Poll

6 votes (30%)
2 votes (10%)
No votes (0%)
12 votes (60%)
No votes (0%)
No votes (0%)

20 members have voted

SFB
SFB
Joined: Dec 20, 2010
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 203
March 12th, 2011 at 9:07:12 AM permalink
P90:

I will start with this: If I was an Iraqi, or an Afgani, I would be shooting at the people who came to occupy my country.

Just like if the reverse was true, if they came here and started shooting, I would try and kill them.

And I have also worn the USAF uniform for 4 years as well.

Do not confuse the UCMJ, which is designed to protect US Military and their relationship with the US Military, and what the detainees at Gitmo are allowed.

Do not confuse the Geneva Convention, which I do feel applies in the case of these Detainees, with a right to a trial.

The GC says that they have to be treated reasonably well. And those at Gitmo, ARE being treated reasonably well. To the extent that they are being treated ALOT better than many others in this country, and many of their countrymen. However, they are locked up, and under constant supervision. Flushing a Koran, or making them eat some pork, is NOT cruel and unusual punishment. However, the torture that was employed, WAS NOT, in any way shape or form, consistent with the principles of the US that I live in.

At its height, I believe that Gitmo had about 700-800 detainees. Many of them were captured in the battlefields of Afganistan, and in hiding, and were known members, even before the 9/11 attacks, of Al-Quaida and other groups, hostile to the US. So, a number where just “pointed out” by others and whisked away, but many of those are gone, and have been for several years. The current population is down to the real hardcore cases.

What do you do with them? You recommend that they be tried, in trials that follow the UCMJ, which would never apply, or US Courts. Which have no jurisdiction in these matters. None at all. So you are left with Military Tribunals (Like the Nuremburg Trials) or some other quasi-judical proceedings. The detainees are allowed access to counsel, which are being paid for by you and me, at HUGE expense, who in turn state that they do not have access to evidence, witnesses or other exculpatory information, because that is ALL in Afganistan. And it’s pretty dangerous there. So, do we just release them to the Afganistan government?

No. Because we are still fighting the groups that these guys represent.

And how many who have been released from Gitmo have been rearrested in new battles in Afganistan? Quite a number. Not all of them. But a large number.

The fact of the matter is that these folks in many respects are BAD people. And they will/can attack again, if released. And that may mean attacking us, or even their own population, in order to regain the control that they lost.

SFB
dwm
dwm
Joined: Aug 9, 2010
  • Threads: 33
  • Posts: 220
March 12th, 2011 at 11:41:13 AM permalink
Obama, sad to say, did not grow into the job as many hoped. Can you imagine if Bush made all his blunders. Latest blunder was not even mentioning Japan in his Saturday radio talk, many worse like Obamacare, bowing to foreign leaders, and on we go..
soulhunt79
soulhunt79
Joined: Oct 8, 2010
  • Threads: 6
  • Posts: 207
March 12th, 2011 at 2:27:00 PM permalink
I believe he always wanted to. But I also believe that unless luck was on his side, there was no chance at it happening. Building a prison in some random state to house terrorists just doesn't sit well politically with anyone. :)


I assume all the negative things that came out of Gitmo made it possible for it to be an issue politicians could get behind. Which just pushed it to be more of story that it really was. I never really thought it needed to be closed, just the issues fixed.
rxwine
rxwine
Joined: Feb 28, 2010
  • Threads: 160
  • Posts: 9185
March 12th, 2011 at 5:14:49 PM permalink
If you don't feel sorry for Gitmo prisoners put them in some of worst prisons in America. The prisoners will make them welcome probably like they do child molesters.


Quote: dwm

Obama, sad to say, did not grow into the job as many hoped. Can you imagine if Bush made all his blunders.



Look if you're going to criticize Obama, call him a socialist, don't compare him to the man who really needed a 24 hour teleprompter, cue cards, a speech therapist, a historian, and a geography teacher.
Quasimodo? Does that name ring a bell?
dwm
dwm
Joined: Aug 9, 2010
  • Threads: 33
  • Posts: 220
March 12th, 2011 at 6:21:36 PM permalink
Rxwine: Have you heard Obama try to talk without HIS teleprompter?
Bush was a fighter jet pilot, two term governor of the second largest state, Obama a community organizer(whatever that is) and junior senator.
If the Press did the same number on Obama, you would be saying the same thing about him, no President has ever been treated with such kindness and overlooking all his flubs as the current President.
Remember Bush's inspiring speech right after 911 at Ground 0, can you imagine Obama doing that?
rxwine
rxwine
Joined: Feb 28, 2010
  • Threads: 160
  • Posts: 9185
March 12th, 2011 at 7:24:30 PM permalink
I was a Texas resident from 1978-2000. Bush was my former governor. I've been listening to him for a long time.
Quasimodo? Does that name ring a bell?
P90
P90
Joined: Jan 8, 2011
  • Threads: 12
  • Posts: 1703
March 12th, 2011 at 7:25:10 PM permalink
Quote: SFB

....


Good to see a somewhat considered opinion at last. I'll just reply to one point:

Quote: SFB

So, a number where just “pointed out” by others and whisked away, but many of those are gone, and have been for several years. The current population is down to the real hardcore cases. (...)
So you are left with Military Tribunals (Like the Nuremburg Trials) or some other quasi-judical proceedings.


We would like to think it is, but it isn't. The detainees were only through administrative reviews, which check if there is any evidence or potential evidence at all, but not the quality, reliability, implications and character of that evidence, or weighing it against exculpating evidence. Basically, people that got released are those against which there was no case at all. The rest of the prisoners are still awaiting trial, which may come or not come.

As to how the trials should be conducted, 3GC describes the requirements as "A regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples". The courts have interpreted this as tribunals conducted under the same rules as prescribed by UCMJ. It's not a civilian court, it allows for all the necessary adjustments, it won't be the first tribunal for war crimes ever. There is enough procedure developed and prescribed for just this task.

As to how to prevent them from taking up arms again, first of all, there are still a lot who only ever were civilians and who have never (voluntarily) been in Afghanistan or Iraq. As for the rest, those who have committed crimes or war crimes - which include terrorism, using human shields, etc - will get their sentences as pronounced by the court. Which can be death sentences or life imprisonment, not unlike now, but imposed judicially as sentences, not indefinite detainment without charge. Which don't have to be served in US prisons, they can just as well be kept in Guantanamo, but only those who actually are guilty.

Now as to the final group, combatants that have not committed war crimes, but are enemy combatants that would likely return to the fight if released. This is also simpler than it seems, because 3GC has 108 articles describing in detail the procedures for internment of prisoners of war. There is no new question to be answered, it's as simple as applying POW status and following the convention, as they have thought of this all when writing it.

In particular some articles state:
Quote: 3GC

Article 21
The Detaining Power may subject prisoners of war to internment. It may impose on them the obligation of not leaving, beyond certain limits, the camp where they are interned, or if the said camp is fenced in, of not going outside its perimeter. Subject to the provisions of the present Convention relative to penal and disciplinary sanctions, prisoners of war may not be held in close confinement except where necessary to safeguard their health and then only during the continuation of the circumstances which make such confinement necessary.
...
Article 22
Prisoners of war may be interned only in premises located on land and affording every guarantee of hygiene and healthfulness. Except in particular cases which are justified by the interest of the prisoners themselves, they shall not be interned in penitentiaries.


As can be seen, it isn't something that can not be implemented even in the current camps. The convention does not require that they be released.

It's not the camps themselves that are the problem, it's complete disregard for national and international laws in the treatment of prisoners, from torture to denial of the right to trial. There is no practical necessity for this disregard, and it appears to stem more from vengeful rather than pragmatic motivations, and as a result of this quest for indiscriminate revenge a lot of wrong people get under the wheels. All that needs to be done is for the government to stop trying to wiggle out and justify this disregard, and act in accordance with existing laws and customs of war instead.

In terms of what that will do to the bottom line, the cost of trials is nothing compared to over a trillion already dumped into the wars. Furthermore, this is something that gets people across the world outraged and further degrades America's already unfavorable international image, riling even more people up against US.
Resist ANFO Boston PRISM Stormfront IRA Freedom CIA Obama
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 219
  • Posts: 11220
March 12th, 2011 at 8:22:54 PM permalink
Quote: rxwine

Look if you're going to criticize Obama, call him a socialist, don't compare him to the man who really needed a 24 hour teleprompter, cue cards, a speech therapist, a historian, and a geography teacher.



You mean John Kerry?
Tolerance is the virtue of believing in nothing
Keyser
Keyser
Joined: Apr 16, 2010
  • Threads: 34
  • Posts: 1850
March 12th, 2011 at 10:05:13 PM permalink
Democrats are full of warm fuzzy ideas like closing Gitmo, but they are very short on experience, logic and accountability.
Wavy70
Wavy70
Joined: Nov 3, 2009
  • Threads: 15
  • Posts: 907
March 12th, 2011 at 10:25:14 PM permalink
Quote: dwm


Bush was a fighter jet pilot,
Remember Bush's inspiring speech right after 911 at Ground 0, can you imagine Obama doing that?



Oddly only Bush and an elderly general seem to be able to remember seeing him on base during his "Service". No one remembers his failed oil businesses or pathetic management of a MLB team.

I think the important part is not what was said after but how the intelligence about this was used before. I wonder if Obama would ignore the warnings like Bush did.

I also wonder if Obama would have had dinner with the Saudi Crown Prince, whose family sponsored the attack 2 days after and enjoy a cigar on the balcony while the Pentagon burned in the background?

Should Roosevelt have invited the Japanese Ambassador for snacks after 12/7?
I have a bewitched egg that I use to play VP with and I have net over 900k with it.

  • Jump to: