• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Obama Releasing 1/3 Of Gitmo Detainees

AliHajiSheik said:
I suppose since they were not wearing uniforms of a recognized army I haven't spent a lot of time thinking about it. I'll go with the "when the war is over option" since that is the applicable law. Whatever happens then should be appropriate. If it involves a military trial, let the chips fall where they may.
Click to expand...

I have spent a lot of time thinking about this aspect of it. "when the war is over" may be problematic because a lot of countries don't want these people on their soil. I think Bush tried that (with the hope likely they would be executed at the airport) but several nations apparently passed on getting sucked into it.
 
Verax said:
No more ridiculous than rehabilitating somebody in regular criminal prison. Some of those in Gitmo are there for pretty shallow reasons or even completely innocent. Those who are there for associating, perhaps they said the wrong thing, had a big mouth, they get rounded up in the dragnet. They might be steered straight by this. Long periods of time to think in a place you very much dislike has that effect on some. Like other prisoners though, it will have no effect or even make some even worse, its a mixed bag really.
Click to expand...

If some are imprisoned in Gitmo under trumped up charges, then what are those basically innocent captives being rehabilitated for?
 
Fisher said:
I have spent a lot of time thinking about this aspect of it. "when the war is over" may be problematic because a lot of countries don't want these people on their soil. I think Bush tried that (with the hope likely they would be executed at the airport) but several nations apparently passed on getting sucked into it.
Click to expand...
43rd actively fought against deportation of some Gitmo prisoners to Britain.

But yeah, "when the war is over" is crazy talk. War on what? War on Terror? What kind of time frame is expected for wrapping up a war against an idea whose first recorded instance was 2 millennium ago? A war against any hostile adherents to a wider religion that has something near 2 billion followers? With no identifiable authority to declare a surrender, it has the hallmarks of a rabbit hole with no bottom. No, "when the war is over" has no real meaning here for mortals.
 
Travis007 said:
You assume they are not terrorists.. thats the problem...
Click to expand...

This is an asinine post, but yes, I'm going to assume someone is not a terrorist until proven otherwise. That's part of the judicial fabric of this country, innocent until proven guilty.

AliHajiSheik said:
I suppose since they were not wearing uniforms of a recognized army I haven't spent a lot of time thinking about it. I'll go with the "when the war is over option" since that is the applicable law. Whatever happens then should be appropriate. If it involves a military trial, let the chips fall where they may.
Click to expand...

Going off what was said above, when will this war be "over"? We're waging war on an idea, terrorism. You can't "win". So what's our timeframe? 5 years? 10? 50? Then, after that, what happens if during a trial we find out that someone who we've detained for countless years of their life turn out to be innocent after all? Do we give them monetary compensation? Is there any amount of money that could make up for say 10 years of your life in deplorable conditions, away from your friends and family? Your kids have grown up, your wife probably thinks your dead, your friends have forgotten about you...you think that could be fixed with some money?

Furthermore, what if... what IF our act of abducting and detaining citizens without convicting them of a crime, if our continuous bombing of a sovereign nations who we haven't declared war on, if our continued occupation and presence in the Middle East is actually what is CAUSING the widespread hatred against America, much more than any book? What if, as the CIA says, that our actions can cause "blow-back"? What if our actions have consequences? What if our actions are actually helping to inspire and perpetuate terrorism rather than eradicate it?

What do we do then?...

Armed Chinese Troops in Texas! - YouTube
 
these "radicals" are just people attempting to defend themselves from the west
Click to expand...

they target little girls and grammas
 
The Prof said:
they target little girls and grammas
Click to expand...

We've killed plenty of little boys, girls, grammas, husbands, wives, adolescents and infants.

Also, what about the "terrorists" that attacks our troops that are in their country? They don't target little girls and grammas. Don't be so quick to judge. Everything we do is not inherently good just based on who we are, and everything they do is not inherently bad just because they aren't American.

"It's a trap of the mind, more binding than chains, thinking that all the right is on your side, and none on the other.
 
Locke and Load said:
This is an asinine post, but yes, I'm going to assume someone is not a terrorist until proven otherwise. That's part of the judicial fabric of this country, innocent until proven guilty.



Going off what was said above, when will this war be "over"? We're waging war on an idea, terrorism. You can't "win". So what's our timeframe? 5 years? 10? 50? Then, after that, what happens if during a trial we find out that someone who we've detained for countless years of their life turn out to be innocent after all? Do we give them monetary compensation? Is there any amount of money that could make up for say 10 years of your life in deplorable conditions, away from your friends and family? Your kids have grown up, your wife probably thinks your dead, your friends have forgotten about you...you think that could be fixed with some money?

Furthermore, what if... what IF our act of abducting and detaining citizens without convicting them of a crime, if our continuous bombing of a sovereign nations who we haven't declared war on, if our continued occupation and presence in the Middle East is actually what is CAUSING the widespread hatred against America, much more than any book? What if, as the CIA says, that our actions can cause "blow-back"? What if our actions have consequences? What if our actions are actually helping to inspire and perpetuate terrorism rather than eradicate it?

What do we do then?...

Armed Chinese Troops in Texas! - YouTube
Click to expand...


sure... and Gitmo is just the local YMCA....and you dont trust the work of our brave men and women..they arent sending girl scouts to Gitmo...
 
Locke and Load said:
We've killed plenty of little boys, girls, grammas, husbands, wives, adolescents and infants.

Also, what about the "terrorists" that attacks our troops that are in their country? They don't target little girls and grammas. Don't be so quick to judge. Everything we do is not inherently good just based on who we are, and everything they do is not inherently bad just because they aren't American.


"It's a trap of the mind, more binding than chains, thinking that all the right is on your side, and none on the other.
Click to expand...
Clinton carpet bombed Iraq... Obama is using drones..but you worry about Gitmo?...
 
VanceMack said:
Have you ever read the process that landed people in GITMO? And since we are talking about GITMO...I wonder if we will also begin to talk about Bahgram AB and Obamas expanded black ops prison use there and number of detainees...hmmmm...

3.5 years...just before the election. He must have had another one of those 'conversions of conscience". How conveeeeeeenient.
Click to expand...

I've read countless stories about people ending up in Gitmo for no good reason, some have absolutely no connection to terrorism whatsoever. I don't know how truthful these stories are and I don't know what the percentage is, but I do believe it happens too much.
 
Dwight said:
43rd actively fought against deportation of some Gitmo prisoners to Britain.

But yeah, "when the war is over" is crazy talk. War on what? War on Terror? What kind of time frame is expected for wrapping up a war against an idea whose first recorded instance was 2 millennium ago? A war against any hostile adherents to a wider religion that has something near 2 billion followers? With no identifiable authority to declare a surrender, it has the hallmarks of a rabbit hole with no bottom. No, "when the war is over" has no real meaning here for mortals.
Click to expand...

I heard on one of those talking head shows on PBS I think (sorry it was along time ago), that Bush administration officials tried to vett Middle eastern countries to take some of these people at some point (I think it was the countries of origins of the ones they were looking to transfer) and the response was NFW. Either way, I am not ACLU type when it comes to these people or their rights. I just think we have had more than enough time to come up with some sort of Kangaroo Court to say they were tried. Give them a Mass with Captain Hook for all I care. The SCOTUS pretty much rubber stamps anything involving non-citizens just as long as there is some procedural due process argument to wrap itself in. "We created a process; the process was followed; Doesn't matter if you like the process. Next...."
 
Someone fighting on a battlefield against our troops in a foriegn land does not deserve our civil justice considerations.
 
RadicalModerate said:
If some are imprisoned in Gitmo under trumped up charges, then what are those basically innocent captives being rehabilitated for?
Click to expand...

I don't know man? They're probably angry that they are being falsely imprisoned. They're probably treated as though they are guilty. What do they do play along? I'm not sure what you're getting at. Are you supposing they're guilty if they're being rehabilitated? I don't know what kind of rehab they go through, is it even considered rehab? I don't work there.
 
The Prof said:
they target little girls and grammas
Click to expand...

Our bombs blow their children to bits, what's the difference? I believe we don't mean to do such things and some of them mean to, so there is that. Otherwise it doesn't make much difference, especially considering we are vastly militarily superior.
 
Travis007 said:
sure... and Gitmo is just the local YMCA....and you dont trust the work of our brave men and women..they arent sending girl scouts to Gitmo...
Click to expand...

What in the hell are you talking about?... You do know that people in Gitmo DO NOT have to be convicted or even charged with a crime to be detained right? And that there have been several instances where the people we've detained, sometimes for years, turn out to be innocent? As for the soldiers, they aren't the ones saying who goes to Gitmo, they're just capturing those that someone up the line has said to grab.

Travis007 said:
Clinton carpet bombed Iraq... Obama is using drones..but you worry about Gitmo?...
Click to expand...

Exactly! You're getting close here mate. We overthrew Iran's DEMOCRATICALLY elected government in 1953 and installed an oppressive dictator just because we wanted their oil. They had a revolution in 1979 and overthrew that person and reclaimed their government. So they're kind of upset with us.

Clinton carpet-bombed Iraq-Yes! And the ensuing carnage and death INCREASED hatred and resentment towards Americans, thus making it MORE PLAUSIBLE that people would engage in acts of violence and terrorism against us.

Obama is using drones- Yes! And when a drone flies into a country, drops a bomb and wipes out a "suspected" (NOT proven) terrorist as well as everyone else who is unfortunate enough to be close by, this angers people as they see it as an assult to their sovereignty. This INCREASES hatred and resentment towards America, making it MORE PLAUSIBLE that people engage in acts of violence and terrorism against us.

We were bombing Iraq and had military bases in Saudi Arabia before 9/11 happened. Do you think that it might be possible that our invasion and occupation of their country, that our bombing of their innocent civilians, that our disregard for their autonomy and sovereignty might have contributed to and inspired their attacks of 9/11? If so, then our response of more invasions, more troops, more bombs, more dead civilians, more force is actually PERPETUATING terrorism against us, NOT eliminating it.
 
This violates the Rule of Law, which is what our country was founded on
Click to expand...

50 democratic senators, including harry reid, john kerry, chuck schumer, difi, daniel inouye, chair of appropriations, and russ feingold, evidently, don't know what our country was founded on

Senate Votes To Block Funds For Guantanamo Closure, 90 to 6

if gitmo is a violation of rights, what's a drone kill?

for the record, mr qumu went back

indeed, according to the nyt in april, 2010, mr qumu was to barack hussein "an ally of sorts"

not due to any change of mr qumu's disposition, mind you, but all attributable to redirections in barack hussein's policies

according to the nyt

mr qumu is hardly alone

Nation & World | Report: Gitmo detainees rejoin fight against U.S. | Seattle Times Newspaper
 
Aberration said:
Someone fighting on a battlefield against our troops in a foriegn land does not deserve our civil justice considerations.
Click to expand...

Everyone deserves civil justice, regardless of race, religion, or circumstance. To believe anything else would be an affront to freedom and liberty. You can't say that you support liberty but only for people who agree with what you say and do what you want them to do, and everyone else isn't worth the crap on your shoe. You either fully support liberty or not at all.

And besides, so they are fighting our troops that are occupying THEIR country, killing THEIR friends and family and you say that because of this they no longer have rights? How would you feel if the Chinese came over here, occupied YOUR city, detained YOUR friends and family, killed YOUR kid through a drone strike, and then when you finally decided to try and defend yourself they arrested you and threw you in a rathole for the rest of your life? Seem fair? Reasonable?
 
The Prof said:
50 democratic senators, including harry reid, john kerry, chuck schumer, difi, daniel inouye, chair of appropriations, and russ feingold, evidently, don't know what our country was founded on

Senate Votes To Block Funds For Guantanamo Closure, 90 to 6

if gitmo is a violation of rights, what's a drone kill?

for the record, mr qumu went back

indeed, according to the nyt in april, 2010, mr qumu was to barack hussein "an ally of sorts"

not due to any change of mr qumu's disposition, mind you, but all attributable to redirections in barack hussein's policies

according to the nyt

mr qumu is hardly alone

Nation & World | Report: Gitmo detainees rejoin fight against U.S. | Seattle Times Newspaper
Click to expand...

A drone kill is still a violation of rights, in fact it's an assassination. The Senate voted against closing Guantanamo because they didn't want to transfer the inmates to state prisons. But that's not the point. They should be sent home and only detained if we charge them with a crime, and kept only if we can convict them of actual wrong-doing. Not just keep shuffling them around like cattle.

From your NYT article:
"Terrorism suspects who have been held but released from Guantánamo Bay are increasingly returning to the fight against the United States and its allies, the Pentagon said Tuesday"

Ah yes, straight from the Pentagon, so it's gotta be true right? Of course not. Would you expect them to say "Oh well after illegally detaining these people for several years, we let them go back to their country that our troops are currently occupying and wouldn't you know it, now they're angry and want to fight us!"

They have to say detainees "rejoin" the fight to not make it sound like they're creating enemies. They're trying to protect and defend our foreign policy because they don't want to admit they might have been wrong.
 
we got to make cuts
Click to expand...

we are

Obama outlines defense cuts - POLITICO.com

the defense secty says these sequester cuts will devastate our military effectiveness

Defense Cuts Devastating: Panetta

obama didn't want defense contractors sending those painful pink slips to the 100K defense workers of VA, among others, in violation of the warn act

White House to defense contractors: Don't Send Pink Slips

lockheed, eads, general dynamics, et al, simply ignored him

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0912/81007.html

a lot of people ignore the presidential apologist these days, friends and foes alike

they need to study up on america's founding, it appears
 
Locke and Load said:
Everyone deserves civil justice, regardless of race, religion, or circumstance. To believe anything else would be an affront to freedom and liberty. You can't say that you support liberty but only for people who agree with what you say and do what you want them to do, and everyone else isn't worth the crap on your shoe. You either fully support liberty or not at all.

And besides, so they are fighting our troops that are occupying THEIR country, killing THEIR friends and family and you say that because of this they no longer have rights? How would you feel if the Chinese came over here, occupied YOUR city, detained YOUR friends and family, killed YOUR kid through a drone strike, and then when you finally decided to try and defend yourself they arrested you and threw you in a rathole for the rest of your life? Seem fair? Reasonable?
Click to expand...

No, civilians deserve civil justice. Enemy combatants don't.

Maybe they shouldn't be planning and harboring terrorists if they don't want to wind up in a rathole. Seems the majority of the country can manage that.
 
Now the defense question for me is, what is the plan for Afghanistan if we have stopped training civilians (which BTW was a decision I 100% support given the circumstances)?
 
Aberration said:
No, civilians deserve civil justice. Enemy combatants don't.

Maybe they shouldn't be planning and harboring terrorists if they don't want to wind up in a rathole. Seems the majority of the country can manage that.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, most are declared enemy combatants and terrorists without them doing anything, and no proof to back it up. They are then rounded up and put in said rathole. They are detained and denied a lawyer, a trial, and the right to know what they are being detained for without ANY proof that they have done ANYTHING wrong. Does that sound like America to you?

The Prof said:
Drone strike kills 13 civilians — RT

US drones kill 9 civilians in Somalia | The Nation

How The US Kills Civilians In Afghanistan - Salon.com

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/18/world/asia/18pakistan.html
Click to expand...

Good links. For some reason people seem to think that we as a country can do no wrong, like just because we're America everything we do is moral and legal and right.
 
Locke and Load said:
Unfortunately, most are declared enemy combatants and terrorists without them doing anything, and no proof to back it up. They are then rounded up and put in said rathole. They are detained and denied a lawyer, a trial, and the right to know what they are being detained for without ANY proof that they have done ANYTHING wrong. Does that sound like America to you?



Good links. For some reason people seem to think that we as a country can do no wrong, like just because we're America everything we do is moral and legal and right.
Click to expand...

I will let the boots on the ground make those decisions.

No one said we don't do any wrong. Detaining combatants is just not one of them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom