Nemesis, you are truly sad. You're trying your best to defend the terrorists but we're not convinced. You just why and b!tched but you've proven nothing, except that any terrorist wants to commit a crime and get away with it can head to Europe, just like that guy that killed his girl in Philly and ran away to France. I'm outta here. later pacifist.
Let's agree to disagree, Nemesis77.
Any part of this war was cleared by Britain and many other allies, including Sweden probably. I'd be willing to bet that the US will have it's way with these prisoners and with the approval of its allies. Do you seriously think that the British and Swedish prisoners will be extradited back to there repsective countries of origin? I think not.
We extradited those P'sOS not from Britain and not from Sweden but from the land they held hostage for 5 years. Afghanistan is real lucky right now, they get billions of dollars in aid, new infrastructure, and better way of life all around. If anyone gave extradition, it was Afghanistan.
Any part of this war was cleared by Britain and many other allies, including Sweden probably. I'd be willing to bet that the US will have it's way with these prisoners and with the approval of its allies. Do you seriously think that the British and Swedish prisoners will be extradited back to there repsective countries of origin? I think not.
We extradited those P'sOS not from Britain and not from Sweden but from the land they held hostage for 5 years. Afghanistan is real lucky right now, they get billions of dollars in aid, new infrastructure, and better way of life all around. If anyone gave extradition, it was Afghanistan.
Terrorists have rights, too.
Seems the question will start moving through our legal system. As it should.
If this has already been linked or discussed I apologize.
Seems the question will start moving through our legal system. As it should.
If this has already been linked or discussed I apologize.
<<
<< He's an American. The plane crashes were acts of aggression against America. He is being tried in an American court of law in accordance with our laws.
The other nationals are being held in accordance with American and International laws. >>
If they get the same treatment, why isn't Walker in Guantanamo? Does the fact that he's american change anything?
American law, why not british law as well? After all, some of the prisoners are british citizens. If the american prisoner gets treated according to american law, why can't the british citizens be treated according to british law? >>
Yes, it changes things because he has certain rights under the American legal system by being an American citizen. If the Brits wanna try the prisoners in their own court of law, then I'm sure there are legal proceedings to do that.
The guys at Guantanmo are in American custody. Since it was probably Americans that captured them, then they are dealt with under American laws.
I have to absolutely agree. If I was being held in say Afghanistan, Iraq or North Korea and was treated like they are I would be extremely happy.
<< If I were a POW and I were given a cot, 3 full and nutritious meals a day, freedom to walk about and talk in the large communal cell, clothes, and was not beaten, tortured, pissed on, raped, or abused... I'd be freaking dancing for joy. >>
<< If I were a POW and I were given a cot, 3 full and nutritious meals a day, freedom to walk about and talk in the large communal cell, clothes, and was not beaten, tortured, pissed on, raped, or abused... I'd be freaking dancing for joy. >>
Nemesis77,
Why hasn't the British or Sweedish Government made a request to have their citizens extridited to them? I have heard of no formal request from either government. In fact I'm willing to bet that none of the Euro government's want's these "citizens" back.
Why hasn't the British or Sweedish Government made a request to have their citizens extridited to them? I have heard of no formal request from either government. In fact I'm willing to bet that none of the Euro government's want's these "citizens" back.
<< Nemesis, you are truly sad. >>
Look whos'e talking.
<< You're trying your best to defend the terrorists but we're not convinced. >>
For crying out loud... Defend terrorists??? Where have I done so? What I have done is to raise few points regarding the way this entire situation has been handled! That is NOT "defending terrorists". Either you are low on intelligence or you just see whatever you want to see. And looking at your past comments in the threads you have posted... Well, what's the point?
<< You just why and b!tched but you've proven nothing, except that any terrorist wants to commit a crime and get away with it can head to Europe >>
PLEASE SHOW ME WHERE I TOLD YOU THAT THE TERRORISTS SHOULD BE RELEASED UNPUNISHED? God you are slow! Just because I disagree with the way the situation has been handled does not, I repeat, does NOT mean that they should be released.
Do you understand now or do I have to spell it out for you? If there are any complicated words in what I have posted, please don't hesitate to ask. I live to please
.Why not simply set up an international meeting where the status of the prisoners is decided? Since this IS international matter. Also, in that meeting could be decided whether they should be treated in american court or international court (like War-Crimes Tribunal in the Hague). That way everyone would get their voices heard and everybody would be happy. That's just about the best suggestion I have heard when it comes to this situation.
<< They should be glad their still alive. >>
It's probably the bloodlust for vengeance talking (typing), but I hope they have the opposite reaction. Those zealots are soldiers bent on destruction. In contrast, almost four thousand people that are now dead were just private citizens trying to pay their bills.
<< You don't think that the government is going to set them free or risk putting them in jail, do you? These people cannot be reasoned with, they will never change their mind about us. They are fanatics. >>
While I wholeheartedly agree, to put a band-aid over all the bleeding hearts, why don't we "treat them decent" and NOT kill them. Yes, let's put them into our prison systems. The fact is, once they enter prison, they're dead anyway. Sure, they'll be among criminals, but they'll be among American criminals. These terrorist scumbags' lives are already over. They just don't know it yet.
"Mr. Smith, while reviewing your parole request, we notice that you had good behavior except for one small blotch."
"You mean that time I murdered an al-Qaida soldier the first night he was brought in?"
"Oh, heavens no! I was talking about the one time you overslept and missed roll call. But I forgot about that incident you mentioned. Consider that blotch cleaned. Congratulations!"
<< i have an even better idea. how about before any of our soldiers discharges their weapon they must frist get a warant from a judge and a trial takes place to determine if he/she should fire their weapon. i got new for you, due process doesnt exist in war >>
The way you treat armed, attacking enemies in WAR (whether or not the mission in Afghanistan is even war or not is debatable) is completely different than than how you treat those who you have subdued and are keeping prisoner. If you don't see that distinction you have quite a bit of misunderstanding you should resolve before trying to carry on an intelligent conversation.
<< Give one of these sh!tbags a gun, and he WILL shoot you >>
Point is that they no longer have guns and no one is proposing we give them guns. They are subdued, imprisoned, shackled, etc. In their current state they are not a threat and they should not be treated as if at any moment they could turn around and kill you. They are prisoners and should be treated as such.
<< You make me wanna puke. Do you leave in Berkely? >>
No.
<< Again, might equals right. It's our war, our rules. ANy problems? Didn't think so. >>
Wrong. Might does not equal right. Might may equal what your interest are but might certainly does not equal right. Just because an entity doesn't have the will/might to oppose you does not make what you are doing right.
The way you treat armed, attacking enemies in WAR (whether or not the mission in Afghanistan is even war or not is debatable) is completely different than than how you treat those who you have subdued and are keeping prisoner. If you don't see that distinction you have quite a bit of misunderstanding you should resolve before trying to carry on an intelligent conversation.
<< Give one of these sh!tbags a gun, and he WILL shoot you >>
Point is that they no longer have guns and no one is proposing we give them guns. They are subdued, imprisoned, shackled, etc. In their current state they are not a threat and they should not be treated as if at any moment they could turn around and kill you. They are prisoners and should be treated as such.
<< You make me wanna puke. Do you leave in Berkely? >>
No.
<< Again, might equals right. It's our war, our rules. ANy problems? Didn't think so. >>
Wrong. Might does not equal right. Might may equal what your interest are but might certainly does not equal right. Just because an entity doesn't have the will/might to oppose you does not make what you are doing right.
<<Why not simply set up an international meeting where the status of the prisoners is decided? Since this IS international matter. Also, in that meeting could be decided whether they should be treated in american court or international court (like War-Crimes Tribunal in the Hague). That way everyone would get their voices heard and everybody would be happy. That's just about the best suggestion I have heard when it comes to this situation. >>
There is too much american hatred for this to be effective. Allow a world court to make decisions and everyone will go free "to get back at america". Hell the UN human rights commission has the Sudan and a bunch of authoritarian governments. In addition these trials would require the exposure of high level US intelligence information, something we are unwilling to divulge. Face the facts, none of these people will go free. They will spend the rest of their lives in a prison in cuba.
There is too much american hatred for this to be effective. Allow a world court to make decisions and everyone will go free "to get back at america". Hell the UN human rights commission has the Sudan and a bunch of authoritarian governments. In addition these trials would require the exposure of high level US intelligence information, something we are unwilling to divulge. Face the facts, none of these people will go free. They will spend the rest of their lives in a prison in cuba.
<< Nemesis, you are truly sad. You're trying your best to defend the terrorists but we're not convinced. You just why and b!tched but you've proven nothing, except that any terrorist wants to commit a crime and get away with it can head to Europe, just like that guy that killed his girl in Philly and ran away to France. I'm outta here. later pacifist. >>
you stand there like a little punk shouting MIGHT=RIGHT but when someone logical shows you how you are wrong (i.e, hitler having the right to kill 6 million jews because he could), then all you can do it sit back and whine.
youre the one who is sad and pathetic.
<< There is too much american hatred for this to be effective. >>
I'd twist this statment a bit and say there is too much hatred from Americans for this to be effective.
I'm all for the punishment, I have no qualms about how they're being treated, mostly because I don't "know" how they are treated. What I do take issue with is the reasons that have been given. According to the Geneva Convention, unless a judicial tribunal has decided as such, it is my understanding that the prisoners should be treated as POW's.
<< Might equals right >>
Uh, no. Might gets things done. Might allows you to follow through with your own "interests". Might does not, however, make right.
"You Europeans are softer than I thought. It's called survival. Stop being so philosophical. "
Rison sounds like he's 10 years old so why am I even responding? Oh well, here goes:
So you want to throw moral virtues out the window and survive. Do you think the firefighters that climbed those endless stairs to their deaths were thinking about THEIR survival? No, they were heroes who valued the moral virtue of putting their brothers' safety ahead of their own. If they thought like Rison, they would have stayed home. Rison, you should be ashamed of yourself.:disgust:
Rison sounds like he's 10 years old so why am I even responding? Oh well, here goes:
So you want to throw moral virtues out the window and survive. Do you think the firefighters that climbed those endless stairs to their deaths were thinking about THEIR survival? No, they were heroes who valued the moral virtue of putting their brothers' safety ahead of their own. If they thought like Rison, they would have stayed home. Rison, you should be ashamed of yourself.:disgust:
<<According to the Geneva Convention, unless a judicial tribunal has decided as such, it is my understanding that the prisoners should be treated as POW's.>>
And according to those statutes if we declare them POW's they must be set free when hostilities cease unless we can provide evidence that they commited war crimes. Considering there was no real war the evidence that exists is undoubtably circumstantial. They will be tried in front of a millitary tribunal to ease proof requirements so that the worst can be detained indefinetely. The american administration is well aware that if the detainees are treated as POW's then the vast majority will go free. The freedom of these individuals presents a dire threat to the saftey of every freedom loving person in the world.
And according to those statutes if we declare them POW's they must be set free when hostilities cease unless we can provide evidence that they commited war crimes. Considering there was no real war the evidence that exists is undoubtably circumstantial. They will be tried in front of a millitary tribunal to ease proof requirements so that the worst can be detained indefinetely. The american administration is well aware that if the detainees are treated as POW's then the vast majority will go free. The freedom of these individuals presents a dire threat to the saftey of every freedom loving person in the world.
Alright, once and for all...what in the hell is so bad about their treatment? I am a Military Police officer. I deal with common American criminals. At my disposal I have handcuffs, leg shackles, spit hoods, cages, detention cells, jail cells, pepper spray, clubs and guns. The criminals I take in may have done something such as steal a CD from a store all the way up to kill someone and you know what, they might be subjected to any and/or all of the above items within my arsenal.
First off, these guys are and/or can be combative. Anyone, criminal or terrorist, suspected to be combative is going to be shackled or cuffed in some way to protect not only the people around them, but also to protect themselves.
Second, the hoods were a necessary evil. As stated above, as a cop/law enforcement officer, I have what is called a spit hood. It has happened where a criminal with hepatitis has spit on an officer and infected them with not only hepatitis, but also a number of other possible diseases. It was specifically stated in at least one article I read or watched that many of these individuals were unchecked for infectious diseases, therefore they wore hoods to protect their captors from being subjected to communicable diseases. Ask any city cop what a spit hood is and they will tell you and show you. The hoods were a safety precaution for both the detainees and their overseers. Can't have one infected captive infecting the other prisoners and causing a huge outbreak. If nothing else, look to the hoods as another "humanitarian" favor we've extended to the ones with no infectious diseases.
Third, it is not uncommon to put a criminal on his/her knees to gain more physical control over them, especially if they have the potential to be combative. What is the problem with that. There were no guns at the back of their heads, so there was no "execution" style activity going on there.
Fourth, the area where they are staying is a "temporary" facility. Did you get that? TEMPORARY!!! We are in the process of building a 2000 person capacity detention facility down there. What would you rather we did with them? Place them on a leash with a runner between two trees? Jesus people! Come on! I would go right now and stay in the same exact conditions as them right now with little or no complaint whatsoever, but then being in the Army I actually KNOW what it's like to get my pale, pasty, keyboard jockey ass out of an office chair and actually go outside once in a while. Seems to me the people complaining most are a bunch of chair-borne, keyboard jockeys who have a silver spoon stuck up their rosy little asses and have never known what it's like to "rough it" for even a day.
So continue to sit back in your office chair endless reading reports of what you "perceive" to be these inhumane conditions and I will go to work tomorrow to handle the next juvenile shoplifter with less humane treatment than these "terrorists" in Cuba are getting, and guess what, I'll being doing it all in complete accordance with American law in every way. If nothing else, these guys are getting better treatment than most of our own "citizen terrorists/criminals" who might have done something as minor as break up someone's personal property with a baseball bat in a fit of rage. I don't expect anyone to reply with anything even remotely coherent or decisive as you can't argue any of the above statements with any knowledge whatsoever, other than what you've seen in the media and perceived to be a noble cause. On a final note, get up, face the really real world and go spend some time with humanity for a while to learn what "inhumane" actually is.
I consider "inhumane" to be your needless, ill-informed, popular media driven, baseless belief that some individuals who partook in a terrible attrocity upon humanity, who now reside on a warm tropical island several hundred to thousand miles away from you where you have never been and most likely never will be to even visit and have never lived a day in the life of those you so strongly defend. You make baseless claims of "inhumane" yet it is such a subjective term the world over that you take it upon yourselves to place your interpretation upon it and wage a war of words in complete, blind ignorance of the truth. Believe all of what you see, touch, taste, feel and experience and nothing of what you read. Ignorant, ill-informed and baseless retorts to the above can be directed to the nearest person who gives a damn, because I don't care what you think because you've more than likely never worked with a detainee before in your entire damn life.
First off, these guys are and/or can be combative. Anyone, criminal or terrorist, suspected to be combative is going to be shackled or cuffed in some way to protect not only the people around them, but also to protect themselves.
Second, the hoods were a necessary evil. As stated above, as a cop/law enforcement officer, I have what is called a spit hood. It has happened where a criminal with hepatitis has spit on an officer and infected them with not only hepatitis, but also a number of other possible diseases. It was specifically stated in at least one article I read or watched that many of these individuals were unchecked for infectious diseases, therefore they wore hoods to protect their captors from being subjected to communicable diseases. Ask any city cop what a spit hood is and they will tell you and show you. The hoods were a safety precaution for both the detainees and their overseers. Can't have one infected captive infecting the other prisoners and causing a huge outbreak. If nothing else, look to the hoods as another "humanitarian" favor we've extended to the ones with no infectious diseases.
Third, it is not uncommon to put a criminal on his/her knees to gain more physical control over them, especially if they have the potential to be combative. What is the problem with that. There were no guns at the back of their heads, so there was no "execution" style activity going on there.
Fourth, the area where they are staying is a "temporary" facility. Did you get that? TEMPORARY!!! We are in the process of building a 2000 person capacity detention facility down there. What would you rather we did with them? Place them on a leash with a runner between two trees? Jesus people! Come on! I would go right now and stay in the same exact conditions as them right now with little or no complaint whatsoever, but then being in the Army I actually KNOW what it's like to get my pale, pasty, keyboard jockey ass out of an office chair and actually go outside once in a while. Seems to me the people complaining most are a bunch of chair-borne, keyboard jockeys who have a silver spoon stuck up their rosy little asses and have never known what it's like to "rough it" for even a day.
So continue to sit back in your office chair endless reading reports of what you "perceive" to be these inhumane conditions and I will go to work tomorrow to handle the next juvenile shoplifter with less humane treatment than these "terrorists" in Cuba are getting, and guess what, I'll being doing it all in complete accordance with American law in every way. If nothing else, these guys are getting better treatment than most of our own "citizen terrorists/criminals" who might have done something as minor as break up someone's personal property with a baseball bat in a fit of rage. I don't expect anyone to reply with anything even remotely coherent or decisive as you can't argue any of the above statements with any knowledge whatsoever, other than what you've seen in the media and perceived to be a noble cause. On a final note, get up, face the really real world and go spend some time with humanity for a while to learn what "inhumane" actually is.
I consider "inhumane" to be your needless, ill-informed, popular media driven, baseless belief that some individuals who partook in a terrible attrocity upon humanity, who now reside on a warm tropical island several hundred to thousand miles away from you where you have never been and most likely never will be to even visit and have never lived a day in the life of those you so strongly defend. You make baseless claims of "inhumane" yet it is such a subjective term the world over that you take it upon yourselves to place your interpretation upon it and wage a war of words in complete, blind ignorance of the truth. Believe all of what you see, touch, taste, feel and experience and nothing of what you read. Ignorant, ill-informed and baseless retorts to the above can be directed to the nearest person who gives a damn, because I don't care what you think because you've more than likely never worked with a detainee before in your entire damn life.
Oh and now that I've had even more time to think, why don't those of you claiming the "inhumane" treatment check in by posting your country of origin, where you served time as a detainee/prisoner, what you did to deserve serving time and how your captors treated you. Oh wait, you can't? Therefore you must automatically believe that detention of any kind must be "inhumane" have never experienced it first hand.
Point is, you base your entire arguements off of one picture it seems. While it is true that a picture is worth a 1000 words, it is not stated whether or not those words are truth or falsehood.
Take this example. You are standing outside a large, fenced in field watching a team practice for a soccer game (I choose soccer because it's passive enough for the pansy ass Euro's who seem to be the ones chiming in the most). You, believe it or not, have never played the game of soccer before. In fact, you only left your house to get more CD-Rs because your usual day of surfing porn on your high speed internet connection came to a halt when you realized you were out of blank discs to record your kiddie porn to (you know, you all like that in Europe, right? That's what I hear in the media, so it must be true). As you stop and watch, you see these players running briskly in the sunlight, diving on the ground for a ball, falling upon one another, possibly causing physical injury. On another part of the field, you see players doing "grass drills", soiling their clothing beyond recognition. To you, who's never experienced anything like this, it looks like pure, unbridled torture upon humanity and since they're behind a fence, what's going on MUST be wrong. Speeding into action you rush over to the first person who looks like they're in charge and you demand that this activity, this vile, inhumane act cease immediately only to find out that the players themselves actually rather enjoy what they're doing.
Moral of the story is, we've not heard from the players/prisoners themselves. We've simply interpreted a picture or two and assumed that what we see and none of what we've lived is "inhumane" by our own personal standards. Is this sinking in yet?
Point is, you base your entire arguements off of one picture it seems. While it is true that a picture is worth a 1000 words, it is not stated whether or not those words are truth or falsehood.
Take this example. You are standing outside a large, fenced in field watching a team practice for a soccer game (I choose soccer because it's passive enough for the pansy ass Euro's who seem to be the ones chiming in the most). You, believe it or not, have never played the game of soccer before. In fact, you only left your house to get more CD-Rs because your usual day of surfing porn on your high speed internet connection came to a halt when you realized you were out of blank discs to record your kiddie porn to (you know, you all like that in Europe, right? That's what I hear in the media, so it must be true). As you stop and watch, you see these players running briskly in the sunlight, diving on the ground for a ball, falling upon one another, possibly causing physical injury. On another part of the field, you see players doing "grass drills", soiling their clothing beyond recognition. To you, who's never experienced anything like this, it looks like pure, unbridled torture upon humanity and since they're behind a fence, what's going on MUST be wrong. Speeding into action you rush over to the first person who looks like they're in charge and you demand that this activity, this vile, inhumane act cease immediately only to find out that the players themselves actually rather enjoy what they're doing.
Moral of the story is, we've not heard from the players/prisoners themselves. We've simply interpreted a picture or two and assumed that what we see and none of what we've lived is "inhumane" by our own personal standards. Is this sinking in yet?
I am going to Union Square tomorrow to yell at the anti-war protesters. I am sure they are out there whining about this with stupid signs like "US is treating prisioners of the racial war like dogs".
Liberals, awwww.
Liberals, awwww.
Rogue: You bring up excellent points. US Military treatment of detainees or prisoners has evolved greatly since World War II.
I remember in 1984, a Medal of Honor awardee gave an NCOPD (Non-Commission Officer Professional Development) about treatment US troops dished out to German soldiers during WWII. Although the gentleman referred to the US handling of POW's or EPW's (new term) back then as humane, there were many shady "practices" endorsed by the chain of command during the period. This gentleman alluded to the fact that some captured German officers actually tormented (spitting and flinging manure) and refused to cooperate with their captors when instructed to do such basic tasks as medical examinations, movement from place to place, etc. I can't remember the gentleman's name off-hand, but at any rate he was 6' 6" and a former University of Kansas football player. So, he was normally tasked to "smack 'em around" for a bit in order to "straighten 'em out". He stated the biggest problems were with the German officers from the "old money" establishment, or former German aristocracy who believed they shouldn't cooperate with the Americans even though it was for their own personal well-being.
Also remember one of my uncle's describing how US forces treated Japanese prisoners during WWII. Get's a bit savage at times, so I won't mention it here. At anyrate, their respective treatment was also humane.
Moving on to the 1990s, my own personal experience with Iraqi EPWs during the Persian Gulf war was nothing like what some of these nutcases here on ATOT or the bleeding hearts organizations refer to. When we received EPWs in the field, we searched them, put zip ties around their wrists, and either marched or trucked them to a processing point. They were allowed to keep personal effects and NBC protective masks, which most didn't have. I remember we had one EPW who kicked a couple of soldiers while his hands were bound. So we also forced him to the ground, bound his feet with zip ties, and carried his ass to a truck. Overall, 99 percent of the Iraqis couldn't surrender quickly enough and were very cooperative.
Personally, I can't see any problems or misgivings at all with how the Gitmo detainees are being handled. Seemingly very professional, in my opinion. Professionalism is, by the way, a trademark of the modern US Armed Forces. Obviously, they are at Gitmo for a reason or they would still be in Afghanistan.
The main problem lies with the bleeding hearts. Forever taking one cheap shot or another at old Uncle Sam. Granted, there should be concern for the welfare of any detainee. However, when a "scandal sheet" story on this subject breaks in Great Britain from some avowed leftist publication akin to the National Enquirer, I normally sit back and laugh at the poor, misguided souls who actually believe this crap without knowing all the facts.
A situation such as this makes one indeed wonder about the term "sheltered-life".
I remember in 1984, a Medal of Honor awardee gave an NCOPD (Non-Commission Officer Professional Development) about treatment US troops dished out to German soldiers during WWII. Although the gentleman referred to the US handling of POW's or EPW's (new term) back then as humane, there were many shady "practices" endorsed by the chain of command during the period. This gentleman alluded to the fact that some captured German officers actually tormented (spitting and flinging manure) and refused to cooperate with their captors when instructed to do such basic tasks as medical examinations, movement from place to place, etc. I can't remember the gentleman's name off-hand, but at any rate he was 6' 6" and a former University of Kansas football player. So, he was normally tasked to "smack 'em around" for a bit in order to "straighten 'em out". He stated the biggest problems were with the German officers from the "old money" establishment, or former German aristocracy who believed they shouldn't cooperate with the Americans even though it was for their own personal well-being.
Also remember one of my uncle's describing how US forces treated Japanese prisoners during WWII. Get's a bit savage at times, so I won't mention it here. At anyrate, their respective treatment was also humane.
Moving on to the 1990s, my own personal experience with Iraqi EPWs during the Persian Gulf war was nothing like what some of these nutcases here on ATOT or the bleeding hearts organizations refer to. When we received EPWs in the field, we searched them, put zip ties around their wrists, and either marched or trucked them to a processing point. They were allowed to keep personal effects and NBC protective masks, which most didn't have. I remember we had one EPW who kicked a couple of soldiers while his hands were bound. So we also forced him to the ground, bound his feet with zip ties, and carried his ass to a truck. Overall, 99 percent of the Iraqis couldn't surrender quickly enough and were very cooperative.
Personally, I can't see any problems or misgivings at all with how the Gitmo detainees are being handled. Seemingly very professional, in my opinion. Professionalism is, by the way, a trademark of the modern US Armed Forces. Obviously, they are at Gitmo for a reason or they would still be in Afghanistan.
The main problem lies with the bleeding hearts. Forever taking one cheap shot or another at old Uncle Sam. Granted, there should be concern for the welfare of any detainee. However, when a "scandal sheet" story on this subject breaks in Great Britain from some avowed leftist publication akin to the National Enquirer, I normally sit back and laugh at the poor, misguided souls who actually believe this crap without knowing all the facts.
A situation such as this makes one indeed wonder about the term "sheltered-life".
Excellent posts Rogue and Burnedout!!!!!
Everyone needs to read those three posts by you two.
Up....
Everyone needs to read those three posts by you two.
Up....
Why do they have to sit on their legs? Isn't that a form of torture?
As Rogue earlier points out: "Third, it is not uncommon to put a criminal on his/her knees to gain more physical control over them, especially if they have the potential to be combative. What is the problem with that. There were no guns at the back of their heads, so there was no "execution" style activity going on there."
Kneeling in this case isn't a form of torture and isn't intended to be. Kneeling is more of a precautionary measure. The potential for a group of captives to overwhelm their captors while standing is higher. Although the picture in question indicates otherwise, it appears the guards were conducting a movement of the detainees from one place to another within the compound itself.
When the Naval photographer took the picture, he probably didn't take into account the backlash from such as scene. Neither did the PAO or Public Affairs Officer who authorized the release of such picture. A public relations blunder? Certainly. Mistreatment of detainees? Not only no, but hell no.
One facet many critics conveniently forget is the fact that the number of detainees (300-400) who are in, and destined for Gitmo, actually pales in comparison with the number in Afghanistan held by the NA and United Front. The number was something like 8,000 in Afghanistan a month or so ago. This number has probably dropped due to repatriations, back-alley deals, etc. They are there for a reason, or otherwise the US could probably care less about them.
Another aspect which the bleeding heart community so conveniently forgets, or fails to address with such vigor, are the conditions in which the captives in Afghanistan are being housed. The prison at Mazur Al Shariff, Afghanistan run by the Northern Alliance makes Cuba look like a Grand Cayman resort.
Bias? Most certainly!
As Rogue earlier points out: "Third, it is not uncommon to put a criminal on his/her knees to gain more physical control over them, especially if they have the potential to be combative. What is the problem with that. There were no guns at the back of their heads, so there was no "execution" style activity going on there."
Kneeling in this case isn't a form of torture and isn't intended to be. Kneeling is more of a precautionary measure. The potential for a group of captives to overwhelm their captors while standing is higher. Although the picture in question indicates otherwise, it appears the guards were conducting a movement of the detainees from one place to another within the compound itself.
When the Naval photographer took the picture, he probably didn't take into account the backlash from such as scene. Neither did the PAO or Public Affairs Officer who authorized the release of such picture. A public relations blunder? Certainly. Mistreatment of detainees? Not only no, but hell no.
One facet many critics conveniently forget is the fact that the number of detainees (300-400) who are in, and destined for Gitmo, actually pales in comparison with the number in Afghanistan held by the NA and United Front. The number was something like 8,000 in Afghanistan a month or so ago. This number has probably dropped due to repatriations, back-alley deals, etc. They are there for a reason, or otherwise the US could probably care less about them.
Another aspect which the bleeding heart community so conveniently forgets, or fails to address with such vigor, are the conditions in which the captives in Afghanistan are being housed. The prison at Mazur Al Shariff, Afghanistan run by the Northern Alliance makes Cuba look like a Grand Cayman resort.
Bias? Most certainly!
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 20K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter