Held without charges, the new american way.

[wiin]

Originally posted by: fitzov
Sadly we are becoming more totalitarian by the day.

Dude, you have no idea what you are saying. America is hardly totalitarian. Perhaps you would like to move to Iran, China or Cuba and experience totalitarian first hand?
I hear that eduacation is free in China and Cuba. My advice though is that you don't get caught stealing chewing gum(assuming they have it) or else you will lose your finger...if you 're lucky.

Have a wonderful day.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: wiin

Originally posted by: fitzov
Sadly we are becoming more totalitarian by the day.

Dude, you have no idea what you are saying. America is hardly totalitarian. Perhaps you would like to move to Iran, China or Cuba and experience totalitarian first hand?
I hear that eduacation is free in China and Cuba. My advice though is that you don't get caught stealing chewing gum(assuming they have it) or else you will lose your finger...if you 're lucky.

Have a wonderful day.

"more"

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Cyclo, this isn't a case of "John told me he saw you" this is a guy who was caught hanging out with the leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq.

So Johnny Soldier told you that that's what he saw. What's the difference? If I raid a meth lab and you're the mailman who happens to be standing on the doorstep at the time, should I take you in to custody and hold you for months without trial or even charges? If it's as open and shut as you suggest, why can't we just try him and get it over with? I'm not asking for him to be set free - only that he be given a fair trial. If we can't charge him with anything, then he should be let go.

 

[envy me]

"They hate us because we're free"

Ya right...

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: thraashman

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: palehorse74
here's a thought: what if he really IS a security threat? what if releasing the data really WOULD effect the security of our allied forces? What then?

Have any of you given those possibilities even a remote chance of being true, or do you automatically assume that he is a completely innocent bystander based on one newspaper article or two?

try playing devil's advocate and addressing my first two questions. After all, the military cught him with two known insurgents, including a leader of the Iraqi Al Qaeda. What's his excuse for that? "oh, im so sorry. I thought they were just trying to buy a cell phone..."

If that's the case, he should be charged and tried. Don't you agree?

once we're finished interrogating him and using him to the fullest possible extent possible in terms of intelligence value; then yes, perhaps the trial process could begin... maybe.. unless some other agency comes along and wishes to ask Achmed a few more months worth of questions about the type of cell phones used in his particular district to set off IED's, or perhaps just the building materials used in the average home in his village. Heck, maybe the guy is smart and it takes 6-12 months of interrogation just to break him! so be it. (Are you trying to give interrogators a time limit?)

once all the agencies are done using Muhammed for intel, then yes, you panzies can have him for a nice fair trial... however, he will not be allowed to hear any of the evidence against him because the sources and methods used to collect it will all be VERY critical classified info. thus, the trial will be all show... but hey, that will make you all happy, right?

JAG should determine when trials happen, NOT congress.

thankyou much.

It almost makes me cry to think that there's an American out there that thinks like you Palehorse. I'm serious. Your method of thinking is EXACTLY the same method of thinking as the people we're fighting against. You think because they're different, because they're not American, that we don't have to treat them like people. The Declaration of Independence for the United States of America states "All men are created equal". That idea is the ENTIRE basis for American society. Not all Americans are created equal, not all non Muslims are created equal, all men. And Americans have intelligently realized that by that it actually means ALL PEOPLE. The Constitution, while only applying to people with US citizenship, was drafted with the intent of treating everyone fairly. Just because we're not dealing with the problem domestically doesn't mean we should completely ignore the ideal. The big freaking argument that Bush is trying to stick to now for Iraq, since all others have proven null, is that we're trying to instill a stable, democratic government there. Well then why aren't we letting this man be treated like he was in a fair, democratic government if that's what we're trying to insill. Instead we're treating him like he was caught in 1950's Russia and he's in a Stalinist regime. If this man had been American and caught with the same people, we wouldn't have done this same thing. If this man had been European and caught with the same men, we wouldn't have done the same thing. The ONLY reason we're treating this man this way is his religion and the color of his skin.

It straight out sickens me that anyone, ANYONE thinks of as less of a person simply because they're not American. That's the problem. What we like to call "the Enemy" thinks the same way. They think that Allah is on their side and not ours and that makes us less human than they are, and thus expendable. They think less of human life than they do of this ideal. Well I keep seeing Americans like you who think nothing of human like that's not American, which is just as sick of an ideal. So I just have to say that you sicken me and it truly saddens me to know that a person like you exists. The reason we're in this situation is because they think exactly like you do.

actually, your reading comprehension skills need work. Never once did I say that we should treat them poorly, or in any way inhumane.

My only point was that the US Consititution does not apply to prisoners captured on a foreign battlefield. period.

Being Amercians, we will generally treat everyone MUCH better than they would treat us. Our ideals, morals, and general goodnatured attitudes will result in humane treatment. (with a few sociopathic exceptions that are NOT the norm). As a veteran member of the armed services, I have been trained in both the Law of War and the GC's. I know what I can and cant do to prisoners of any type, and you will never see me break those rules/laws.

However, you will also never see me reading an Iraqi insurgent his Miranda Rights either! All prisoners under my control will be treated in accordance with my training, and that training has always been humane. The prisoners wont be physically or psychologically abused. they will be given time to sleep, excercise, eat, pray, bathe, and use a restroom. The Red Cross will be given access to the prisoners. The prisoners will be allowed to write letters and receive them. All of their treatments shall be in accordance with the GC's and the Laws of War.

But giving the enemies on foreign soil the same rights as Joe Smith from Kentucky? A lawyer and a "speedy trial" that completely ruins our ability to interrogate them and gather as much intel as possible? I dont f'n think so...

 

[M00T]

Originally posted by: palehorse74
But giving the enemies on foreign soil the same rights as Joe Smith from Kentucky? A lawyer and a "speedy trial" that completely ruins our ability to interrogate them and gather as much intel as possible? I dont f'n think so...

It's a good thing you are an operational security expert. Give us some facts to back up that statement, or keep the opinions to yourself.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: M00T

Originally posted by: palehorse74
But giving the enemies on foreign soil the same rights as Joe Smith from Kentucky? A lawyer and a "speedy trial" that completely ruins our ability to interrogate them and gather as much intel as possible? I dont f'n think so...

It's a good thing you are an operational security expert. Give us some facts to back up that statement, or keep the opinions to yourself.

lol... back up what statement? that a lawyer would ruin our abilities to interrogate? or that some interrogations take more than a year, or more?

if you only knew...

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: M00T

Originally posted by: palehorse74
But giving the enemies on foreign soil the same rights as Joe Smith from Kentucky? A lawyer and a "speedy trial" that completely ruins our ability to interrogate them and gather as much intel as possible? I dont f'n think so...

It's a good thing you are an operational security expert. Give us some facts to back up that statement, or keep the opinions to yourself.

lol... back up what statement? that a lawyer would ruin our abilities to interrogate? or that some interrogations take more than a year, or more?

if you only knew...

I don't know, I can see M00T's point. Sure, you TALK like you're some sort of expert on intelligence and military matters, but my experience has been that an individual's actual expertise in the intelligence and military community is inversly proportional to how big of a smartass he is about it. Keep in mind that the people who really know their stuff in the intelligence community are not the type of people who can or would go blabbing about it on the internet to impress some strangers. I am not calling you a liar, I have no doubt that you have dealt with prisoners in a military environment (and all politics aside, I have no doubt you treated them fairly well, much better than they would have treated you had the situation been reversed), but that doesn't mean you know what you're talking about from a big picture or operational standpoint either.

Do lawyers IMPACT interrogations? Obviously, there isn't a lawyer on earth that doesn't make as much noise as possible at every opportunity. But I'm not really convinced a lawyer "ruins" the abilities of the interrogator to get information (they might have to use different tactics, however...) and I am not convinced that there isn't some sort of middle ground between full constitutional rights and waterboarding.

 

[WHAMPOM]

Originally posted by: palehorse74
here's a thought: what if he really IS a security threat? what if releasing the data really WOULD effect the security of our allied forces? What then?

Have any of you given those possibilities even a remote chance of being true, or do you automatically assume that he is a completely innocent bystander based on one newspaper article or two?

try playing devil's advocate and addressing my first two questions. After all, the military cught him with two known insurgents, including a leader of the Iraqi Al Qaeda. What's his excuse for that? "oh, im so sorry. I thought they were just trying to buy a cell phone..."

"!!LACKEY!!"

 

[fitzov]

Originally posted by: wiin

Originally posted by: fitzov
Sadly we are becoming more totalitarian by the day.

Dude, you have no idea what you are saying. America is hardly totalitarian. Perhaps you would like to move to Iran, China or Cuba and experience totalitarian first hand?
I hear that eduacation is free in China and Cuba. My advice though is that you don't get caught stealing chewing gum(assuming they have it) or else you will lose your finger...if you 're lucky.

Have a wonderful day.

being totalitarian is not an all or nothing scheme. "more totalitarian" means sacrificing more liberty for government power. the current excuse is to provide us with more security. My own belief is that better long-term thinking on our part (not setting-up Dictators and puppet regimes) does more than simply increasing the military budget on a short term level.

 

[WHAMPOM]

Originally posted by: wiin

Originally posted by: fitzov
Sadly we are becoming more totalitarian by the day.

Dude, you have no idea what you are saying. America is hardly totalitarian. Perhaps you would like to move to Iran, China or Cuba and experience totalitarian first hand?
I hear that eduacation is free in China and Cuba. My advice though is that you don't get caught stealing chewing gum(assuming they have it) or else you will lose your finger...if you 're lucky.

Have a wonderful day.

You say we should be happy to have half the rights and freedoms. we had yesterday? Happy to only lose a few at a time? Happy til the last one disappears? Happy that others have less then us, instead of being angry that others have less? Does the oppression that others suffer under make you feel like a better human being?

 

[imported_Tango]

Originally posted by: blackangst1
Unfortunetely people forget most, if not all, the people we are holding are not entitled to Geneva Convention law for various reasons. Many "anti Gitmo" and similar people conveniently play naive to this fact.

They still enjoy Human Rights as per the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html

Article 5.

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Article 6.

Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.

Article 7.

All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

Article 8.

Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.

Article 9.

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

Article 10.

Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

Article 11.

(1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.

(2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.

Also, about the Geveva convention... it does cover irregular armies:
rticle 4

A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:

1. Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.

2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions:

(a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;

(b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;

(c) That of carrying arms openly;

(d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

Civilians actually enjoy additional protection and rights than military personell, and most people detained at Guantanamo was not involved in any military operation. No matter how scared you are, or how much you hate terrorists, this should never lead a developed country to violations of basic human rights, otherwise it mean we already lost what we are supposed to be fighting for.

And even apart from these moral considerations, the current policies about prisoners' conditions have hurt the image and consensus of the US in the world big time. International consensus is a very precious asset, and one that is not cheap nor easy to buy back. It will have a price.

 

[jrenz]

Originally posted by: WHAMPOM

Originally posted by: wiin

Originally posted by: fitzov
Sadly we are becoming more totalitarian by the day.

Dude, you have no idea what you are saying. America is hardly totalitarian. Perhaps you would like to move to Iran, China or Cuba and experience totalitarian first hand?
I hear that eduacation is free in China and Cuba. My advice though is that you don't get caught stealing chewing gum(assuming they have it) or else you will lose your finger...if you 're lucky.

Have a wonderful day.

You say we should be happy to have half the rights and freedoms. we had yesterday? Happy to only lose a few at a time? Happy til the last one disappears? Happy that others have less then us, instead of being angry that others have less? Does the oppression that others suffer under make you feel like a better human being?

What rights and freedoms did you have yesterday that you don't have today?

 

[shadow9d9]

Originally posted by: jrenz

Originally posted by: WHAMPOM

Originally posted by: wiin

Originally posted by: fitzov
Sadly we are becoming more totalitarian by the day.

Dude, you have no idea what you are saying. America is hardly totalitarian. Perhaps you would like to move to Iran, China or Cuba and experience totalitarian first hand?
I hear that eduacation is free in China and Cuba. My advice though is that you don't get caught stealing chewing gum(assuming they have it) or else you will lose your finger...if you 're lucky.

Have a wonderful day.

You say we should be happy to have half the rights and freedoms. we had yesterday? Happy to only lose a few at a time? Happy til the last one disappears? Happy that others have less then us, instead of being angry that others have less? Does the oppression that others suffer under make you feel like a better human being?

What rights and freedoms did you have yesterday that you don't have today?

You need to ask? Have you been paying attention for the last 3 years? Go educate yourself before being foolish and uninformed on forums please. You waste our time repeating the same things over and over.

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: fitzov

Originally posted by: wiin

Originally posted by: fitzov
Sadly we are becoming more totalitarian by the day.

Dude, you have no idea what you are saying. America is hardly totalitarian. Perhaps you would like to move to Iran, China or Cuba and experience totalitarian first hand?
I hear that eduacation is free in China and Cuba. My advice though is that you don't get caught stealing chewing gum(assuming they have it) or else you will lose your finger...if you 're lucky.

Have a wonderful day.

being totalitarian is not an all or nothing scheme. "more totalitarian" means sacrificing more liberty for government power. the current excuse is to provide us with more security. My own belief is that better long-term thinking on our part (not setting-up Dictators and puppet regimes) does more than simply increasing the military budget on a short term level.

I think its quite funny that there are Republican Senators like Frist who want to clarify (read: expand) the interpretation of the 3rd Geneva Convention but at the same time do not want the clarifications made public because then the *gasp* terrorists would use the tactics against us.

 

[jrenz]

Originally posted by: shadow9d9

Originally posted by: jrenz

Originally posted by: WHAMPOM

Originally posted by: wiin

Originally posted by: fitzov
Sadly we are becoming more totalitarian by the day.

Dude, you have no idea what you are saying. America is hardly totalitarian. Perhaps you would like to move to Iran, China or Cuba and experience totalitarian first hand?
I hear that eduacation is free in China and Cuba. My advice though is that you don't get caught stealing chewing gum(assuming they have it) or else you will lose your finger...if you 're lucky.

Have a wonderful day.

You say we should be happy to have half the rights and freedoms. we had yesterday? Happy to only lose a few at a time? Happy til the last one disappears? Happy that others have less then us, instead of being angry that others have less? Does the oppression that others suffer under make you feel like a better human being?

What rights and freedoms did you have yesterday that you don't have today?

You need to ask? Have you been paying attention for the last 3 years? Go educate yourself before being foolish and uninformed on forums please. You waste our time repeating the same things over and over.

So you can't answer the question. I don't feel that I have lost any rights. It seems to me that the only people thinking that their rights are being stripped away are the ones who want so desperately to believe that.

And if reading my opinion is a waste of your time... well I guess that goes a long way in showing how arrogant and set in your mindset you are. Continue to live a life of self-induced bondage if that makes you happy... the rest of us will go lead successful lives in the real world.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: jrenz

Originally posted by: shadow9d9

Originally posted by: jrenz

Originally posted by: WHAMPOM

Originally posted by: wiin

Originally posted by: fitzov
Sadly we are becoming more totalitarian by the day.

Dude, you have no idea what you are saying. America is hardly totalitarian. Perhaps you would like to move to Iran, China or Cuba and experience totalitarian first hand?
I hear that eduacation is free in China and Cuba. My advice though is that you don't get caught stealing chewing gum(assuming they have it) or else you will lose your finger...if you 're lucky.

Have a wonderful day.

You say we should be happy to have half the rights and freedoms. we had yesterday? Happy to only lose a few at a time? Happy til the last one disappears? Happy that others have less then us, instead of being angry that others have less? Does the oppression that others suffer under make you feel like a better human being?

What rights and freedoms did you have yesterday that you don't have today?

You need to ask? Have you been paying attention for the last 3 years? Go educate yourself before being foolish and uninformed on forums please. You waste our time repeating the same things over and over.

So you can't answer the question. I don't feel that I have lost any rights. It seems to me that the only people thinking that their rights are being stripped away are the ones who want so desperately to believe that.

And if reading my opinion is a waste of your time... well I guess that goes a long way in showing how arrogant and set in your mindset you are. Continue to live a life of self-induced bondage if that makes you happy... the rest of us will go lead successful lives in the real world.

You can now be thrown in jail indefinitely without going to Court or even seeing a Lawyer.

 

[fitzov]

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: fitzov

Originally posted by: wiin

Originally posted by: fitzov
Sadly we are becoming more totalitarian by the day.

Dude, you have no idea what you are saying. America is hardly totalitarian. Perhaps you would like to move to Iran, China or Cuba and experience totalitarian first hand?
I hear that eduacation is free in China and Cuba. My advice though is that you don't get caught stealing chewing gum(assuming they have it) or else you will lose your finger...if you 're lucky.

Have a wonderful day.

being totalitarian is not an all or nothing scheme. "more totalitarian" means sacrificing more liberty for government power. the current excuse is to provide us with more security. My own belief is that better long-term thinking on our part (not setting-up Dictators and puppet regimes) does more than simply increasing the military budget on a short term level.

I think its quite funny that there are Republican Senators like Frist who want to clarify (read: expand) the interpretation of the 3rd Geneva Convention but at the same time do not want the clarifications made public because then the *gasp* terrorists would use the tactics against us.

