11, but lets look at what this country contributed for 9/11 to occur.

that's a dangerous line of reasoning, masood. while i agree that the US has contributed to the climate that fosters terrorism, i would never say that US policy CAUSED 9/11. 9/11 happened because a bunch of subhumans decided that they needed to ram a plane into our buildings to make a point. they made the choice. everything else is just trappings.

I dont' agree with what happened on 9/11, but lets look at what this country contributed for 9/11 to occur.

According to Osama, the only offense we "committed" in order to justify 9-11 was to send troops to Saudi Arabia and station them there during the 1991 Gulf War.

According to his own statements, that's it - nothing else. We didn't even go to Mecca, but to him and his followers, just setting foot in Saudi Arabia was enough.

He added more reasons to hate American and kill all of us after we invaded Afghanistan.

You know what I think? I think that terrorists and their sympathizers are really people who just love to kill people and blow things up - and they'll think up any excuse or reason to ensure that they can continue to do it.

Now, apparently, they have a new religious ruling that says that they can even kill their own people - their own children - as many as necessary if it means the death of at least one enemy.

Nice. You do realize, of course, that if there is a repeat of 9-11 in the United States, what comes after will make Hitler's Holocaust look like child's play.

And our teachers will tell our children, "Who remembers the Arabs?"

But he is not IN the us ... he has no real legal recourse

you don't think that if you were imprisoned for 3 years in g'tmo, and then released, that you couldn't get any lawyer in the US to sue on your behalf? I think lawyers are salivating(sp) at the chance to get someone to represent from there. And if it was me, that's what i would try to do. but then, it's not me so.....

that's a dangerous line of reasoning, masood. while i agree that the US has contributed to the climate that fosters terrorism, i would never say that US policy CAUSED 9/11. 9/11 happened because a bunch of subhumans decided that they needed to ram a plane into our buildings to make a point. they made the choice. everything else is just trappings.

This is a vicious circle is all i'm trying to say, we fuck with people around the world, they are going to in return fuck with us. Simple as that. We should not be surprised or shocked. An on the point of who caused 9/11, there has been no proof shared with the public on who caused this. Bush lied about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, what makes you think he was telling the truth of who caused 9/11 ?

According to Osama, the only offense we "committed" in order to justify 9-11 was to send troops to Saudi Arabia and station them there during the 1991 Gulf War..
Osama has never come out and said he did 9/11... his only comment was that he supported those that did so, and gave the above reasoning.

Nice. You do realize, of course, that if there is a repeat of 9-11 in the United States, what comes after will make Hitler's Holocaust look like child's play.

So its ok to go kill civilians in other countries, but when civilians are killed here you are going to cause a holocaust ? We have killed more civilians in Afganistan then those that died on 9/11. We have killed more civillians in Iraq then those that died on 9/11. It is only a matter of time before something happens here again in America. And No I dont' support the killing of any civillians whether in America or any other country in the world. But it seems to me, that you would be inclinded to cause a Holocust. Who is the barbarian now ?

In fact I would put Bush in teh same league as Osama or Saddam as far as being murderers. Its no wonder the US is so opposed to being a part of the world court.

Hahaha alright, you just ruined all your credibility you stupid conspiracy theorist. Blame America, huh? We deserved all that I guess. Our leaders liked 9/11. Go back to hole you came from or maybe go to Afghanistan and preach your extreme left-wing ideals there.

The avalanche has already begun - it is too late for the pebbles to vote.

Moreover, torture is not only outlawe, not only inhuman, it's only innefficient, like hundreds of years of history has proven.
Depends on how you use it. Torturing random or even semi-random people for information rarely works. However, if you are certain that someone holds a piece of information then torturing him will eventually get him/her to release that information. Might take awhile, but they will let the information slip.

if i was imprisoned wrongly, i wouldn't go about trying to get back at the country that did it by fighting in iraq, i would take the fight to court.

There is absolutely no way to do this right now. There is no recourse for a foreign national other than moral suasion from their domestic government.

That being said, it's also true that a lot of people in Gitmo are in fact innocent of any wrong doings.

I guess you could look at it like a Soviet gulag (I realize this is an extreme analogy, and I don't mean they are in all ways the same): some of the people in that prison camp are there for good reason, but it does not justify that system in imprisoning people arbitrarily.

It's sort of like summary execution I guess. you'll get a lot of bad guys, but you'll get a lot of good guys too. I think most of us would acknowledge that this is wrong.

Well since you seem to know what doesn't work, what do you sugest we do to get information out of terrorists? I'm pretty sure tortue is actually a very effective tactic. Obviously they don't respond to the best treatment of their lives. I wonder how much sympathey you will have for these animals once they hurt someone close to you.

Torture isn't needed today. It is outdated and proven ineffectual, people will simply say whatever will ease their pain. Modern interrogation uses primarily a combination of psychological manipulation and drugs. For instance, a combination of methamphetamines and versaid will make ANYONE talk. Versaid is a drug that puts you into a "Twilight Sleep," a condition where you feel like you loose consciousness and can remember nothing but you are actually fully awake and mainly alert. It is used in surgery when the patient is needed to be awake but unable to remember the pain. In addition to that it puts you in a totally compliant, zombie like stupor so, in the instance of interrogation, you do not have any hatred or aggression towards your interrogator thus no reason to lie. Meth simply makes you hyper and even more compliant. People under the effect of these drugs will talk, and talk, and talk until there are no more questions to be answered. Plus, they remember none of it and don’t lie.

Once again, torture is useless and inefficient. It isn't used because we don't NEED to use it. The people in Gitmo where TOLD to claim torture in the event of their capture. ZE END!

An you are an ignorant bigot.

You dont' think we employ these forms of torture ourselves ? We do. And you would be naive to think that we do not.

Plain and simple, the US found a loophole to hold these people without due process. That is really what is wrong with this picture. You want to hold them, then try them. You want to excute them, then do so after a fair trial. We claim to be democratic, and then do crap like this. The problem with the US is that democracy is great, when it applies to the US, but when it comes to the rest of the world, no way.

We have overthrown governments and installed regimes and dictatorships becasue frankly they are easier to control. We support a monarcy in Saudi Arabia. We support a military dictator in Pakistan. We supported a military coup in Algeria. We created Saddam Hussain because we needed him to fight Iran. And , yes we created Iran, because we supported a dictator there before he was overthrown in 1979. We created Osama bin Ladden because we needed him to fight Russia.

I dont' agree with what happened on 9/11, but lets look at what this country contributed for 9/11 to occur.

On a point by point basis...

A bigot is "One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ." Most people on this forum are bigots. You are a bigot, judging by your post probably to a higher degree then me. Get over it, as for ignorance, everyone is ignorant. No one knows everything and everything you know may be wrong. I promise you I know more about interrogation and torture. On both counts here, get used to it.

Next point. Read my response to The Second Holy Empire, torture is outdated and has been statistically proven to be inefficient. We don't need to use it and we get far better information for NOT using it.

I do not want these people to be executed, that would be a mistake because these people are useful as information banks. It would be foolish to execute them.

Democracy isn't some moral pinnacle. It has no innate moral principles; it is only as moral as the people who run the Democracy. The people's whims determine the morality of the system. Besides, we have a (Roman-esque) Republic as apposed to a (Greek-esque) Democracy. Our system of government is intended to apply to our citizens and our citizens alone. How would a Portuguese man feel if we tried to apply our system on him? A criminal is a criminal, an American criminal is treated like an American criminal and an Iraqi criminal is treated like an Iraqi criminal.

Yes and England, France, Spain, and the Netherlands created the appalling situation in Africa. We are cleaning up our past mistakes, they aren't. You are bitching at us? Your ideology has blinded you. Nations have been carving their place on the face of the Earth for thousands of years, America is a blip compared to the sheer magnitude of the past, and our methods pale in comparison to the outright brutality that most (now called “civilized” nations have incurred in the past. Shall we dig up every past exploits of every past and present nation and discuss how THEY impacted the world for better or for worse?

