Originally posted by: halik
Isn't the afghani gov't supposed to keep track of them?
But more to the core of the thing,
How many convicted murders kill again after release? Should we just lock up everyone infinitely in fear of repeat crimes?
How do you balance the innocent people in Gitmo as opposed to the real terrorist?
Good thing is we've already answered these questions as a society and have a system to deal with this. It's better to let some criminals go than to imprison the innocent (thus the "innocent till proven guilty" principle).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In MHO, halik has nailed the issue.
He may have been held at GITMO, but if you can't come up with the evidence to show why he should be held, its proper that he should be released. The real crime, and the far greater abuse of human rights is to hold imprison and torture someone for many years on no evidence.
The other thing to question is the winnar111 allegation is something like a big cheese Taliban leader, at best he may be a player along with many many others.
And some of the most anti-Nato fighters we are fighting are not really Taliban at all,
they were former mujahadeen fighters, paid and trained by our very own CIA.
And for that matter, Noriaga and Saddam Hussein were also on the CIA payroll, our the enemy of my enemy is my friend assumption seldom pans out in the end.
And historically, much of the motivation for the American Revolution and the war of 1812 was over the British policy of suppressing human rights, arbitrarily detaining people without charges, and kidnapping people who no longer wanted to have anything to do with the British system of injustice that was similarly based on might makes right.
The last thing we should come away from this thread is that we should imprison everyone we can grab up on the assumption they MIGHT act against us.
Facebook
Twitter