• 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!

Obama advisers set to recommend military tribunals for alleged 9/11 plotters

PogueMoran said:
No he was captured by Pakistani intelligence then turned over to the CIA then transferred to our facility. By what definition of "captured by our military" does that fall under. Transferring of custody is not the same as capturing.
Click to expand...

The CIA is a military apparatus. Not that it matters who captured him; he's an unlawful combatant which means he's not entitled to a trial in the US's criminal justice system.
 
Ethereal said:
Where does the Constitution provide protection to unlawful combatants captured on foreign soil?
Click to expand...

Who has been labeled as an "unlawful combatant"?
 
1. he is not entitled to the rights enjoyed by AMERICAN CITIZENS

2. sensible americans do not want ksm tried before the likes of lance ito
 
ADK_Forever said:
Who has been labeled as an "unlawful combatant"?
Click to expand...

When you openly defy the Geneva Conventions you are, by definition, an unlawful combatant.

By the way, I like the way you answered my question with another question.

Tell me, where are foreign terrorists addressed in the US Constitution?
 
Ethereal said:
When you openly defy the Geneva Conventions you are, by definition, an unlawful combatant.
Click to expand...

And does it matter to you what SCOTUS says about people we capture?

By the way, I like the way you answered my question with another question.
Click to expand...

I don't address sideways questions that someone asks because they know their argument is a loser. What are you gonna do next, ask me what I would do if a captured terrorist might have knowledge about a nuclear bomb? :doh

Tell me, where are foreign terrorists addressed in the US Constitution?
Click to expand...

Another distraction.
 
It's nice to see that Obama is finally making a good decision by trying these guys with a military tribunal. Although I don't trust his motives, I think his main goal is to still shut down Guantanamo and cripple national security, either he genuinely couldn't have the civilian court thing or there is a hidden agenda at work.
 
does it matter what POTUS says?

does it matter what AG says?

"military tribunal" are THEIR words
 
Why are all you people so afraid of trying this guy, or anyone, in a civilian court? I mean, seriously. We've done it before, in fact we've done it for 99% of terrorists.

So, now if Obama turns tail and changes his mind what will you rightees then have to complain about?
 
you mean, they're cowards
 
Frankly, I think we give these nuts too much credibility as a military force by giving them military tribunals. If we didn't pick them up off the battle field then we shouldn't treat them as military prisoners.

We are a country of laws and terrorists are criminals and not enemy combatants. The fact that the dems are capitulating to the repubs just points out the weakness of democrats to bite back against stupidity. Seems like all the repubs have to do is gin up a boogeyman and the dems, worried about re-election, roll over. Both parties are so pathetic it's sick.
 
The Prof said:
you mean, they're cowards
Click to expand...

He's too concerned with trying to make both sides happy. I think he still thinks bipartisanship is possible. It's not.

He needs to stop debating and just DO what he knows is the right thing to do. The Repukes will never agree with him, even when he, or Congress, does what they have wanted. They have proven this. All they want is to regain power. They will not help him, or the Dems, to have any wins they can point to in November. Obama needs to just roll over them.
 
he doesn't seem to be listening to your advice

he's a LOSER
 
ADK_Forever said:
He's too concerned with trying to make both sides happy. I think he still thinks bipartisanship is possible. It's not.

He needs to stop debating and just DO what he knows is the right thing to do. The Repukes will never agree with him, even when he, or Congress, does what they have wanted. They have proven this. All they want is to regain power. They will not help him, or the Dems, to have any wins they can point to in November. Obama needs to just roll over them.
Click to expand...

Barry can't even roll over his own wife... he's a lame duck after just 1 year. :lamo
 
The Prof said:
he doesn't seem to be listening to your advice

he's a LOSER
Click to expand...

What makes you think I'm advising him.

He won the election. That makes him a winner.
 
he WAS a winner

on ksm in manhattan he IS a loser

sorry
 
Crunch said:
Barry can't even roll over his own wife... he's a lame duck after just 1 year. :lamo
Click to expand...
Why would you need to get that personal? Your hate is really apparent, after only one year.
 
NoJingoLingo said:
Why would you need to get that personal? Your hate is really apparent, after only one year.
Click to expand...

My dislike of this man dated from the time I did a bit of research on him and found out what he stood for and who he associated with.. was there a point to your post?
 
Crunch said:
My dislike of this man dated from the time I did a bit of research on him and found out what he stood for and who he associated with.. was there a point to your post?
Click to expand...

Oh come on now. I'll bet you started not liking him as soon as you knew a "D" was associated with him. :2wave:
 
Crunch said:
My dislike of this man dated from the time I did a bit of research on him and found out what he stood for and who he associated with.. was there a point to your post?
Click to expand...
No its more than dislike its hate so much so that you think he isnt eligible to be preisdent. It has everything to do with the D
 
ADK_Forever said:
Oh come on now. I'll bet you started not liking him as soon as you knew a "D" was associated with him. :2wave:
Click to expand...

You mean like Disloyal... Dingenuous... Disrespects this country... Discombobulated without his teleprompter, wants to reDistribute our money to those that didn't earn it?

Yeah, I hate all of those D's. :2wave:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom