• 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!

Hardin, Montana Requests Guantanamo Detainees

Indy said:
Way to completely dodge the meat of the argument and focus on the garnish.
Click to expand...

Most of these prisoners are not terrorists but "enemy combatants", which simply means they fought against Americans in Afghanistan. Even the German and Japanese prisoners in WW2 were processed and release long before the time already served by these detainees. It is time to decide on their fate, and stop irresponsibly pretending they don't exist.
 
Indy said:
Way to completely dodge the meat of the argument and focus on the garnish.
Click to expand...

Actually, I think it speaks towards the attitude the left has regarding the enemy combatants. They seem to have deep, profound sympathy for them. Its one thing to argue the merits of how we handle this issue, and I have no problem with a healthy and vigourous debate over detainee legal rights. But lets not call these enemies of our state, and just enemies of freedom in general, "poor shmucks".
 
I'll still love Montana even if they take the killers. However, these killers may serve better as hunting targets in the Montana back country.
 
Whose idea was it to build that facility in that location? Just another typical US government project, eh?


.
 
WI Crippler said:
Actually, I think it speaks towards the attitude the left has regarding the enemy combatants. They seem to have deep, profound sympathy for them. Its one thing to argue the merits of how we handle this issue, and I have no problem with a healthy and vigourous debate over detainee legal rights. But lets not call these enemies of our state, and just enemies of freedom in general, "poor shmucks".
Click to expand...

Where the f*** do you get the idea that the "left" has sympathy for these guys? If you don't understand the issue any better than that, maybe you should stay out of it. Most of these detainees are not terrorists, and should not have rotted in Gitmo for eight years. Those that are terrorists should be either locked up for life or killed. Either way, some sort of justice should have been rendered by now, and your Republican administration weakened America by screwing up what should have been a straight forward POW issue.
 
tlmorg02 said:
No one is pushing for closing the base. Only the military prison that is a black-eye to America throughout the world. A country based on fair, unbiased justice should not be holding captives indefinitely. Give the detanees a trial, if guilty lock them up, if they are not guilty then send them home.
Click to expand...

So... taking the enemy combatants to an American prison and treating them in exactly the same way as they're now being treated at Hotel Guantanamo will eliminate this fictitious "black eye" that only the pants-wetting left can see in what way?
 
tlmorg02 said:
No one is pushing for closing the base. Only the military prison that is a black-eye to America throughout the world. A country based on fair, unbiased justice should not be holding captives indefinitely. Give the detanees a trial, if guilty lock them up, if they are not guilty then send them home.
Click to expand...

Except we did just that during WWII. We held more than 300,000 German POWs in camps in the US until the war was over. You think they all got lawyers and trials?
 
WillRockwell said:
Where the f*** do you get the idea that the "left" has sympathy for these guys?
Click to expand...

Well, you may not read them, but at least some of us read at least some of your posts.

WillRockwell said:
Either way, some sort of justice should have been rendered by now, and your Republican administration weakened America by screwing up what should have been a straight forward POW issue.
Click to expand...

How can it be a straightforward POW issue when there's no enemy nation with which to discuss prisoner treatment or prisoner exchange, let alone the surrender of that nation to permit the eventual repatriation of the detainees?

Perhaps you should try to understand the issues at hand a little better.
 
Moon said:
Except we did just that during WWII. We held more than 300,000 German POWs in camps in the US until the war was over. You think they all got lawyers and trials?
Click to expand...

Well the difference there is that a number of people have already been released from Guantanamo and declared innocent. So its reasonable enough to assume that there are a number of innocent people still in there. In a conventional war the issue of whos guilty [for want of a better term] and who isnt is more clear cut.
 
Red_Dave said:
Well the difference there is that a number of people have already been released from Guantanamo and declared innocent. So its reasonable enough to assume that there are a number of innocent people still in there. In a conventional war the issue of whos guilty [for want of a better term] and who isnt is more clear cut.
Click to expand...

I agree, though I take exception to another poster's contention that "most" of the detainees are innocent. Also, there have been several "innocent" detainees that were released that were found to be fighting our soldiers again.
 
Red_Dave said:
Well the difference there is that a number of people have already been released from Guantanamo and declared innocent. So its reasonable enough to assume that there are a number of innocent people still in there. In a conventional war the issue of whos guilty [for want of a better term] and who isnt is more clear cut.
Click to expand...

The better term is "enemy". Because wars do not concern themselves with guilt or innocence, that being a matter for civillian courts in peacetime. Rather soldiers and patriots are concerned with national survival and the protection of the kids at home.