Frist is the typical plastic man politician--I would not be surprised if he runs for president in 08, and is endorsed by the Christian right.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: palehorse74
actually, your reading comprehension skills need work. Never once did I say that we should treat them poorly, or in any way inhumane.

My only point was that the US Consititution does not apply to prisoners captured on a foreign battlefield. period.

Being Amercians, we will generally treat everyone MUCH better than they would treat us. Our ideals, morals, and general goodnatured attitudes will result in humane treatment. (with a few sociopathic exceptions that are NOT the norm). As a veteran member of the armed services, I have been trained in both the Law of War and the GC's. I know what I can and cant do to prisoners of any type, and you will never see me break those rules/laws.

However, you will also never see me reading an Iraqi insurgent his Miranda Rights either! All prisoners under my control will be treated in accordance with my training, and that training has always been humane. The prisoners wont be physically or psychologically abused. they will be given time to sleep, excercise, eat, pray, bathe, and use a restroom. The Red Cross will be given access to the prisoners. The prisoners will be allowed to write letters and receive them. All of their treatments shall be in accordance with the GC's and the Laws of War.

But giving the enemies on foreign soil the same rights as Joe Smith from Kentucky? A lawyer and a "speedy trial" that completely ruins our ability to interrogate them and gather as much intel as possible? I dont f'n think so...

So, your premise seems to be that the potential gain in intelligence outweighs any violation of fundamental rights of captives. I submit that the rights of any individual are worth more than any piece of intelligence. Why should you be given sway over me simply because I was born in Iraq and you think I have intelligence about something? I'm questioning whether these rules are truly just, not whether your interpretation of said rules is correct.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: palehorse74
actually, your reading comprehension skills need work. Never once did I say that we should treat them poorly, or in any way inhumane.

My only point was that the US Consititution does not apply to prisoners captured on a foreign battlefield. period.

Being Amercians, we will generally treat everyone MUCH better than they would treat us. Our ideals, morals, and general goodnatured attitudes will result in humane treatment. (with a few sociopathic exceptions that are NOT the norm). As a veteran member of the armed services, I have been trained in both the Law of War and the GC's. I know what I can and cant do to prisoners of any type, and you will never see me break those rules/laws.

However, you will also never see me reading an Iraqi insurgent his Miranda Rights either! All prisoners under my control will be treated in accordance with my training, and that training has always been humane. The prisoners wont be physically or psychologically abused. they will be given time to sleep, excercise, eat, pray, bathe, and use a restroom. The Red Cross will be given access to the prisoners. The prisoners will be allowed to write letters and receive them. All of their treatments shall be in accordance with the GC's and the Laws of War.

But giving the enemies on foreign soil the same rights as Joe Smith from Kentucky? A lawyer and a "speedy trial" that completely ruins our ability to interrogate them and gather as much intel as possible? I dont f'n think so...

So, your premise seems to be that the potential gain in intelligence outweighs any violation of fundamental rights of captives. I submit that the rights of any individual are worth more than any piece of intelligence. Why should you be given sway over me simply because I was born in Iraq and you think I have intelligence about something? I'm questioning whether these rules are truly just, not whether your interpretation of said rules is correct.

If you are looking for any kind of respect for ethics and justice, you are barking up the wrong tree. How exactly righties like palehorse74 don't die from an overdose of irony every time they haul out their noise about "fighting for freedom" I'll never understand.

 

[fitzov]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: palehorse74
actually, your reading comprehension skills need work. Never once did I say that we should treat them poorly, or in any way inhumane.

My only point was that the US Consititution does not apply to prisoners captured on a foreign battlefield. period.

Being Amercians, we will generally treat everyone MUCH better than they would treat us. Our ideals, morals, and general goodnatured attitudes will result in humane treatment. (with a few sociopathic exceptions that are NOT the norm). As a veteran member of the armed services, I have been trained in both the Law of War and the GC's. I know what I can and cant do to prisoners of any type, and you will never see me break those rules/laws.

However, you will also never see me reading an Iraqi insurgent his Miranda Rights either! All prisoners under my control will be treated in accordance with my training, and that training has always been humane. The prisoners wont be physically or psychologically abused. they will be given time to sleep, excercise, eat, pray, bathe, and use a restroom. The Red Cross will be given access to the prisoners. The prisoners will be allowed to write letters and receive them. All of their treatments shall be in accordance with the GC's and the Laws of War.

But giving the enemies on foreign soil the same rights as Joe Smith from Kentucky? A lawyer and a "speedy trial" that completely ruins our ability to interrogate them and gather as much intel as possible? I dont f'n think so...

So, your premise seems to be that the potential gain in intelligence outweighs any violation of fundamental rights of captives. I submit that the rights of any individual are worth more than any piece of intelligence. Why should you be given sway over me simply because I was born in Iraq and you think I have intelligence about something? I'm questioning whether these rules are truly just, not whether your interpretation of said rules is correct.

If you are looking for any kind of respect for ethics and justice, you are barking up the wrong tree. How exactly righties like palehorse74 don't die from an overdose of irony every time they haul out their noise about "fighting for freedom" I'll never understand.

Oh come on, sure you do. It's the freedom to live the life of luxury that we do at the expense of others.

 

[Termagant]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: jrenz

Originally posted by: shadow9d9

Originally posted by: jrenz

Originally posted by: WHAMPOM

Originally posted by: wiin

Originally posted by: fitzov
Sadly we are becoming more totalitarian by the day.

Dude, you have no idea what you are saying. America is hardly totalitarian. Perhaps you would like to move to Iran, China or Cuba and experience totalitarian first hand?
I hear that eduacation is free in China and Cuba. My advice though is that you don't get caught stealing chewing gum(assuming they have it) or else you will lose your finger...if you 're lucky.

Have a wonderful day.

You say we should be happy to have half the rights and freedoms. we had yesterday? Happy to only lose a few at a time? Happy til the last one disappears? Happy that others have less then us, instead of being angry that others have less? Does the oppression that others suffer under make you feel like a better human being?

What rights and freedoms did you have yesterday that you don't have today?

You need to ask? Have you been paying attention for the last 3 years? Go educate yourself before being foolish and uninformed on forums please. You waste our time repeating the same things over and over.

So you can't answer the question. I don't feel that I have lost any rights. It seems to me that the only people thinking that their rights are being stripped away are the ones who want so desperately to believe that.

And if reading my opinion is a waste of your time... well I guess that goes a long way in showing how arrogant and set in your mindset you are. Continue to live a life of self-induced bondage if that makes you happy... the rest of us will go lead successful lives in the real world.

You can now be thrown in jail indefinitely without going to Court or even seeing a Lawyer.

If you have done nothing wrong than you have nothing to fear. :laugh:

 

[shadow9d9]

Originally posted by: jrenz

Originally posted by: shadow9d9

Originally posted by: jrenz

Originally posted by: WHAMPOM

Originally posted by: wiin

Originally posted by: fitzov
Sadly we are becoming more totalitarian by the day.

Dude, you have no idea what you are saying. America is hardly totalitarian. Perhaps you would like to move to Iran, China or Cuba and experience totalitarian first hand?
I hear that eduacation is free in China and Cuba. My advice though is that you don't get caught stealing chewing gum(assuming they have it) or else you will lose your finger...if you 're lucky.

Have a wonderful day.

You say we should be happy to have half the rights and freedoms. we had yesterday? Happy to only lose a few at a time? Happy til the last one disappears? Happy that others have less then us, instead of being angry that others have less? Does the oppression that others suffer under make you feel like a better human being?

What rights and freedoms did you have yesterday that you don't have today?

You need to ask? Have you been paying attention for the last 3 years? Go educate yourself before being foolish and uninformed on forums please. You waste our time repeating the same things over and over.

So you can't answer the question. I don't feel that I have lost any rights. It seems to me that the only people thinking that their rights are being stripped away are the ones who want so desperately to believe that.

And if reading my opinion is a waste of your time... well I guess that goes a long way in showing how arrogant and set in your mindset you are. Continue to live a life of self-induced bondage if that makes you happy... the rest of us will go lead successful lives in the real world.

That is the problem... the ignorant american public doesn't "feel" like they are losing rights because it is being done slowly and deliberately. THe germans didn't feel like they were losing their rights until they were all gone... when will we learn from the past? We keep repeating it.

Read the Patriot Act if you want a review of rights we have lost.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: palehorse74
actually, your reading comprehension skills need work. Never once did I say that we should treat them poorly, or in any way inhumane.

My only point was that the US Consititution does not apply to prisoners captured on a foreign battlefield. period.

Being Amercians, we will generally treat everyone MUCH better than they would treat us. Our ideals, morals, and general goodnatured attitudes will result in humane treatment. (with a few sociopathic exceptions that are NOT the norm). As a veteran member of the armed services, I have been trained in both the Law of War and the GC's. I know what I can and cant do to prisoners of any type, and you will never see me break those rules/laws.

However, you will also never see me reading an Iraqi insurgent his Miranda Rights either! All prisoners under my control will be treated in accordance with my training, and that training has always been humane. The prisoners wont be physically or psychologically abused. they will be given time to sleep, excercise, eat, pray, bathe, and use a restroom. The Red Cross will be given access to the prisoners. The prisoners will be allowed to write letters and receive them. All of their treatments shall be in accordance with the GC's and the Laws of War.

But giving the enemies on foreign soil the same rights as Joe Smith from Kentucky? A lawyer and a "speedy trial" that completely ruins our ability to interrogate them and gather as much intel as possible? I dont f'n think so...

So, your premise seems to be that the potential gain in intelligence outweighs any violation of fundamental rights of captives. I submit that the rights of any individual are worth more than any piece of intelligence. Why should you be given sway over me simply because I was born in Iraq and you think I have intelligence about something? I'm questioning whether these rules are truly just, not whether your interpretation of said rules is correct.

What "fundamental rights of captives" did I suggest that we even come close to violating? Which "rules" are you referring to? Those found in the Laws of War and the GC's?

We are only "given sway over" those we capture on the fields of battle; which, in an asymetrical war, happen to be everywhere! So we must therefore adapt our warfighting methods to fit the new forms of warfare. One of those methods is the interrogation of captured enemy prisoners (non-US persons!)

It's not our fault that our enemies are too cowardly to put on uniforms and fight us in the open. It's not our fault that they hide amongst the women and children like dogs. However, in response, we must adapt our fighting techniques and also our weapons of war. One of those "weapons" is the gathering of intelligence through actual interrogations.

To further restrict our already very humane systems of interrogation would be seriously detrimental to our efforts in the war. One of my biggest fears is that the tool of interrogation will be completely removed (made impotent) from our arsenal and we'll be forced to fight our inhumane enemies in total darkness. We will be effectively blinded.

Rainsford > you know where you can stick those personal attacks...

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: palehorse74
What "fundamental rights of captives" did I suggest that we even come close to violating? Which "rules" are you referring to? Those found in the Laws of War and the GC's?

The right to a fair trial, to face his accuser, and to know the evidence against him. There are probably others, but I'll stop there.

We are only "given sway over" those we capture on the fields of battle; which, in an asymetrical war, happen to be everywhere! So we must therefore adapt our warfighting methods to fit the new forms of warfare. One of those methods is the interrogation of captured enemy prisoners (non-US persons!)

You repeatedly miss the entire point. The point is that you believe determining who the 'enemy' is is completely cut-and-dry. You believe that, as Americans, we have some sort of moral superiority, yet your conclusion based on this premise is that we may act with a moral deficit. Criminals in the US are interrogated, yet they are still accorded all the rights I mentioned above.

It's not our fault that our enemies are too cowardly to put on uniforms and fight us in the open. It's not our fault that they hide amongst the women and children like dogs. However, in response, we must adapt our fighting techniques and also our weapons of war. One of those "weapons" is the gathering of intelligence through actual interrogations.

It's not Joe Blow's fault, either. He was just standing on a street corner in Iraq when you guys picked him up because the bad guys happened to be walking by him. Now you're interrogating the hell out of him, though he has no information. He's held indefinitely without trial for nothing because we failed to enforce our own principle that defines Americans, that all men are created equal. Not just Americans.

To further restrict our already very humane systems of interrogation would be seriously detrimental to our efforts in the war. One of my biggest fears is that the tool of interrogation will be completely removed (made impotent) from our arsenal and we'll be forced to fight our inhumane enemies in total darkness. We will be effectively blinded.

I would beg to differ. If people saw that we treated people fairly, didn't hold people indefinitely without trial, allowed them to see the evidence against them, and told them why we were holding them, our 'enemies' might all of a sudden become much more friendly. Instead of having to interrogate them to get the information you desire, they might freely give it to us on the streetcorner. They'd realize that we really were their friends, not their enemies as you keep painting us. Then and only then might we get the information we need in a timely fashion and avoid compromising every principle that we are supposedly in Iraq to uphold.