In closing, get over it.

Some of you guys are painting Gitmo as a traditional jail or prison, when in fact its not. It is a detention center for POWs. We do not have the legal obligation at the moment, seeing that the war is still in progress, to ILLEGALY bring these detanees into the US for a proper trail. Gitmo is painted in the media as a 'jail' or 'prison', trying to confuse the public and create an image where these enemies of the US are not being treated fair on a legal scale. They are not being 'arrested', they are being 'detained'. Therefore they are not covered under the US constitution, only the GC, which is being perfectly abided by.

Yes and England, France, Spain, and the Netherlands created the appalling situation in Africa. We are cleaning up our past mistakes, they aren't.


In fact when 9/11 happened I had hoped that it would move us in the direction of cleaning up our past mistakes. However it did not. We have become even more brutal then we were before. In the past countries like you mentioned above did it blatantly. We do it under the covers and in the guise of Democracy. My only claim is that yes, the powerfull do this. Have done so since the dawn of time. But don't tell me that we are there to help the people for freedom and democracy. That is bull crap.

Meh. I don't blame them. After that treatment, it is reasonable to expect innocent men to want bloody revenge.

So...what? People detained, even if mistakenly, should never be released lest they seek revenge? No, the civilised response is to close the facility, take whatever blowback results, and learn the obvious lesson from it. :rolleyes:

There is absolutely no way to do this right now. There is no recourse for a foreign national other than moral suasion from their domestic government.
why?

That being said, it's also true that a lot of people in Gitmo are in fact innocent of any wrong doings.
then why are they still there?

some of the people in that prison camp are there for good reason, but it does not justify that system in imprisoning people arbitrarily.
so you would rather release all prisoners just to free the "innocent"ones?

I think most of us would acknowledge that this is wrong.

i agree that it's wrong to hold them indefinitely w/o trial. but i don't think it's wrong to hold them.

Honestly, some of you actually think the US is innocent? Terrorism is the western worlds new excuse to enforce even more dictatorial measures upon those whom it controls. Before terrorism it was communism, before communism it was fascism! The US in particular always needs an excuse to make sure its control over the world is secure, and the torture and brutal internment of terrorists are prime examples of what they are getting away with in the name of 'Counter-Terrorism'!

Some of you guys are painting Gitmo as a traditional jail or prison, when in fact its not. It is a detention center for POWs. We do not have the legal obligation at the moment, seeing that the war is still in progress, to ILLEGALY bring these detanees into the US for a proper trail. Gitmo is painted in the media as a 'jail' or 'prison', trying to confuse the public and create an image where these enemies of the US are not being treated fair on a legal scale. They are not being 'arrested', they are being 'detained'. Therefore they are not covered under the US constitution, only the GC, which is being perfectly abided by.

Actually you are incorrect on a lot of points here, and Bush himself clouds this same issue. First he says we are fighting a War on terrorism. However no war was ever officially really declared. Not in Afghan and not in Iraq. Because of this none who were captured are decalred as POWs. They are instead labled as enemy combatants hence having no rights. This is a way that Bush has used to get around the Constitution and the Geneva convention. But aside from all the legal mumbo jumbo. What shoudl be done from a moral perspective? This is the bigger question. And don't tell me these people shoudl have no rights because of this or that. We are supposed to be held to a higher standard, irregardless of what they have done or we have just stooped to their level.

Honestly, some of you actually think the US is innocent? Terrorism is the western worlds new excuse to enforce even more dictatorial measures upon those whom it controls. Before terrorism it was communism, before communism it was fascism! The US in particular always needs an excuse to make sure its control over the world is secure, and the torture and brutal internment of terrorists are prime examples of what they are getting away with in the name of 'Counter-Terrorism'!


You are so right! Let's go apologize to Hitler and all those other poor fascits. Hell, you know what? Let's give them back their concentration camps, after all, we just used that as an excuse to stop the poor Third Reich from "expanding."

In fact when 9/11 happened I had hoped that it would move us in the direction of cleaning up our past mistakes. However it did not. We have become even more brutal then we were before. In the past countries like you mentioned above did it blatantly. We do it under the covers and in the guise of Democracy. My only claim is that yes, the powerfull do this. Have done so since the dawn of time. But don't tell me that we are there to help the people for freedom and democracy. That is bull crap.

War is war, conquest is conquest, victory is victory, has always been always will be. Every war has had its rhetoric, its political justifications, its pretence, and its results. What is happening today is nothing new; it's the same tune with different lyrics. HOWEVER, results may vary. I challenge you to go to Iraq, find a crowd of people, and yell at the top of their lungs that they shouldn't have voted, shouldn't have torn down that statue, shouldn't be supporting America, shouldn't be enjoying what was once forbidden on threat of death, that the people blowing themselves up and killing their mothers, fathers, sons and daughters are justified those who support them shouldn't be punished, etc, etc, etc.....

Actually you are incorrect on a lot of points here, and Bush himself clouds this same issue. First he says we are fighting a War on terrorism. However no war was ever officially really declared. Not in Afghan and not in Iraq. Because of this none who were captured are decalred as POWs. They are instead labled as enemy combatants hence having no rights. This is a way that Bush has used to get around the Constitution and the Geneva convention. But aside from all the legal mumbo jumbo. What shoudl be done from a moral perspective? This is the bigger question. And don't tell me these people shoudl have no rights because of this or that. We are supposed to be held to a higher standard, irregardless of what they have done or we have just stooped to their level.


War hasn't been declared since World War II, why does that matter? Congress approved the use of troops, ergo it's a war. The reason the Constitution and Geneva Convention don't apply is because they are terrorists, they don't even have a country they are fighting for.

Oh, and we have NEVER stooped to their level. When America starts targeting innocent citizens for death then maybe I'll consider that statment. You forget how well they are actually being treated. They ARE being processed. Yes, it's slow but it's the only way to keep terrorists out of action.

no, i didn't know there were 400 americans at g'tmo, how did they get there?
probably on a (even if they only play in 2 countries) world champs RedSox chartered gulfstream jet.

BTW I don't know if there are 400...we don't know how many female...how many children...we don't know...its all dark and secret...just like any Gulag.

Oh, and we have NEVER stooped to their level. When America starts targeting innocent citizens for death then maybe I'll consider that statment. You forget how well they are actually being treated. They ARE being processed. Yes, it's slow but it's the only way to keep terrorists out of action.

We may be stooping, but not to their level.

When we put their women and children on CNN, and scare the crap out of them before we gouge out their eyes and slit their throats, and yell, "Jesus is Great!" then we'll have sunk to their level.

When we have Christian Fundamentalists shooting women in the head at a soccer stadium because she was listening to music, then we'll have sunk to their level.

When we blow up the Museum of Modern Art because it is full of "blasphemy", then we'll have sunk to their level.

When we force people to become a particular type of Christian, or kill them, then we'll have sunk to their level.

When we force men to grow beards, or beat them to death, then we'll have sunk to their level.

When we take schoolchildren hostage by the hundreds, and then shoot them, then we'll have sunk to their level.

Until then, we're nowhere near their level.

Actually you are incorrect on a lot of points here, and Bush himself clouds this same issue. First he says we are fighting a War on terrorism. However no war was ever officially really declared. Not in Afghan and not in Iraq. Because of this none who were captured are decalred as POWs. They are instead labled as enemy combatants hence having no rights. This is a way that Bush has used to get around the Constitution and the Geneva convention. But aside from all the legal mumbo jumbo. What shoudl be done from a moral perspective? This is the bigger question. And don't tell me these people shoudl have no rights because of this or that. We are supposed to be held to a higher standard, irregardless of what they have done or we have just stooped to their level.

There would be no point in filing a war declaration, seeing that the UN would block it, and would give the regime in Iraq more time to smuggle WoMD into Syria. The 48-hour ultimatum was still to long, giving Iraq ample time to sneak its WoMD into Syria, in according to combined US, British, and Russian intel. What should be done from a moral persepctive? (I want to say fly them coach to the UAE) Exactally what is being done right now. Hold them in what many consider a first class holding facility until operation Iraqi-Freedom is over, and then they can legally be tried.

War hasn't been declared since World War II, why does that matter? Congress approved the use of troops, ergo it's a war. The reason the Constitution and Geneva Convention don't apply is because they are terrorists, they don't even have a country they are fighting for.

IMO, congress approved the use of troops so they wouldn't look unpatriotic. At the time, anyone who said anything against Bush was considered unpatriotic, i.e. if you aren't with me, you are against me type childish mentality.

And what is a terrorist. Its easy to come up with a generic label bascially to say if you dont' agree with me and my ideals, you are a terrorist and i'm going to kill you. This is a very dangerous time we live in. Since 9/11 the right has more and more taken our civil liberties. What is next ?

In my opinion we are as much causing terror abroad as these folks are causing terror here....


Oh, and we have NEVER stooped to their level. When America starts targeting innocent citizens for death then maybe I'll consider that statment. You forget how well they are actually being treated. They ARE being processed. Yes, it's slow but it's the only way to keep terrorists out of action.

We do so already. Do you think you would hear about it, if we did ? Naive.
A prison is a prision no matter how well you are treated. Again the word terror. These people are found guilty before a trial. What happend to innocent until proven guilty. The enemy combatant label is being used instead of POW because it is in Bush's interest to do so. Nothing more.

God bless ya Whispering Legs. Well said

War hasn't been declared since World War II, why does that matter? Congress approved the use of troops, ergo it's a war. The reason the Constitution and Geneva Convention don't apply is because they are terrorists, they don't even have a country they are fighting for.

Oh, and we have NEVER stooped to their level. When America starts targeting innocent citizens for death then maybe I'll consider that statment. You forget how well they are actually being treated. They ARE being processed. Yes, it's slow but it's the only way to keep terrorists out of action.

I always thought the Geneva Convention applied whenever there was a war... If you want to call yourself guardian of liberty or land of the free or whatever, I think you have the responsibility to hold yourself to a higher standard than your enemies. Which means not inventing a new category called "enemy combatants" and saying it's not prisoners-of-war. If you're fighting a war, then let them be prisoners of war. And if they're terrorists, try them for their crimes - obviously, after interrogation. But not torture, and not holding them for three years (I'm pretty sure you've got all the necessary information by now), and not holding juveniles (there is one person who has been in Guantanamo for three years, and he's still not eighteen...)

And as for not targetting innocent citizens for death... I've heard that the US Army has deliberately targetted journalists in Iraq. For example, Giuliana Sgrena and Nicola Calipari... Not proven, I know, but somewhat suspicious...

probably on a (even if they only play in 2 countries) world champs RedSox chartered gulfstream jet.

BTW I don't know if there are 400...we don't know how many female...how many children...we don't know...its all dark and secret...just like any Gulag.

i've always wanted to fly in a gulfsteam. i hear they're real comfortable. and as far as women and children in guantanamo.... eh? don't remember hearing/reading it on the news. I wouldn't say it's like a gulag because it's dark and secret. Info is getting out about guantanamo prisoners... it may not be true... but it is coming out :P

i've always wanted to fly in a gulfsteam. i hear they're real comfortable. and as far as women and children in guantanamo.... eh? don't remember hearing/reading it on the news. I wouldn't say it's like a gulag because it's dark and secret. Info is getting out about guantanamo prisoners... it may not be true... but it is coming out :P

They have a continuous presence by the ICRC. Since day one.

The prisoners are free to talk in private to representatives of the ICRC.

There have been over a thousand visits by reporters to Guantanamo.

More interviews and more journalists have been to Guantanamo than to any military place of confinement in history.

It's hardly dark and secret.

"We do so already. Do you think you would hear about it, if we did ? Naive."

Hahaha, hold on, lemme guess. You don't believe in the moon landing either.

Did you also know that we have colonies on Mars where we use slaves captured from South America to gather intel on Elvis and the evil empire he established on Pluto. What you didn't hear about it? Fool! You naive fool!

God bless ya Whispering Legs. Well said


Agreed!

We may be stooping, but not to their level.

When we put their women and children on CNN, and scare the crap out of them before we gouge out their eyes and slit their throats, and yell, "Jesus is Great!" then we'll have sunk to their level.

When we have Christian Fundamentalists shooting women in the head at a soccer stadium because she was listening to music, then we'll have sunk to their level.

When we blow up the Museum of Modern Art because it is full of "blasphemy", then we'll have sunk to their level.

When we force people to become a particular type of Christian, or kill them, then we'll have sunk to their level.

When we force men to grow beards, or beat them to death, then we'll have sunk to their level.

When we take schoolchildren hostage by the hundreds, and then shoot them, then we'll have sunk to their level.

Until then, we're nowhere near their level.

Its easy to point out single events and label a people for them. The above incident may have happened, but they are limited to a small group of people if that.
Same kind of crap happens here.

In essence America is still a white, protestant country. For all its diversity and everything else, it is still run by teh same. We have replaced slavery with slums and jails. For all teh progress that we have made and for teh small victories of colored people, the racial biases are still there... Maybe not at the surface but hidden away. Instead of racism now its called poorism, where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. And people are still treated like crap.

How many people did Timothy McVeigh kill ?
How many millions or billiions of dollars do we give Israel for dislocating a people and killing how many? We might not do it ourselves but we certainly support it.

What contributed to Collumbine?
We have had missionares force convert people to Christanity.
We ahve had abortions in this country...
How many gay people have died in this country ?
Look at the acts of those guards in the Iraqi prisions.. you don't think
the higher ups knew what was going on? come on...

Its all the same crap.

You can point out many bad things in other countries, but we have the same.

And what is a terrorist. Its easy to come up with a generic label bascially to say if you dont' agree with me and my ideals, you are a terrorist and i'm going to kill you.
let's look at this sentence...
by definition, a terrorist is: One that engages in acts or an act of terrorism.
Terrorism is: The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.
www.dictionary.com

Terrorists are clearly defined, and no where does it say "if you don't agree with me or my ideals..." So we have a clear definition of terrorism and terrorists. Therefore, the last part of this sentence is false.

This is a very dangerous time we live in. Since 9/11 the right has more and more taken our civil liberties. What is next ?
i agree, the "conservatives" has done more change to the US than a normal "conservative" would like. So i think it's safe to say they're liberal (liberals want change right?). What's next? Who's to say? GB and Congress i guess :P

In my opinion we are as much causing terror abroad as these folks are causing terror here....
terror for whom? Our methodology isn't unlawful, therefore it's not terrorism. And besides, terrorists are labeled clearly, and i don't think the US's methods falls under the defnition of terrorism.


A prison is a prision no matter how well you are treated. Again the word terror. These people are found guilty before a trial. What happend to innocent until proven guilty.
I disagree, a prison isn't a prison. Would you rather be jailed in a US prison, or a Mexican prison? Or an Iraqi prison. Or a Saudi prison? The prisoners at guantanamo aren't found guilty, they're just incarcerated until they get a trial. It's just indefinite until that trial date comes.

"We do so already. Do you think you would hear about it, if we did ? Naive."

Hahaha, hold on, lemme guess. You don't believe in the moon landing either.

Did you also know that we have colonies on Mars where we use slaves captured from South America to gather intel on Elvis and the evil empire he established on Pluto. What you didn't hear about it? Fool! You naive fool!

You can joke if you like.. but to give you a couple of examples.. Arafat is dead.. some say he was killed. If the Us or Israel killed him, do you really think we would know...

The Saudi Family, don't remember teh exact date, but before teh last King took office, he was not the next in line to the throne. One of his brothers was. But this guy was also a religious zealot, probably like Bin Ladin and eh mysteriously died. Of course we dont' know why.

Don't know if we had anything to do with this, but it makes you think.

On antoher note, we also know of teh Bay of Pigs which was to assasinate Castro....

The difference is pride, accpetance, and tolerance for the events. We set up cost-free therapy sessions for everyone affected by Columbine, we tried and executed McVeigh, the world Christian church, not the US, should take responsibility for the "forced conversions", hetero and homo sexuals die all around the world, and its naive to think that the high command did know about Ghraib. You insult every serviceman and women when you start thinking like that.

The first thing for you to understand is that in Guantanamo there are no martyrdoms. You have read of the religious persecutions of the past. In the Middle Ages there was the Inquisition. It was a failure. It set out to eradicate heresy, and ended by perpetuating it. For every heretic it burned at the stake, thousands of others rose up. Why was that? Because the Inquisition killed its enemies in the open, and killed them while they were still unrepentant: in fact, it killed them because they were unrepentant. Men were dying because they would not abandon their true beliefs. Naturally all the glory belonged to the victim and all the shame to the Inquisitor who burned him. Later, in the twentieth century, there were the totalitarians, as they were called. There were the German Nazis and the Russian Communists. The Russians persecuted heresy more cruelly than the Inquisition had done. And they imagined that they had learned from the mistakes of the past; they knew, at any rate, that one must not make martyrs. Before they exposed their victims to public trial, they deliberately set themselves to destroy their dignity. They wore them down by torture and solitude until they were despicable, cringing wretches, confessing whatever was put into their mouths, covering themselves with abuse, accusing and sheltering behind one another, whimpering for mercy. And yet after only a few years the same thing had happened over again. The dead men had become martyrs and their degradation was forgotten. Once again, why was it? In the first place, because the confessions that they had made were obviously extorted and untrue. We do not make mistakes of that kind. All the confessions that are uttered here are true. We make them true. And above all we do not allow the dead to rise up against us. You must stop imagining that posterity will vindicate them. Posterity will never hear of them. They will be lifted clean out from the stream of history. We shall turn them into gas and pour them into the stratosphere. Nothing will remain of them, not a name in a register, not a memory in a living brain. They will be annihilated in the past as well as in the future. They will never have existed.

Ever wonder why of the detainees who remain at Guantanamo, we haven't executed any of them? Because we're waiting for their minds to be clean.

You are thinking, that since we intend to destroy them utterly, so that nothing that they say or do can make the smallest difference -- in that case, why do we go to the trouble of interrogating them first? That is what you were thinking, was it not?'

They are a flaw in the pattern. They are a stain that must be wiped out. Did I not tell you just now that we are different from the persecutors of the past? We are not content with negative obedience, nor even with the most abject submission. When finally they surrender to us, it must be of their own free will. We do not destroy the heretic because he resists us: so long as he resists us we never destroy him. We convert him, we capture his inner mind, we reshape him. We burn all evil and all illusion out of him; we bring him over to our side, not in appearance, but genuinely, heart and soul. We make him one of ourselves before we kill him. It is intolerable to us that an erroneous thought should exist anywhere in the world, however secret and powerless it may be. Even in the instant of death we cannot permit any deviation. In the old days the heretic walked to the stake still a heretic, proclaiming his heresy, exulting in it. Even the victim of the Russian purges could carry rebellion locked up in his skull as he walked down the passage waiting for the bullet. But we make the brain perfect before we blow it out. The command of the old despotisms was "Thou shalt not". The command of the totalitarians was "Thou shalt". Our command is "Thou art".

Its easy to point out single events and label a people for them. The above incident may have happened, but they are limited to a small group of people if that.
Same kind of crap happens here.

In essence America is still a white, protestant country. For all its diversity and everything else, it is still run by teh same. We have replaced slavery with slums and jails. For all teh progress that we have made and for teh small victories of colored people, the racial biases are still there... Maybe not at the surface but hidden away. Instead of racism now its called poorism, where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. And people are still treated like crap.

How many people did Timothy McVeigh kill ?
How many millions or billiions of dollars do we give Israel for dislocating a people and killing how many? We might not do it ourselves but we certainly support it.

What contributed to Collumbine?
We have had missionares force convert people to Christanity.
We ahve had abortions in this country...
How many gay people have died in this country ?
Look at the acts of those guards in the Iraqi prisions.. you don't think
the higher ups knew what was going on? come on...

Its all the same crap.

You can point out many bad things in other countries, but we have the same.


Your analogies are completely irrevelant. Find a country without rich and poor divides, without racism, without serial killers, without missionaries, without abortions, without hate crimes. Come on I dare you find that country so we can all move there.

We do not kill civilians to prove our idealogical points. Even if there are several Christians in power we don't blow up Mosques(sp?). We let women vote and don't force them to submit to one relgion's ideals.

You were confused by Whispering Legs post. You think that the terrorists have some country named Terria and it happens that some of them are evil. All terrorists do these things, not all Americans are racist, "poorist", what have you..


You are actually defending terrorists! "Its easy to point out single events and label a people for them. The above incident may have happened, but they are limited to a small group of people if that.
Same kind of crap happens here."

I'm sorry Mr. Terrorist! I didn't mean to label you just because the other 5000 of your friends were bad! Your statement is wrong, just plain wrong.

Y
Don't know if we had anything to do with this, but it makes you think.


Oh God, don't do that! For the sake of sanity please don't do that!

I always thought the Geneva Convention applied whenever there was a war... If you want to call yourself guardian of liberty or land of the free or whatever, I think you have the responsibility to hold yourself to a higher standard than your enemies. Which means not inventing a new category called "enemy combatants" and saying it's not prisoners-of-war. If you're fighting a war, then let them be prisoners of war.
it's more of a "military action" than a war (since ppl have pointed out that War hasn't been officially declared). And as far as i've read, the term enemy combatant has been around a while... But enough of that, the Geneva Convention and POW/enemy combatant thing has been argued to death. this thread is about ex-prisoners of guantanamo getting out and being captured/killed in Iraq.
And if they're terrorists, try them for their crimes - obviously, after interrogation.
it will happen. It takes a long time to get a case up. The ones they've found innocent or no longer able to "harm" the US have been released.
But not torture, and not holding them for three years (I'm pretty sure you've got all the necessary information by now)
How can you say they have all the necessary info they want? They may not. Torture is in the eye of the beholder. What they're doing some consider torture, and some do not. Me? I'm in the do not crowd.
and not holding juveniles (there is one person who has been in Guantanamo for three years, and he's still not eighteen...) what's wrong with holding a juvenile? It's legal for states to hold people under age that they expect have commited a crime (did that sentece come out right?)

And as for not targetting innocent citizens for death... I've heard that the US Army has deliberately targetted journalists in Iraq. For example, Giuliana Sgrena and Nicola Calipari... Not proven, I know, but somewhat suspicious...
speculation. It's much easier to believe a nasty rumor than an boring truth. I "heard" that Giuliana and Nicola ran blockade points. It was a lack of communication that resulted in this tragic accident.

The difference is pride, accpetance, and tolerance for the events. We set up cost-free therapy sessions for everyone affected by Columbine, we tried and executed McVeigh, the world Christian church, not the US, should take responsibility for the "forced conversions", hetero and homo sexuals die all around the world, and its naive to think that the high command did know about Ghraib. You insult every serviceman and women when you start thinking like that.

Why is it naive to think they knew about Abu Ghraib? A lot of what went on their is official government policy. And even if they didn't, they should have. It's a commander's duty to know what goes on in his or her command.

@Mirchaz: Not unlawful? Under the Kellogg-Briand Pact of 1928, war is unlawful... The legality of the war in Iraq is still doubtful, and will be until some crazy lawyer brings it to trial. And if it isn't legal, all actions stemming from it are also illegal...

The point is if u mess with the USA you are gonna pay we do torture people masood but how else are we supposed to get info and torture is never good but they will do it to us to get info from us so we just giving them there own medicine

also masood who do you think you are? you are always bitching about stuff i have read all of your posts man you always whining about america dude are you american? if you are move to france if you arent keep whining i dont care anyways

Why is it naive to think they knew about Abu Ghraib? A lot of what went on their is official government policy. And even if they didn't, they should have. It's a commander's duty to know what goes on in his or her command.

@Mirchaz: Not unlawful? Under the Kellogg-Briand Pact of 1928, war is unlawful... The legality of the war in Iraq is still doubtful, and will be until some crazy lawyer brings it to trial. And if it isn't legal, all actions stemming from it are also illegal...

The Kellogg-Briand Pact is no longer in effect, having been replaced by provisions of the UN Charter.

However, even though the US signed the UN Charter, and it is in essence a ratified international treaty, such treaties under Constitutional law are subordinate to the US Constitution. As long as the Congress delegated its authority to the President under Constitutional means (which it did), then the law is completely legal under US domestic and Constitutional law - regardless of the treaties signed to the contrary.

More interviews and more journalists have been to Guantanamo than to any military place of confinement in history.

It's hardly dark and secret.if its not a dark and secret gulag...tell me how many women and how many children are prisoners at guantamo.

The Kellogg-Briand Pact is no longer in effect, having been replaced by provisions of the UN Charter.

However, even though the US signed the UN Charter, and it is in essence a ratified international treaty, such treaties under Constitutional law are subordinate to the US Constitution. As long as the Congress delegated its authority to the President under Constitutional means (which it did), then the law is completely legal under US domestic and Constitutional law - regardless of the treaties signed to the contrary.

Thank you Legs. and now for the other part of Kalmykhia's statement: The legality of the war in Iraq is still doubtful, and will be until some crazy lawyer brings it to trial. And if it isn't legal, all actions stemming from it are also illegal...
It's not a war as some have already said. There was no official declaration. Also, other people (I wanna say WL and Corneliu) have stated that it's a continuation of the first Gulf War due to Iraq not following UN resolutions, and if this is the case, it's not an illegal war because the 1st one wasn't illegal.

if its not a dark and secret gulag...tell me how many women and how many children are prisoners at guantamo.

Perhaps you should ask the ICRC. They have a permanent presence there.

I'm sure you can look up their phone number and call them.

if its not a dark and secret gulag...tell me how many women and how many children are prisoners at guantamo.

Do you also want to know how many prisoners are kept at the federal prison in Huntsville, Tx? (it is federal isn't it?)

It may be a little more difficult to get the numbers for g'tmo, but i think a request for info under the Freedom of Information Act (i think that's what it's called) should get you those details.

it will happen. It takes a long time to get a case up. The ones they've found innocent or no longer able to "harm" the US have been released.
Why not indict them and put them in jail, like you do with normal criminals? Like every other democracy does with terrorists?

How can you say they have all the necessary info they want? They may not. Torture is in the eye of the beholder. What they're doing some consider torture, and some do not. Me? I'm in the do not crowd.
What's wrong with holding a juvenile? It's legal for states to hold people under age that they expect have commited a crime (did that sentece come out right?)
I got what you meant anyways... switch underage and people and it makes much more sense. Yes, it's legal for states to hold underage people that they expect have commited a crime. And, of course, they follow the rules of law - habeas corpus, etc... However, the guy was fourteen when he was captured? What the hell use do you expect him to be? I hardly think that Osama is going to have trusted him with the details of Operation Attack America Again, do you?
And, if they haven't gotten all the information out of them in three years, what the hell have they been doing with the regular eight hour interrogation sessions, and the sensory deprivation, and everything? Everyone cracks, usually after a month or so of 'torture' (as in sensory deprivation and the like, not physical torture, which is worse than useless...). And we know they've cracked - we've heard it on the news...

speculation. It's much easier to believe a nasty rumor than an boring truth. I "heard" that Giuliana and Nicola ran blockade points. It was a lack of communication that resulted in this tragic accident.
Speculation, yes. But that doesn't make it untrue. I heard that the car was shot from the side (strange for a car APPROACHING a checkpoint, no?), and that they'd passed through many other checkpoints before...

Its times like these that I am willing to propose my "Ticket Bill" to the Congress. It curtails that the US will pay for a 1 way ticket to anywhere in the world, as long as you agree you will never return to this country. Ill tell you right now no one would do it. So many people, like Masoon, are so fed blinded by their anti-American hate speech, but if you put them in Saddam Iraq, they would be beggin' to come back. I encourage you all to go to MichaelSavage . Com , I think thats the adress, and browse around (some is extremely graphic material). It is important that people like Masoon, who has probably never seen anything anti-Terrorist or anti-Saddam Iraq to know the enemy, because until they do, they will stay under the veil of blind anti-American ideals.

Hmm. I hear that if you won't talk, they tie you to a chair, and then women that look like this sit on your lap and rub themselves on you.
http://www.redstararms.com/arnewrsa1.JPG

The only thing about Guantanamo that surprises me is the absence of that much-feared trials in military tribunals. I suppose that there is enough evidence of guilt in some cases, but the US hasn't put anyone from Guantanamo on trial.

It's not a war as some have already said.its not a war? someone should tell that to CNN/BBC/FOX/ABC/NBC/CBS...because they call it "Iraq War"...

and someone should tell that to the Chimp...cos thats how he calls it too.

I think it's funny when people view America as the problem, rather than the solution.

Hmm. I hear that if you won't talk, they tie you to a chair, and then women that look like this sit on your lap and rub themselves on you.
http://www.redstararms.com/arnewrsa1.JPG

Which isn't torture at all. I pay for that kind of thing. ;)

The only thing about Guantanamo that surprises me is the absence of that much-feared trials in military tribunals. I suppose that there is enough evidence of guilt in some cases, but the US hasn't put anyone from Guantanamo on trial.

They've been holding tribunals, but only to determine the identity of the individual, and the degree of their involvement with al-Q.

You'll notice that more than 200 have been released through this process.

Why not indict them and put them in jail, like you do with normal criminals? Like every other democracy does with terrorists?
because they aren't normal prisoners. However, i don't disagree with the indictments. I think they should either try them or free them.

I got what you meant anyways... switch underage and people and it makes much more sense. Yes, it's legal for states to hold underage people that they expect have commited a crime. And, of course, they follow the rules of law - habeas corpus, etc... However, the guy was fourteen when he was captured? What the hell use do you expect him to be? I hardly think that Osama is going to have trusted him with the details of Operation Attack America Again, do you?
no, i don't expect him to know Osama's next big plan. But being an enemy combatant at such a young age, it must be hard to convince him that he shouldn't rejoin his "brothers" in the fight against the US. I admit that what i said is speculation on why they're holding him, but there must be a reason.
And, if they haven't gotten all the information out of them in three years, what the hell have they been doing with the regular eight hour interrogation sessions, and the sensory deprivation, and everything? Everyone cracks, usually after a month or so of 'torture' (as in sensory deprivation and the like, not physical torture, which is worse than useless...). And we know they've cracked - we've heard it on the news...
has everyone cracked? It takes a long time to interrogate everyone. And aren't more people joining the ranks as prisoner at Guantanamo? A shortage of interrogators/interpreters could be the reason behind this. Again, it's speculation and i don't know.

Speculation, yes. But that doesn't make it untrue. I heard that the car was shot from the side (strange for a car APPROACHING a checkpoint, no?), and that they'd passed through many other checkpoints before...
true, it doesn't make it untrue, but it also doesn't make it true. I'd rather type something that is true (or what i believe to be true) rather than spread an untruth of this nature.

its not a war? someone should tell that to CNN/BBC/FOX/ABC/NBC/CBS...because they call it "Iraq War"...

and someone should tell that to the Chimp...cos thats how he calls it too.


Was Afghanistan a war?
Was the first Gulf War a war?
Was Vietnam a war?

No, they weren't.

None of the cool kids declare war anymore, haven't done so for 60 years.

Thank you Legs. and now for the other part of Kalmykhia's statement: The legality of the war in Iraq is still doubtful, and will be until some crazy lawyer brings it to trial. And if it isn't legal, all actions stemming from it are also illegal...
It's not a war as some have already said. There was no official declaration. Also, other people (I wanna say WL and Corneliu) have stated that it's a continuation of the first Gulf War due to Iraq not following UN resolutions, and if this is the case, it's not an illegal war because the 1st one wasn't illegal.

So its ok to attack and take over a country and install a puppet regime ?
This is state sanctioned terrorism.

its not a war? someone should tell that to CNN/BBC/FOX/ABC/NBC/CBS...because they call it "Iraq War"...

and someone should tell that to the Chimp...cos thats how he calls it too.
Why do they call it WMD? because it's easier to call it that rather than weapons of mass destruction.

It's easier to call it a war rather than say "military action" every time. Plus, if it's a continuation of the 1st gulf war, then it technically is a war ;) So i think both those answers cover my bases.

and WL, those are some fine wimmins, where'd you get the pic? :P

The Kellogg-Briand Pact is no longer in effect, having been replaced by provisions of the UN Charter.

However, even though the US signed the UN Charter, and it is in essence a ratified international treaty, such treaties under Constitutional law are subordinate to the US Constitution. As long as the Congress delegated its authority to the President under Constitutional means (which it did), then the law is completely legal under US domestic and Constitutional law - regardless of the treaties signed to the contrary.

Article VI, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

The semi-colon in there makes things confusing, but as far as I can tell, treaties are not subordinate to, and may even be superior to, the US Constitution.

I didn't know that about the Kellogg-Briand Pact, thanks. But if it's been superseded by the UN Charter, its basic rules must apply, yes? In that all war is illegal unless mandated by the UN?

Thank you Legs. and now for the other part of Kalmykhia's statement: The legality of the war in Iraq is still doubtful, and will be until some crazy lawyer brings it to trial. And if it isn't legal, all actions stemming from it are also illegal...
It's not a war as some have already said. There was no official declaration. Also, other people (I wanna say WL and Corneliu) have stated that it's a continuation of the first Gulf War due to Iraq not following UN resolutions, and if this is the case, it's not an illegal war because the 1st one wasn't illegal.
There was no declaration of war in the Vietnam War either... I believe that if you attack another state, you start a war... Not being an international lawyer, and it being such a fuzzy subject, I can't say for sure - I would welcome any helpful sources.

So its ok to attack and take over a country and install a puppet regime ?
This is state sanctioned terrorism.

As long as you win, and as long as no country can beat you in a war and make you stop, it's ok.

Winners make the rules. There is no substitute for victory.

Arab nations have been kicked on the battlefield fairly consistently since the early 20th Century.

Perhaps you should ask the ICRC. They have a permanent presence there.

I'm sure you can look up their phone number and call them.I called this number 1(202)293 94 30

she said that they do not know how many women and children are prisoners at gitmo, and that they do not know how to get the information...

do you have any other suggestions?

They've been holding tribunals, but only to determine the identity of the individual, and the degree of their involvement with al-Q.

You'll notice that more than 200 have been released through this process.
Yes... but no one there has been convicted of anything yet.

Yes, they were... but no one there has been convicted of anything yet.

That's because it's not a criminal matter. They were detained by military forces in battle, not by the police.

If you're detained by the police, you get the right to a trial, etc.

If you're captured in wartime as a combatant, they have an obligation to determine whether or not you are one of the enemy.

Captured enemy may be held for the duration of the conflict.

It might make things easier just to make everyone happy and call them prisoners of war (officially). You can keep POWs until the other side surrenders. Which will NEVER happen.

Do you also want to know how many prisoners are kept at the federal prison in Huntsville, Tx? (it is federal isn't it?)no, my question was "how many Women and Children are prisoners at Gitmo".

but if you do have the total number of prisoners...then spell it out... I cant wait

I called this number 1(202)293 94 30

she said that they do not know how many women and children are prisoners at gitmo, and that they do not know how to get the information...

do you have any other suggestions?

I suggest that they are lying to you. Why, I don't know.

They said on NPR that the ICRC knows each and every one of the detainees at Guantanamo.

I suggest that they are lying to you. Why, I don't know.

They said on NPR that the ICRC knows each and every one of the detainees at Guantanamo.
do you trust the NPR?

As long as you win, and as long as no country can beat you in a war and make you stop, it's ok.

Winners make the rules. There is no substitute for victory.

Arab nations have been kicked on the battlefield fairly consistently since the early 20th Century.


Good then don't think yourselves morally superior for doing so.
America is just as corrupt, just as evil, just as arrogant as any other empire
that has existed.

They are no better or no worse, they just happen to be the strongest at the current time.

Yes... but no one there has been convicted of anything yet.


The "20th Hijacker" (please don't make me attempt to spell his name) has been trying to confess for how long now? Yet, we still don't want to kill a man if we arn't convinced 100% that he is in a clear state of mind. Convictions take a LONG TIME for terrorists and Americans alike. Also as others have said, more are comming in and who knows how much staff they have available. Things take time!

do you trust the NPR?

Yes, in fact it's unusual for a conservative like me to trust them.

The ICRC representative they interviewed said it himself. They've seen each of the detainees many times. They have people all over the camp at all times. They have been there since the camp opened.

Still think they missed something? Well, the ICRC has only leaked information about the camp once - because they don't want to get into politics - but they did claim that some detainees have been mistreated.

I'm sure that if children were there, the ICRC would have said something.

If you're captured in wartime as a combatant, they have an obligation to determine whether or not you are one of the enemy.

Captured enemy may be held for the duration of the conflict.

It might make things easier just to make everyone happy and call them prisoners of war (officially). You can keep POWs until the other side surrenders. Which will NEVER happen.

Ah yes, the 'non' combatant theory. easy to make up new rules to suit yourself when the old ones don't fit you anymore :rolleyes:
The 'War on Terrorism' by definition is a war- ergo, those captured during it are prisoners of said 'war'- POWs not 'non combatants'.

Its an idiotic abuse of the language to get away with unlawful detention- i hope those that are released sue the ass off of the US military or State itself (it would be interesting to see which side the US courts would come down on actually)

I think removing a cruel dictator who used biological weapons (hear that UN supporters, your buddy in Iraq did break some rules... oops!) in a genocidal effort to eliminate and purge by force an entire culture to the brink of elimination is grounds for removal. And I would hardly start to call a fully-functional democracy, one of TWO in the middle east, a puppet regime.

Article VI, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

The semi-colon in there makes things confusing, but as far as I can tell, treaties are not subordinate to, and may even be superior to, the US Constitution.

The Supreme Court has not adopted this point of view.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9060842&postcount=105

I didn't know that about the Kellogg-Briand Pact, thanks. But if it's been superseded by the UN Charter, its basic rules must apply, yes? In that all war is illegal unless mandated by the UN?
Basically, yes... and that is one of the reasons why the countries don't declare wars anymore.


There was no declaration of war in the Vietnam War either... I believe that if you attack another state, you start a war... Not being an international lawyer, and it being such a fuzzy subject, I can't say for sure - I would welcome any helpful sources.
When you attack another state, you, I suppose, commit a crime of aggression... but, as far as I know, 'crime of aggression' hasn't yet been defined in international legal instruments.

Good then don't think yourselves morally superior for doing so.
America is just as corrupt, just as evil, just as arrogant as any other empire
that has existed.

They are no better or no worse, they just happen to be the strongest at the current time.


That...just doesn't...make sense! :confused:

You are one confused child, one very, very, confused child.

I mean, by that rational, America could commit a global holocoust and we would be "no better and no worse" than say Alexander the Great. On the flip side we could take all those starving children in Brazil instead of buying a cup of coffee every day and give them a full life and we would still be just like Eygpt with Isralie slaves!

So basically if you happen to make yourself a strong country, you are automatically an evil empire.

Ah yes, the 'non' combatant theory. easy to make up new rules to suit yourself when the old ones don't fit you anymore :rolleyes:
The 'War on Terrorism' by definition is a war- ergo, those captured during it are prisoners of said 'war'- POWs not 'non combatants'.

Its an idiotic abuse of the language to get away with unlawful detention- i hope those that are released sue the ass off of the US military or State itself (it would be interesting to see which side the US courts would come down on actually)

Actually, it's "enemy combatant" not "non combatant".

Technically, under the rules of the Hague Convention, these men captured under arms are violating the laws of war by waging war while not wearing uniforms. And, due to the fact that they are not fighting as representatives of one of the High Contracting Parties of the Geneva Convention, under Convention I, Article 2, they may be denied the protections of the Geneva Conventions.

Same as spies, saboteurs in civilian clothing, mercenaries. Technically, that means that you can refuse their surrender on the spot, and just shoot them.

The "20th Hijacker" (please don't make me attempt to spell his name) has been trying to confess for how long now? Yet, we still don't want to kill a man if we arn't convinced 100% that he is in a clear state of mind. Convictions take a LONG TIME for terrorists and Americans alike. Also as others have said, more are comming in and who knows how much staff they have available. Things take time!
Of course, the trials in a democratic country of ten take a lot of time... the Guantanamo guys should be happy that they are not on trial in Japan.

Moussaoui is on trial in a civilian federal court, though, not in a military commission.

Of course, the trials in a democratic country of ten take a lot of time... the Guantanamo guys should be happy that they are not on trial in Japan.

Moussaoui is on trial in a civilian federal court, though, not in a military commission.

He just changed his plea to guilty. They are right now reviewing whether he is of sound mind - if they think he's being crazy, he'll not be allowed to plead guilty.

No not really. The term empire can be equated with hegemon- whcih is what the US is at the moment. Roman Empire, Chinese, Mongol, Britiah yadda yadda yadda.... same status as US now really. Empire/Hegemonic power.

Yes, in fact it's unusual for a conservative like me to trust them.

The ICRC representative they interviewed said it himself. They've seen each of the detainees ...how can that "representative" say that the red cross has seen all POW s...if they dont know how the total nomber of POW...


let me give you a yellow book example:

The Pentagon...could give the red Cross reps. acces to seccion 1,2,3,4,5,6...never telling them that seccion Y,X,Z exist...

red cross rep: "is that all the POWs?"
Gitmo Colonel: "you've seen them all I swear" *crossing his fingers*

That...just doesn't...make sense! :confused:

You are one confused child, one very, very, confused child.

I mean, by that rational, America could commit a global holocoust and we would be "no better and no worse" than say Alexander the Great. On the flip side we could take all those starving children in Brazil instead of buying a cup of coffee every day and give them a full life and we would still be just like Eygpt with Isralie slaves!

So basically if you happen to make yourself a strong country, you are automatically an evil empire.

We may not be commiting a holocost, atleast at the current time, but we are killing people all over the world.

I doubt we are giving starving children in Brazil a full life, more like this country and its corporations are supporting sweat shops across the globe...

Just because you are a strong country, doesn't make you an evil empire, its yout actions that do.

Its the attitude that we are better then every one that seals the deal.
Why not hold ourselves to the same level of integrity that we want everyoen else to live up to.

Why is it that the US won't become a part of the world court? Because we want everyone to live at a higher standard, but dont' want to be held accountable for when we don't ourselves.

how can that "representative" say that the red cross has seen all POW s...if they dont know how the total nomber of POW...


let me give you a yellow book example:

The Pentagon...could give the red Cross reps. acces to seccion 1,2,3,4,5,6...never telling them that seccion Y,X,Z exist...

red cross rep: "is that all the POWs?"
Gitmo Colonel: "you've seen them all I swear" *crossing his fingers*


Guantanamo is a really, really small physical area, with a very small number of buildings. It's rather difficult to hide anyone there.

Now we run off with Ocean into grounds of that whole, "trust no-one. Every high ranking or just plain American official is out to get and torture every person in Gitmo. They will never tell you the truth. Do not trust them. Instead, let me tell you how it really is"

When are you going to stop shooting down every credible piece of evidence and end your little radical conspiracy theories?

Guantanamo is a really, really small physical area, with a very small number of buildings. It's rather difficult to hide anyone there.
you call 116 km2 small ??? :confused:

http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=19.997520,-75.142021&spn=0.163078,0.253372&t=k&hl=en

Now we run off with Ocean into grounds of that whole, "trust no-one. Every high ranking or just plain American official is out to get and torture every person in Gitmo. They will never tell you the truth. Do not trust them. Instead, let me tell you how it really is"

When are you going to stop shooting down every credible piece of evidence and end your little radical conspiracy theories?

No, you see, if Michael Moore says it, it must be true!

you call 116 km2 small ??? :confused:

The actual detention center is far, far smaller.

No, you see, if Michael Moore says it, it must be true!
Its because Rumsfield has no credability left. Frist there were WMD, then there weren't. First he didnt' sanction the use of torture, then all of a sudden interrogation techniques where changed. Heck this guy cant' even support his own troops when they complain that they dont' have the right equipment to get the job done.

He is the optimy of a hick. I woudln't be surprised if he has a confederate flag on his pickup truck

you call 116 km2 small ??? :confused:

I dont think they have to check the over 100 km2 of open plains for detanees, unless, who knows, maybe the guards have built a network of underground chambers and rooms and corridors where they hurridly rush around the prisoners around so they dont come in contact with the professional, already anti-Gitmo red cross reps. Please, give me a break.

The actual detention center is far, far smaller.

And do we know why Guantanmo was used anyhow instead of US soil. Another loophole Bush used so that the prisoners or combatants couldn't get legal representation since they werent' being held on US soil.

The actual detention center is far, far smaller.how would you know?

its a Gulag...you do not know how many women prisoners...you dont know how many children...you don know how big are the undergroung facilities..

Its because Rumsfield has no credability left. Frist there were WMD, then there weren't. First he didnt' sanction the use of torture, then all of a sudden interrogation techniques where changed. Heck this guy cant' even support his own troops when they complain that they dont' have the right equipment to get the job done.

He is the optimy of a hick. I woudln't be surprised if he has a confederate flag on his pickup truck

Saddams WoMD were hurridly moved into Syria during the time that the US was getting hell from the UN about going into Iraq and having proper cause for going in. Are you implying that his new interrigaion techniques involve torture, becuase if you are, you are dead wrong, and I have never heard anything about the troops not recieving anything less than the highest grade equipment. My two cousins are in Iraq, and an uncle, and they cherish their surperior equipment.

I find it completely illogical to compare Guantanamo to a Gulag or concentration camp.

I've seen videos, of the camp, where the detainees are playing soccer. What the hell kind of Gulag allows their detainees to play soccer?

Its because Rumsfield has no credability left. Frist there were WMD, then there weren't. First he didnt' sanction the use of torture, then all of a sudden interrogation techniques where changed. Heck this guy cant' even support his own troops when they complain that they dont' have the right equipment to get the job done.

He is the optimy of a hick. I woudln't be surprised if he has a confederate flag on his pickup truck


*L* A hick? I dont know about the confederate flag, but I do know the stereotype of a hick generally includes the inability to spell correctly.

Does that make you a hick?

I find it completely illogical to compare Guantanamo to a Gulag or concentration camp.

I've seen videos, of the camp, where the detainees are playing soccer. What the hell kind of Gulag allows their detainees to play soccer?


Awww- come on. We all know that in concentration camps and gulags, those being held always had their special meals prepared. They were also always supplied with their religious books and allowed to use them. [sarcasm]

We may not be commiting a holocaust, at least at the current time, but we are killing people all over the world.
uh... i can't believe you just compared what the US is doing to the holocaust... over 6 million people were killed there. Please don't say the US has even come to that amount of people killed. The citizenry of the world would not allow another holocaust. You have a warped sense of America. And if you're american, i'm truly sorry.

I doubt we are giving starving children in Brazil a full life, more like this country and its corporations are supporting sweat shops across the globe... Starving children in Brazil? what about US's own starving children. This is one problem i have with the US, they like to throw money into other countries before they do theirs.

Just because you are a strong country, doesn't make you an evil empire, its your actions that do.

Its the attitude that we are better then every one that seals the deal.
Why not hold ourselves to the same level of integrity that we want everyone else to live up to.
So we're evil now because we think we're better than other countries? Other countries don't think they're better than us? If they do, does that make them evil?
Why is it that the US won't become a part of the world court? Because we want everyone to live at a higher standard, but dont' want to be held accountable for when we don't ourselves.
Answering your own question? I disagree with your answer however.

I've seen videos, of the camp, where the detainees are playing soccer. It does not mean there is no murder and torture.

In fact, Ocean, there's a complete hospital there (not part of the detention facility), a housing area for the families of those stationed there, barracks for single soldiers, a weather station, a training area for a marine security detachment, gee, Ocean, it's a complete military base - and on that military base is a very small cantonment that contains the prison.

The prison is not very large. In fact, half the inmates now live in air conditioned dorms with multiple people per room. It's only the hard cases who are living outdoors in the cages.

If you figure that over 1000 reporters have been given access to the whole base, and are far more inquisitive and far more likely to talk than an ICRC person, including people who have been present at some of the interrogations and military tribunals, you have to realize that there can't be too many secrets there.

It does not mean there is no murder and torture.
so there's murder at guantanamo now?

masood you are just an idiot okay be quiet everyone tortures people even america and i dont really care considering they cut peoples heads off and put the videos on the internet i think forget holding them lets just dump them on antarctica with no supplies

It does not mean there is no murder and torture.


And it doesnt mean there is.

And where did these people come from? Were they living in Disney world when they were rounded up?
No-they were living in a place far more barren and hostile than they are in now. Guantanamo has probably increased their life expectancy and improved their health-even a "gulag" is better than what they are used to.
And when they are released back into the wild, how do their compatriots treat them? Any that were released likely had their heads chopped off by their buddies as they have to assume they told us everything.

And it doesnt mean there is.

And where did these people come from? Were they living in Disney world when they were rounded up?
No-they were living in a place far more barren and hostile than they are in now. Guantanamo has probably increased their life expectancy and improved their health-even a "gulag" is better than what they are used to.
And when they are released back into the wild, how do their compatriots treat them? Any that were released likely had their heads chopped off by their buddies as they have to assume they told us everything.


More hostile than Disney World!?? Are you mad, man!! :eek:

And it doesnt mean there is.

And where did these people come from? .some are POWs
some are kiddnaped from differnt places on earth...

how many? i dont know
from where? i dont know

...do you?

More hostile than Disney World!?? Are you mad, man!! :eek:


You havent ridden "Its a Small World" recently, have you? That music is torture.

some are POWs
some are kiddnaped from differnt places on earth...

how many? i dont know
from where? i dont know

...do you?


I dont know either. I dont have any authority in the situation. Are you some sort of authority? Do they owe you answers and proof?

Kidnapped? Yeah-they were just students at prayer and we rounded them up for a little practice, right?
I guess they were just in the wrong place at the wrong time, right? Thats what you'll believe? Why does it make you feel better to believe that?

It does not mean there is no murder and torture.


There IS murder now too? I didnt hear this yet!! I dont even think Al Franken is stupid enough to start this speculation.

There IS murder now too? I didnt hear this yet!! I dont even think Al Franken is stupid enough to start this speculation.

Oh, you didn't hear? They breed the terrorists and Bush and Rumsfield sit down every night and eat the babies. You naive fool!

Oh, you didn't hear? They breed the terrorists and Bush and Rumsfield sit down every night and eat the babies. You naive fool!


Oh! The Humanity!!!

These people are what you would classically call "Barbarians," they are conditioned to be brutal, morally bankrupt, and desperately ignorant but somehow people are surprised when they resist being broken of that. These people are programmed like machines to hate and kill, they are told explicitly to claim torture if captured, their entire life is devoted to an ideal that any nation that could claim to be civilized would abhor, but still these scum get SYMPATHY?!?

Bah!

When did this become a descution about Americans?

And do we know why Guantanmo was used anyhow instead of US soil. Another loophole Bush used so that the prisoners or combatants couldn't get legal representation since they werent' being held on US soil.


I like it fine holding these people at Guantanamo. We dont need any more of them on the mainland US. Guantanamo is the perfect place for them. Their buddies cant get to them there either.

In fact, Ocean, there's a complete hospital there (not part of the detention facility), a housing area for the families of those stationed there, barracks for single soldiers, a weather station, a training area for a marine security detachment, gee, Ocean, it's a complete military base - and on that military base is a very small cantonment that contains the prison.

The prison is not very large. In fact, half the inmates now live in air conditioned dorms with multiple people per room. It's only the hard cases who are living outdoors in the cages.

If you figure that over 1000 reporters have been given access to the whole base, and are far more inquisitive and far more likely to talk than an ICRC person, including people who have been present at some of the interrogations and military tribunals, you have to realize that there can't be too many secrets there.has any of those 1000 reporters ever reported how many women prisoners? or how many children prisoners?

and if you do have their phone numbers...yes, I would call them again.

has any of those 1000 reporters ever reported how many women prisoners? or how many children prisoners?

and if you do have their phone numbers...yes, I would call them again.

IMO, if there were women or children prisoners, we would have definetely heard about it by now.

IMO, if there were women or children prisoners, we would have definetely heard about it by now.why?...because WL says that 1000 reporters have seen all and every single prisoner at Gitmo???

do you actually believe everything WL says?

why?...because WL says that 1000 reporters have seen all and every single prisoner at Gitmo???

do you actually believe everything WL says?

Not everything. But that's much more than I can say of you.

That's not why I believe that, though. The media would have reported it and blown it out of proportion, as usual, if there were in fact women and children.

Not everything. But that's much more than I can say of you.

That's not why I believe that, though. The media would have reported it and blown it out of proportion, as usual, if there were in fact women and children.the media knows almost nothing about the POWs.

"1000 reporters at Gitmo"...yet
the Gitmo inbed-ed reporters do not know their numbers.
the Gitmo inbed-ed reporters do not know their ages.
the Gitmo inbed-ed reporters do not know their gender.
the Gitmo inbed-ed reporters do not know their names.

all what the media knows...is whatever the Gov allow them to know...
all what the media knows...is whatever the Gov wants them to know...

sounds like the Iraq War In-bed-ed reporters...doesnt it?

the media knows almost nothing about the POWs.

"1000 reporters at Gitmo"...yet
the Gitmo inbed-ed reporters do not know their numbers.
the Gitmo inbed-ed reporters do not know their ages.
the Gitmo inbed-ed reporters do not know their gender.
the Gitmo inbed-ed reporters do not know their names.

all what the media knows...is whatever the Gov allow them to know...
all what the media knows...is whatever the Gov wants them to know...

sounds like the Iraq War In-bed-ed reporters...doesnt it?

http://www.adamzyglis.com/images/cartoon2.jpg

the media knows almost nothing about the POWs.

"1000 reporters at Gitmo"...yet
the Gitmo inbed-ed reporters do not know their numbers.
the Gitmo inbed-ed reporters do not know their ages.
the Gitmo inbed-ed reporters do not know their gender.
the Gitmo inbed-ed reporters do not know their names.

all what the media knows...is whatever the Gov allow them to know...
all what the media knows...is whatever the Gov wants them to know...

sounds like the Iraq War In-bed-ed reporters...doesnt it?

They know almost nothing, but yet somehow stories of abuse leaked out. :rolleyes:

They know almost nothing, but yet somehow stories of abuse leaked out. :rolleyes:
not from the "1000" Gitmo in-bed-ed reporters...all you got from the in-beds is a few shots of guys in orange prison uniforms.

one thing this thread has shown is that america is very divided at present. thats not a good thing.

in relation to countries invading other countries - yes britain for example, has done that in the past and what do they have? they have northern ireland eating billions of sterling for the past 90 years. No matter if the Iraq war is right or wrong - America now has a financial millstone around its neck and it'll have it for centuries, as realistically, it will not win the fight (going by the current state of affairs).

Take that whatever way you wish, I'm just stating what i think.