Guantanamo Bay

[CaneBrain 95]

I never implied or thought that. Guess what..they arent American citizens, and they arent POWs. Why should they have the same rights as either?

why shouldnt they? (not saying they should I want to hear your argument)

[strategy 4]

how many people are indicted for crimes and found innocent? Do you expect a 100% conviction rate just because (in spite of) they happen to be enemy combatants?

I'm saying it isn't some huge deal, people are sent to and released from gitmo. there's no shame, it's just a process... we're not holding a bunch of innocents for the hell of it. you might wanna reread for the sentiment of the post I quoted.

[copernicus 0]

why shouldnt they? (not saying they should I want to hear your argument)

and likewise, I never said they shouldn't.you know my philosophy of rights by now...they are determined by the society that the person happens to be within the jurisdiction of. Certainly if those outside the borders was to have Constitutional rights then the Constitution would have said so. Certainly if the Geneva Conventions had intended them to have the same rights as POWs they wouldnt have made the distinction. ergo they dont have the same rights as either of those potential jurisdictions.That leaves the military..their direct arbiter of the rules.

[copernicus 0]

I'm saying it isn't some huge deal, people are sent to and released from gitmo. there's no shame, it's just a process... we're not holding a bunch of innocents for the hell of it. you might wanna reread for the sentiment of the post I quoted.

I reread it and it still reads the same. Even if you didnt intend it, it can certainly be read as "if people were sent there that turned out to be innocent, they shouldnt have been sent there".

[strategy's_touch 0]

I reread it and it still reads the same. Even if you didnt intend it, it can certainly be read as "if people were sent there that turned out to be innocent, they shouldnt have been sent there".

def not my intention. I do not believe that at all.

[Jeepster80125 0]

from theagitatorJudge Orders Release of Five Gitmo DetaineesThursday, November 20th, 2008From the Washington Post:

For the first time, a federal judge today ordered the release of enemy combatants from the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, ruling that the government had provided insufficient evidence to continue their detentions. The decision came in the case of six Algerians who were detained in Bosnia after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks and have been held at the military prison in Cuba for nearly seven years. U.S. District Judge Richard J. Leon, a Bush appointee, ruled that five of the men must be released “forthwith” and ordered the government to engage in diplomatic efforts to find them new homes. In an unusual move, Leon also urged the government not to appeal his ruling, saying “seven years of waiting for our legal system to give them an answer” was long enough.

History won’t be kind to Bush’s handling of Gitmo.Even if the government doesn’t appeal, the problem will be finding a place to put all of the people wrongfully detained. Other countries don’t want them. And we can’t easily release them into the U.S., because even if they weren’t our enemies before they were detained and likely tortured, they sure as hell probably consider us an enemy now. And who could blame them?

[strategy 4]

History won’t be kind to Bush’s handling of Gitmo.Even if the government doesn’t appeal, the problem will be finding a place to put all of the people wrongfully detained. Other countries don’t want them. And we can’t easily release them into the U.S., because even if they weren’t our enemies before they were detained and likely tortured, they sure as hell probably consider us an enemy now. And who could blame them?

I'm curious, how do you feel about it?

[copernicus 0]

History won’t be kind to Bush’s handling of Gitmo.

When the released detainees kill a few American soldiers or commit terrorist acts, history will show Bush's handling was right on.

[Jeepster80125 0]

I'm curious, how do you feel about it?

Hmmm. It's a sticky situation. I believe that the detainees were brought to Gitmo for a reason. I agree with BG that those detainees don't have the same rights as American citizens. I'm not sure I've thought enough about what those rights should be, but they definitely don't deserve what some people want to give them.We're kind of screwed though, in that these detainees home countries don't want them, and they hate America. So where do we send them? I don't have an answer.I completely disagree with shutting down gitmo and releasing them.I guess I don't have a problem with how they're running things now. I mean, if there are court officers that feel that some of these people deserve to leave, I can trust their judgement. I don't think we should lock them up and throw away the key though. I don't have a good answer here.

When the released detainees kill a few American soldiers or commit terrorist acts, history will show Bush's handling was right on.

Agree.

[Balloon guy 158]

from theagitatorJudge Orders Release of Five Gitmo DetaineesThursday, November 20th, 2008From the Washington Post:History won’t be kind to Bush’s handling of Gitmo.Even if the government doesn’t appeal, the problem will be finding a place to put all of the people wrongfully detained. Other countries don’t want them. And we can’t easily release them into the U.S., because even if they weren’t our enemies before they were detained and likely tortured, they sure as hell probably consider us an enemy now. And who could blame them?

So the two that weren't released? Was that because they were bad? Levaing out so much details allows for speculation like these 5 guys were totally innocent guys walking down the street while Arab to they were making bombs but we can't prove they were planning on using them

[irishguy 14]

When the released detainees kill a few American soldiers or commit terrorist acts, history will show Bush's handling was right on.

That's like locking an innocent man up for murder, releasing him after years in jail, him coming out a different person then when he went in, he kills someone and then police, DA etc saying "see we knew he was a murderer."

[copernicus 0]

That's like locking an innocent man up for murder, releasing him after years in jail, him coming out a different person then when he went in, he kills someone and then police, DA etc saying "see we knew he was a murderer."

you are making the assumption that they were "innocent" to begin with. And I dont really believe people change into murderers/terrorists.

[Loismustdie 0]

That's like locking an innocent man up for murder, releasing him after years in jail, him coming out a different person then when he went in, he kills someone and then police, DA etc saying "see we knew he was a murderer."

Because people just morph into murders when they sleep over elsewhere. I guarantee if these guys hook up with a terrorist cell it will only be the nonsensical such as yourself that say,"Hey, our fault. We gave him a reason, our bad."

[vbnautilus 48]

you are making the assumption that they were "innocent" to begin with. And I dont really believe people change into murderers/terrorists.

And you're making the assumption they were guilty. There has to be a fair process in place to decide.

[copernicus 0]

And you're making the assumption they were guilty. There has to be a fair process in place to decide.

there was.

[vbnautilus 48]

there was.

at guantanamo? a FAIR process of justice?

[irishguy 14]

Because people just morph into murders when they sleep over elsewhere. I guarantee if these guys hook up with a terrorist cell it will only be the nonsensical such as yourself that say,"Hey, our fault. We gave him a reason, our bad."

Yep people are just born murderers there are no sociatel influences at all and being locked away for years is akin to a sleepover. Brilliant.

[vbnautilus 48]

When the released detainees kill a few American soldiers or commit terrorist acts, history will show Bush's handling was right on.

Because people just morph into murders when they sleep over elsewhere. I guarantee if these guys hook up with a terrorist cell it will only be the nonsensical such as yourself that say,"Hey, our fault. We gave him a reason, our bad."

So are we locking people up now because of what we think they are going to do in the future or because of what they are actually guilty of doing? I don't see how we can go the Minority Report route, however tempting it is with something like terrorism.

[solderz 0]

Lot of fascists speaking their mind here lately.

[Jeepster80125 0]

Lot of fascists speaking their mind here lately.

Thanks for adding to the thread.

[Nimue1995 1]

you are making the assumption that they were "innocent" to begin with. And I dont really believe people change into murderers/terrorists.

Yes they do. If you've ever studied serial murderers, there is believed to be some genetic component but for many that component is magnified when they're subject to abuse. And I do believe that some are definitely molded and made. In that, let's sayyou've got someone with that predispostion in a country that's not too crazy about the U.S. anyway and add false imprisonment and abuse on top of it. Can you honestly say that you're not creating a condition where a person that might have just continued to go on about their business with no terrorist intentions becoming what you accused them of being?That said, I really don't have a great solution for this problem. I know that it's wrong but am not able to come up with any different scenario to deal with it. Maybe we could just give the innocent ones that can't go back to their own country an island to live on. It's worked before for the English when they shipped their criminals to Australia.

[Loismustdie 0]

So are we locking people up now because of what we think they are going to do in the future or because of what they are actually guilty of doing? I don't see how we can go the Minority Report route, however tempting it is with something like terrorism.

No.... I was arguing that against the idea that these recent releases would be justified if they committed a terrorist act. Apparently if all 5 or whatever of these guys were caught hooking up with some terrorist cell in a week, it would not be proof that they are terrorist just proof that if you lock someone up long enough they have no choice but to do bad things, which is about par for the course for liberal thinking, but of course as far from the truth as can be.

[Jeepster80125 0]

Yes they do. If you've ever studied serial murderers, there is believed to be some genetic component but for many that component is magnified when they're subject to abuse. And I do believe that some are definitely molded and made. In that, let's sayyou've got someone with that predispostion in a country that's not too crazy about the U.S. anyway and add false imprisonment and abuse on top of it. Can you honestly say that you're not creating a condition where a person that might have just continued to go on about their business with no terrorist intentions becoming what you accused them of being?That said, I really don't have a great solution for this problem. I know that it's wrong but am not able to come up with any different scenario to deal with it. Maybe we could just give the innocent ones that can't go back to their own country an island to live on. It's worked before for the English when they shipped their criminals to Australia.

LOL

[irishguy 14]

No.... I was arguing that against the idea that these recent releases would be justified if they committed a terrorist act. Apparently if all 5 or whatever of these guys were caught hooking up with some terrorist cell in a week, it would not be proof that they are terrorist just proof that if you lock someone up long enough they have no choice but to do bad things, which is about par for the course for liberal thinking, but of course as far from the truth as can be.

Where did anyone say if these guys join up with a cell it's because they were locked up? The point was if they do something bad now you can't say with a hundred percent certainty that "see we were right to lock them away all along". It's really not that tough of a thought to follow along with but you'd rather twist things and insult than read and formulate a respectful response but hey being locked in gitmo is the same as a sleepover.

[Nimue1995 1]

Where did anyone say if these guys join up with a cell it's because they were locked up? The point was if they do something bad now you can't say with a hundred percent certainty that "see we were right to lock them away all along". It's really not that tough of a thought to follow along with but you'd rather twist things and insult than read and formulate a respectful response but hey being locked in gitmo is the same as a sleepover.

A sleepover with water sports.