• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Guantánamo leaks lift lid on world's most controversial prison

No they are not. The GC only covers those fighing under it's rules.

So, this means, according to you, no law governs our behavior? We can do anything we want, absent any law? I'm sorry, that's just wrong.
 
No they are not. The GC only covers those fighing under it's rules.

We violated those rules. Don't neglect rendition, torture, extraterritorial legalities, etc. Ain't you on a roll?
 
We violated those rules. Don't neglect rendition, torture, extraterritorial legalities, etc. Ain't you on a roll?

We did?

Once their status was determined they are no longer protected by the GC.

They fail to meet the "protected person" status spelled out in the GC.
 
We did?

Once their status was determined they are no longer protected by the GC.

They fail to meet the "protected person" status spelled out in the GC.

show us the GC language which excludes them
 
So you admit you haven't read the GC or anything about it.

no. i want to expose that you will be unable to provide the language of the Geneva Conventions which excludes those individuals from being entitled to the provisions of the Geneva Conventions

and from your inability to post such exclusionary language you have again proven me right ... and yourself wrong

thank you for that, even tho it was not your intent
 
no. i want to expose that you will be unable to provide the language of the Geneva Conventions which excludes those individuals from being entitled to the provisions of the Geneva Conventions

and from your inability to post such exclusionary language you have again proven me right ... and yourself wrong

thank you for that, even tho it was not your intent

Yet another lefty unaware of what's in a document they keep referring to.

Thank you for that admission.
 
Yet another lefty unaware of what's in a document they keep referring to.

Thank you for that admission.

you are the one who has insisted the Geneva Conventions do not apply to those imprisoned at guantanamo
and you have been asked to provide the language of the GC which excludes those prisoners from the provisions of the GC - to document your position has a valid premise
you have been unable/unwilling to do so

but let me offer you a second chance, so that you are not recognized as cowardly slinking away from the challenge to prove your assertion

and to help you, here is a cite
Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions - New York Times
 
cowardly slinking ..... I'll let this go as you're obviously just another dime-a-dozen lefty who hasn't read the GC.


Read it and weep lefties. You can read article 4 as to who is covered and who isn't for yourself. It's too long to post. Terrorists are not covered.

Article 5
The present Convention shall apply to the
persons referred to in Article 4 from the
time they fall into the power of the enemy
and until their final release and repatriation.
Should any doubt arise as to whether
persons, having committed a belligerent act
and having fallen into the hands of the
enemy, belong to any of the categories
enumerated in Article 4, such persons shall
enjoy the protection of the present
Convention until such time as their status
has been determined by a competent
tribunal
.
 
No candle toting lefties in NYC. No protesters in DC. Nothing.

Uhhh
2010 - March 20, March 20, 2010 anti-war protest. March on the White House against wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
2010 - October 2, One Nation Working Together March for Jobs, Peace and Justice.
2010 - December 16, Veterans for Peace rally in Lafayette Park and on the White House sidewalk.
Hell just earlier in March their was an anti war protest in DC....




Why not? They terrorized people and countries for gains...
And they were not citizens of this country and we gave them the same rights we have under the law...



Do I have to go back and find your quote? Would you admit it then? No!?! I didn't think so.

Sure. I believe they have constitutional rights under the Constitution...



Read the ISG report. The key findings is only 19 pages long.

You wanna talk about the Iraq Survey Group?

"On October 6, 2004, the head of the Iraq Survey Group (ISG), Charles Duelfer, announced to the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee that the group found no evidence that Iraq under Saddam Hussein had produced and stockpiled any weapons of mass destruction since 1991, when UN sanctions were imposed."
https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/general-reports-1/iraq_wmd_2004/index.html#sect1

"On September 30, 2004, the U.S. Iraq Survey Group Final Report concluded that "ISG has not found evidence that Saddam Husayn (sic) possessed WMD stocks in 2003, but the available evidence from its investigation—including detainee interviews and document exploitation—leaves open the possibility that some weapons existed in Iraq although not of a militarily significant capability."
Iraq Survey Group Final Report

And hell didnt Iraq want to begin relations with the US? And improve relations?
"Saddam did not consider the United States a natural adversary, as he did Iran and Israel, and he hoped that Iraq might again enjoy improved relations with the United States, according to Tariq ‘Aziz and the presidential secretary."

From the same CIA report:
"Evidence of the maturity and significance of the pre-1991 Iraqi Nuclear Program but found that Iraq's ability to reconstitute a nuclear weapons program progressively decayed after that date"

Wait and Bush even admitted that Saddam had no WMDS and the Saddam had no connection to 9/11
YouTube - bush admits there were no WMDs in IRAQ



Saddam had nuclear weapons plans, long range missile plans, and his IIS had clandestine labs producing chemical weapons.
Look above


From the ISG report:
Saddam wanted to recreate Iraq’s WMD capability—which was essentially destroyed in 1991—after sanctions
were removed and Iraq’s economy stabilized, but probably with a different mix of capabilities to that
which previously existed. Saddam aspired to develop a nuclear capability—in an incremental fashion,
irrespective of international pressure and the resulting economic risks—but he intended to focus on ballistic
missile and tactical chemical warfare (CW) capabilities.

Look above



They were attacking us long before OIF. Where have you been?

Not talking about Operation Iraqi Freedom. Talking about Bin Laden.
 
Uhhh
2010 - March 20, March 20, 2010 anti-war protest. March on the White House against wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
2010 - October 2, One Nation Working Together March for Jobs, Peace and Justice.
2010 - December 16, Veterans for Peace rally in Lafayette Park and on the White House sidewalk.
Hell just earlier in March their was an anti war protest in DC....

Geez DS you didn't know that the DC protests were because of the anniversary of OIF and had nothing to do with protesting 0bama? Really?


Why not? They terrorized people and countries for gains...
And they were not citizens of this country and we gave them the same rights we have under the law...

Piracy is a crime and has been for centuries.

My sister is terrorized by agressive drivers but that doesn't make them terrorists.

Sure. I believe they have constitutional rights under the Constitution...

You can think, feel or believe anything you want. Doesn't make it true.

You wanna talk about the Iraq Survey Group?

Not long ago that was considered "cherry-picking' the intelligence.

Read the entire report. It's full of evidence that Saddam had every intention of restarting his semi-dormant WMD programs once sanctions were lifted.

Not talking about Operation Iraqi Freedom. Talking about Bin Laden.

Ever heard of the WTC in 1993? Somalia?
 
Geez DS you didn't know that the DC protests were because of the anniversary of OIF and had nothing to do with protesting 0bama? Really?

Really? Well according to you they just dont protest anymore because Obama is pres now.. Why would they protest it if a dem is in power now?
Have you seen the signs at the protest?
Have you seen the protests of people protesting against the increase of troops in Afghanistan?
What about the other protests?
What about the WikiLeaks protests? Or the Anti-Gitmo protests?




Piracy is a crime and has been for centuries.
Why is it not terrorism?
Why did they get a trial in America and given constitutional rights?


My sister is terrorized by aggressive drivers but that doesn't make them terrorists.

:doh:doh

You can think, feel or believe anything you want. Doesn't make it true.

..............................



Not long ago that was considered "cherry-picking' the intelligence.

Not cherry picking. You can also say you are cherry picking.

Read the entire report. It's full of evidence that Saddam had every intention of restarting his semi-dormant WMD programs once sanctions were lifted.

First off that is not a sustainable amoutn of biological weapons. According to The Commission of the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction (CICUSRWMD), a presidential committee led by co-chairs Laurence Silberman and Charles Robb, stated in its Mar. 31, 2005 report:

"Extensive post-war investigations were carried out by the Iraqi Survey Group (ISG). The ISG found no evidence that Iraq had tried to reconstitute its capability to produce nuclear weapons after 1991; no evidence of biological weapon (BW) agent stockpiles or of mobile biological weapons production facilities; and no substantial chemical warfare (CW) stockpiles or credible indications that Baghdad had resumed production of CW after 1991."

According to David Kay, PhD, former head of the Iraq Survey Group (ISG), in a Jan. 28, 2004 hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee on the subject of "Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction Programs," stated:

"SEN. BEN NELSON: All right. You know, you have indicated that you found no evidence of existing stockpiles of WMDs. Is it possible that they found their way to Syria? Is there any way of knowing whether they found their way to Syria or to another location?

MR. KAY: In terms of possibility, I mean, you can't rule out anything. The way I tried to direct our activities, I knew we were not going to get permission to conduct inspections in Syria, as much as I would professionally and personally have enjoyed it. I also knew that the intelligence we collected that showed movement of material across the Iraq-Syrian border didn't show what was in the containers.

So you try to answer that question by saying was there something to be moved back across the border? Look at production capability. It's totally inadequate for saying did they move small amounts, did they move technology, did they move documentation -- absolutely possible; I would say probable. But my personal belief is that they did not move large stockpiles, because I do not believe they had reconstituted a capability that had produced large stockpiles. So that's how you get at it...

My belief that they did not move large stockpiles of WMD to Syria is based on my conclusion that there were not large stockpiles to move..."



Ever heard of the WTC in 1993? Somalia?

Yea thanks for proving my point. It was Osama.
 
Really? Well according to you they just dont protest anymore because Obama is pres now.. Why would they protest it if a dem is in power now?
Have you seen the signs at the protest?
Have you seen the protests of people protesting against the increase of troops in Afghanistan?
What about the other protests?
What about the WikiLeaks protests? Or the Anti-Gitmo protests?





Why is it not terrorism?
Why did they get a trial in America and given constitutional rights?




:doh:doh



..............................





Not cherry picking. You can also say you are cherry picking.



First off that is not a sustainable amoutn of biological weapons. According to The Commission of the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction (CICUSRWMD), a presidential committee led by co-chairs Laurence Silberman and Charles Robb, stated in its Mar. 31, 2005 report:

"Extensive post-war investigations were carried out by the Iraqi Survey Group (ISG). The ISG found no evidence that Iraq had tried to reconstitute its capability to produce nuclear weapons after 1991; no evidence of biological weapon (BW) agent stockpiles or of mobile biological weapons production facilities; and no substantial chemical warfare (CW) stockpiles or credible indications that Baghdad had resumed production of CW after 1991."

According to David Kay, PhD, former head of the Iraq Survey Group (ISG), in a Jan. 28, 2004 hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee on the subject of "Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction Programs," stated:

"SEN. BEN NELSON: All right. You know, you have indicated that you found no evidence of existing stockpiles of WMDs. Is it possible that they found their way to Syria? Is there any way of knowing whether they found their way to Syria or to another location?

MR. KAY: In terms of possibility, I mean, you can't rule out anything. The way I tried to direct our activities, I knew we were not going to get permission to conduct inspections in Syria, as much as I would professionally and personally have enjoyed it. I also knew that the intelligence we collected that showed movement of material across the Iraq-Syrian border didn't show what was in the containers.

So you try to answer that question by saying was there something to be moved back across the border? Look at production capability. It's totally inadequate for saying did they move small amounts, did they move technology, did they move documentation -- absolutely possible; I would say probable. But my personal belief is that they did not move large stockpiles, because I do not believe they had reconstituted a capability that had produced large stockpiles. So that's how you get at it...

My belief that they did not move large stockpiles of WMD to Syria is based on my conclusion that there were not large stockpiles to move..."





Yea thanks for proving my point. It was Osama.

I sure admire your tenacity. Like dealing with a piece of wood, eh?
 
Really? Well according to you they just dont protest anymore because Obama is pres now.. Why would they protest it if a dem is in power now?
Have you seen the signs at the protest?
Have you seen the protests of people protesting against the increase of troops in Afghanistan?
What about the other protests?
What about the WikiLeaks protests? Or the Anti-Gitmo protests?

If you don't remember the tens of thousands of people that were protesting the Bush Admin on a regular basis, especially about Iraq, then I'm not sure what it will take to convince you that in relative terms the left is quiet as a mouse about 0bama as he continues Bush's policies.

Why is it not terrorism?
Why did they get a trial in America and given constitutional rights?

They are pirates and criminals. They are not terrorists. It's really that simple.

You can stick on this point 'till the cows come home and it won't be any more relevant.

Not cherry picking. You can also say you are cherry picking.

That's exactly what you're doing. I accept the conclusions of the ISG. You do not.

Ignoring the overwhelming and irrefutable evidence about Saddam's WMD programs and what was found in Iraq speaks for itself.
 
Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist
Yea sense you know you proved me wrong
Conservatives are real smart you know. Iraq had WMDS, empowering terrorists that later come around and attack us.. Real smart!

Originally Posted by Ron Mars
They were attacking us long before OIF. Where have you been?

Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist
Not talking about Operation Iraqi Freedom. Talking about Bin Laden.

Originally Posted by Ron Mars
Ever heard of the WTC in 1993? Somalia?

Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist
Yea thanks for proving my point. It was Osama.


So the US "empowered" OBL? How exactly? No lefty diatribe. Actual facts.

Don't even bring up Afghanistan. That's been debunked long ago.
 
If you don't remember the tens of thousands of people that were protesting the Bush Admin on a regular basis, especially about Iraq, then I'm not sure what it will take to convince you that in relative terms the left is quiet as a mouse about 0bama as he continues Bush's policies.

Protests are over. Plus the height of the Iraq War is over.
But protests are still going on..... Just take your head out of the sand.



They are pirates and criminals. They are not terrorists. It's really that simple.

They were not citizens we gave them constitutional rights.... Your whole ordeal was that sense they are not citizens this does not apply to these "POW's"..

You can stick on this point 'till the cows come home and it won't be any more relevant.

Hmmm...
Just asking what is a terrorist....



That's exactly what you're doing. I accept the conclusions of the ISG. You do not.

Really? Because this is the conclusion these members came to...

Ignoring the overwhelming and irrefutable evidence about Saddam's WMD programs and what was found in Iraq speaks for itself.

Im ignoring it?
Didnt Mr. Kay the head of the ISG say "do not believe they had reconstituted a capability that had produced large stockpiles. So that's how you get at it..."

Didnt he Commission of the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction state that "The ISG found no evidence that Iraq had tried to reconstitute its capability to produce nuclear weapons after 1991; no evidence of biological weapon (BW) agent stockpiles or of mobile biological weapons production facilities; and no substantial chemical warfare (CW) stockpiles or credible indications that Baghdad had resumed production of CW after 1991.""

Sure Iraq probably had small amounts of chemicals which has been revealed by WikiLeaks cables but "very small amount". Not close enough to start production again.
 
So the US "empowered" OBL? How exactly? No lefty diatribe. Actual facts.

Please tell me your joking right...

Don't even bring up Afghanistan. That's been debunked long ago.

Please oh please oh please tell me your joking....
 
Damn you are thick. If you refuse to read the ISG report why bother to talk about it?

These two paragraphs are irrefutable and put the nail in your coffin whether you realize it or not.

Saddam wanted to recreate Iraq’s WMD capability—which was essentially destroyed in 1991—after sanctions
were removed and Iraq’s economy stabilized, but probably with a different mix of capabilities to that
which previously existed. Saddam aspired to develop a nuclear capability—in an incremental fashion,
irrespective of international pressure and the resulting economic risks—but he intended to focus on ballistic
missile and tactical chemical warfare (CW) capabilities.

ISG uncovered Iraqi plans or designs for three long-range ballistic missiles with ranges from 400 to 1,000
km and for a 1,000-km-range cruise missile, although none of these systems progressed to production and
only one reportedly passed the design phase. ISG assesses that these plans demonstrate Saddam’s continuing
desire—up to the beginning of Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF)—for a long-range delivery capability
.
 
Still no response to article 4 and 5 of the GC.

it really doesn't answer the question. I'm not involved in that discussion with you, but what you quoted doesn't prove your point. I was hoping you make a better link. :coffeepap
 
I mean no response from credible posters. Someone besides my tag along wipping boy.
 
Back
Top Bottom