• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Innocent people in Guantanamo ?

In my opinion this needs to be sorted out ASAP, interrogate these guys, find out what they know, and if they are guilty of something, charge them. Alot of them seem to be nuckleheads caught running around in the Afghan hills, hardly the international sophisticated terrorist type, more like "weekend jihadists".

It always used to seem like other nations imprisoning people indefinately without charges was something we Americans looked down at when we read about it in history books or the newspaper.

Zephyr
 
Listen people, Guantanamo Bay is legal limbo- perfect place for Rumsfeld to torture people with Bruce Springstein music without repurcussion. Remember the motto: Guilty until proven innocent- but we won't let you try to prove you're innocent. Works like a charm
 
No wonder Bush wants the Patriot Act. Then again, even w/o it, he'd hold these people indefinitely and no one would force his hand.

I'm beginning to think Bush is the true teflon President.
 
No they were caught fighting against the USA, and siding with the enemy. They are against our lifestyle, and are jealous of our country, that's why they wanted to fight against us. This is their crime, and we can't let them have a trial or anything, because A) They are not citizens and B) They are terrorists and we do not appease with terrorists.
 
Originally posted by: lozina
Listen people, Guantanamo Bay is legal limbo- perfect place for Rumsfeld to torture people with Bruce Springstein music without repurcussion. Remember the motto: Guilty until proven innocent- but we won't let you try to prove you're innocent. Works like a charm
Click to expand...

WHOAH, slow down there for a second! It's impossible to torture someone with the music of Bruce Springsteen! Maybe Tupac, Snoop Dog, o Britney Spears, but not the Boss! :| 😉 🙂
 
A lot of the 9/11 hijackers seemed like "weekend jihadists" too when you think about it. And one of the suspects in the Madrid bombing was previously under watch.
 
Originally posted by: TommyVercetti
No they were caught fighting against the USA, and siding with the enemy. They are against our lifestyle, and are jealous of our country, that's why they wanted to fight against us. This is their crime, and we can't let them have a trial or anything, because A) They are not citizens and B) They are terrorists and we do not appease with terrorists.
Click to expand...

They fought in the army of the Taliban. Where is the proof they went to the US or were planning to in order to launch terrorist attacks? Bush just raped the Geneva convention by not treating them as POWs to show people like you how succesful he is in capturing 'terrorists'.
 
Originally posted by: Skyclad1uhm1
Originally posted by: TommyVercetti
No they were caught fighting against the USA, and siding with the enemy. They are against our lifestyle, and are jealous of our country, that's why they wanted to fight against us. This is their crime, and we can't let them have a trial or anything, because A) They are not citizens and B) They are terrorists and we do not appease with terrorists.
Click to expand...

They fought in the army of the Taliban. Where is the proof they went to the US or were planning to in order to launch terrorist attacks? Bush just raped the Geneva convention by not treating them as POWs to show people like you how succesful he is in capturing 'terrorists'.
Click to expand...

And the Taliban were supporting terrorists. So they were directly fighting for the terrorists and therefore are terrorists.
 
Originally posted by: Skyclad1uhm1
Originally posted by: TommyVercetti
No they were caught fighting against the USA, and siding with the enemy. They are against our lifestyle, and are jealous of our country, that's why they wanted to fight against us. This is their crime, and we can't let them have a trial or anything, because A) They are not citizens and B) They are terrorists and we do not appease with terrorists.
Click to expand...

They fought in the army of the Taliban. Where is the proof they went to the US or were planning to in order to launch terrorist attacks? Bush just raped the Geneva convention by not treating them as POWs to show people like you how succesful he is in capturing 'terrorists'.
Click to expand...

They probably should be treated as POWs but since the war on terrorism is still ongoing I don't see how we can just let them go. That would be like releasing German POWs in the middle of WW2.

Also, it's hard for me to generate much sympathy for them because a lot of them are foreign fighters and I think those types are the most over-zealous ones. What type of person would travel far to fight in another country's war? Most of the Turkey bombers had travelled to Afghanistan and trained there. Releasing some of these guys is like releasing a future suicide bomber.


 
They probably should be treated as POWs but since the war on terrorism is still ongoing I don't see how we can just let them go. That would be like releasing German POWs in the middle of WW2.
Click to expand...

ding ding ding! we have a winner
 
Tommy you don't have a clue what, IF ANYTHING, any of the prisoners did. Neither do the rest of us. That's the problem. Why would you speculate that Rumsfeld is doing anything right? That would certainly be the first time, if true....

-Robert
 
Originally posted by: josphII
They probably should be treated as POWs but since the war on terrorism is still ongoing I don't see how we can just let them go. That would be like releasing German POWs in the middle of WW2.
Click to expand...

ding ding ding! we have a winner
Click to expand...

Actually, if we had treated them like WW2, then since they are armed without uniform, they could be summarily executed on the battlefield.
 
Originally posted by: alchemize
Originally posted by: josphII
They probably should be treated as POWs but since the war on terrorism is still ongoing I don't see how we can just let them go. That would be like releasing German POWs in the middle of WW2.
Click to expand...

ding ding ding! we have a winner
Click to expand...

Actually, if we had treated them like WW2, then since they are armed without uniform, they could be summarily executed on the battlefield.
Click to expand...

sounds like we own their lives, and POW status doesn't apply;
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top