Since the illegal enemy combatants are found on battlefields bearing arms against American troops, since those darling little people can't get the nations they claim to be from to acknowledge them and claim them, they're stateless enemy combatants and what the hell is a nation fighting a war against an amorphous multinational internationally nonspecific cowardly enemy supposed to do with the flotsam picked up on the battlefield?

Personally, I'm all for questioning them until they're drained dry and then feeding them to the pigs.

I haven't forgotten what those people did on September 11, 2001, and will never forget and never forgive the people involved.

What's wrong with you?
 
Last edited:
Even al-jazeera admits the Senator, Congressman, and thus the people there don't want them.



Greg Smith, Hardin's economic development director.
Click to expand...

...

Whats next a community organizer's opinion?
 
Times are tough, unemplyment is up, they have an unused prison so why not RENT A TERRORIST!! After 6 months in that place the CAMEL HUMPING terrorists will be sorry that GITMO was closed !!!
 
TOJ said:
Whose idea was it to build that facility in that location? Just another typical US government project, eh?


.
Click to expand...
Byrd threw Montana a bone. :lol:

BTW, who ****ed around the emoticons??? Check with me next time you adjust that ****, okay? :rofl
 
Moon said:
Except we did just that during WWII. We held more than 300,000 German POWs in camps in the US until the war was over. You think they all got lawyers and trials?
Click to expand...

You are aware that we admitted that we were wrong afterward and apologized for our actions in additions to paying the survivors for what we did to them. Once again, if you don't bother to learn your own history then you are doomed to repeat it.
 
Moon said:
I agree, though I take exception to another poster's contention that "most" of the detainees are innocent. Also, there have been several "innocent" detainees that were released that were found to be fighting our soldiers again.
Click to expand...

Yes, i believe the number was 1 in 7. Lets see, that means that 6 in 7 were innocent. That's a failing grade to me and every single school in the nation. Unless of course you go to Liberty University or something, I'm not sure exactly what they base their grades on.
 
Glinda said:
Seriously, if you'd ever been to Hardin, you'd understand in a heartbeat. The news story paints the picture exactly right. The place is bleak - empty storefronts and drunken Indians wandering the streets (the res is dry; the Crow go to Hardin to drink).
Click to expand...

True, the town went to hell a long time ago, but I loved playing there when I was a kid, and my folks loved it there growing up. In our family, there's always going to be a special place in our hearts for Hardin.
 
Hatuey said:
14th Amendment - Section 1 :



Considering Gbay is under our jurisdiction then it would seem to me like they'd already be subject to our laws and protections. Unless you want to argue that the federal government can deny any person under it's jurisdiction the protection of the law.
Click to expand...

It is not sovereign U.S. territory are you asserting that the Constitution should follow the flag? Were Afghanis and Iraqi's living under the Constitution during the provisional government period? I don't think so. I understand that you want foreign jihadists protected by the bill of rights so that they can be released, but then that would be my whole point.
 
tlmorg02 said:
I am not advocating giving them full Constitutional protection, but I am advocating a fair trial.
Click to expand...

A civilian trial?

And I am not advocating giving them full citizenship if not guilty.
Click to expand...

Then what are you advocating should be done with them? FYI the recidivism rate for released detainees is astonishing.

Question though, what would you do with the detainees who have done nothing wrong? Do you think it is ok to lock innocent people up forever because they were wrongly detained?
Click to expand...


I don't think there are any non-Islamists being detained. But if you want my opinion on what should be done with them it would be the same as FDR's in the ex parte quirin case IE tried by secret military tribunal and executed before the general public even knows they exist.
 
Last edited:
Agent Ferris said:
But if you want my opinion on what should be done with them it would be the same as FDR's in the ex parte quirin case IE tried by secret military tribunal and executed before the general public even knows they exist.
Click to expand...

So people that haven't done anything illegal should be executed. WOW.

I guess they are all just dirty brown Muslims that need a good killin to you right?
 
TheNextEra said:
So people that haven't done anything illegal should be executed. WOW.
Click to expand...

All detainees who are actually innocent are released at the military tribunal hearings prior to the trials by military commissions. Allthough the recidivicsm rate is quite high even for those persons.
 
American said:
Byrd threw Montana a bone. :lol:

...
Click to expand...
Probably needed Baucus's support on funding some new building in WV to be named after the KKK Senator. ;)

.
 
Agent Ferris said:
Oh really? So then what would Obama's plan be once they are in America? Your knowledge of con-law = epic fail.
Click to expand...

Again, if you aren't making rational arguments don't expect people to take you seriously. Oh, and by the way, just saying FAIL every freaking time you disagree with somebody also isn't helping you out any.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom