their biggest crime is trying to defend themselves against the country invading their country out of tens of thousands, less than 500 remain. these are not mere villagers who only took up arms so their women won't be raped and their livestock won't be pillaged. these are organized terrorists. To them, WE ARE the terrorists. yes. just listen to Chomsky - the US government are the real terrorists! state terror, right? and 9/11 victims are little Eichmanns
I have nothing to add at this point. Baron Max and otheadp have made all the arguments I was going to make. I'll shut up now. (Sorry about the butter churning misunderstanding, Max.)
Again, I want to reiterate that they are "terrorizing" another countries armed forces who are invading their country. At the risk of sounding like a TV democrat, to them, they are freedom fighters, not terrorists.
I've not posted in a while. After the election, my interest in political debate decreased. It's good to see BHS, othead, and Baron Max have been keeping you leftists in line.
PING! Sarcasm detected! Hmm...something else on the scanner... G to da O Pizzle... "chaste"ned... MADanthON(N)ywAyne... analyzing...
The computer's telling me The Material Girl is going to join the Republicans. Damn thing must be on the fritz again.
"If genocide is being committed and refugees are asking for NATO aid, and all we've gotta' do is drop some ordinance, sure, why not? All the better if our leaders are straight up about the whole thing, too.?" You mean like how we stopped the Rwanda genocide?? ohhhhh thats right we didnt. Dont step in with this nonsense. The U.S. will only step in and solve conflicts that it has an interest in. You CANNOT use Kosevo as an example of how to win a conflict. We dropped a couple of bombs on an already war torn country with no military power to speak of. If you think we could do the same to a REAL country ie N. Korea or China then you are a fool. That was nothing but a dream conflict for pansies who dont want to get their hands dirty. I guess we should just get rid of the Army, who needs it... "We are destroying their homes, bombing them, killing their citizens who, in their opinions, are just trying to protect themselves and their families from 'terrorists'. And yet, if we heard about these things being done to American soldiers, everyone would be totally up in arms about it." last time I checked the U.S. wasnt crusing around setting off car bombs in Market places. This is utter crap. And as far as these detainees: You talk about due process- Since when were they U.S. citizens? Why should they be given rights promised by the Constitution? They are NOT CITIZENS. Some of the People on here would have put Adolf in their house and guarded him because "he has rights!"
Detainees should at least be treated under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. You are right, they do not have the rights of American citizens, unless they are American citizens. For your information, several detainees have been American citizens.
I'm sorry, what do car bombs have in common with what the US is doing over there? The US is doing all of the abovementioned things, and yet just because it isn't a car bomb, it isn't terrorism?? The US is preaching to the world about how everyone should be a democracy and all people have rights so we are going to help the world by taking out dictators like Saddam, and then we turn around and don't give any rights to prisoners who HAVE NOT BEEN CONVICTED OF ANYTHING. You are bashing liberals for trying to give the same rights to people who the US says everyone should have. Just because they are not US citizens does not make them any less of a person. We say everyone should have rights and then we don't give those rights to people within our control? No, you are totally missing the point. Adolf did something wrong, we all know that, therefore, we know that he should have been put on trial for crimes against humanity. However, these prisoners in Gitmo have not been convicted of anything and we don't know if any of them have actually done anything wrong. You know how many of those prisoners have actually been tried? 4. So how do we know that the rest of them (Gitmo can hold 750 prisoners at a time) have done anything wrong. It is against the US constitution to punish someone for something that we don't know they have done, ex, terrorism against US. Innocent until proven guilty.
"Adolf did something wrong, we all know that" Ok. And what if you couldnt prove it?? Would you let him go? Or would you put him prison while you tried to find a way to do it? Would you give Adolf his Due Process?? And while some of them were citizines the VAST majority are not. Fine, give the one or two who are their due process. The rest can rot.
Fine, what would be your solution? You want us to continue to torture innocent people for crimes that they may or may not have commited or could commit in the future? Is that justice to you? JLocke
Your statement begs the question of whether torture is occuring to begin with, and for what reason it is occuring. I would suggest that pissing on a book and putting a wet towel over someone's head to get information aren't torture in the same way that cutting someone's fingers off for punishment are.
Also, the goal of keeping these people has nothing to do with justice, at least not directly. It has entirely to do with keeping them the fuck out of the insurgency.
And besides that, according to reports the "torture" you're referring to is no longer occuring, but was used to garner information back when these guys had relevant knowledge. They're just doing time now.
BHS, do you seriously believe that the only things they are doing are 'pissing on a book'? In that case why is the US stalling the UN inspectors at Gitmo (hmm, remember why we were mad at Saddam????)? Why are not only prisoners, but officers claiming that there was, in fact, torture going on? Why do they send psychiatrists there? It sure as hell isn't to help them...
Oh, so now that it's been found out and stopped, it's all good in the world? This isn't the first time we've been accused of torturing prisoners (Abu Ghraib), do you really think that if it is going on, then we shouldn't check out what else is happening at other prisons too?
So we should have the power to just pluck up people who don't agree (remember that it's not only Iraqis there) with our government and hold them in case they might possibly have the chance to do something against us? That's not the democratic way of doing things and I don't think that we should have that attitude and then chastise others for having it.
I'm afraid I seriously believe those things. The UN inspectors of which you speak are from the Commission on Human Rights. Not surprising, really, that a sham commission dominated by the world's worst perpetrators of torture should consistently accuse the world's freest countries of being the real bad guys. The Bush adminstration is still looking at their "credible" claims. (red herring alert - ) When will Cuba allow inspectors into it's jails? A Google search for news stories about inspectors going to Cuba only cofirms that Cuba doesn't allow such things to happen. Actually, it's not entirely a red herring, because Cuba was the commission member who first brought these charges to the commission. As for the officers confirming tales of torture, I'm afraid I missed that story and a cursory Google came up blank. Please provide a link. Do you seriously belief that everything the US does at Gitmo has some sort of evil ramifications? Why are the psychiatrists anything other than a positive indication of the degree of care that the US is providing for their prisoners?
