| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
 Posted: Sat Jan 24, 2009 9:10 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| dmbfan wrote: |
| Quote: |
| JMO is right. The onus is on those who advocate torture to show it works. National Security is too important to just scuttle the way we've always done things (i.e. rule of law). Once it is shown to work, then we can have the conversation about whether its ethical. |
Who said it has NOT worked?
Also, I don't believe for one second that ALL those inmates (if very few) were actually tortured, Jack Bauer style.
dmbfan |
I'll be more specific.
You torture Mohammed Al-Jihad. Mohammed Al-Jihad cries, "Enough! I'll tell you everything! Just leave me be!"
How can you be certain what he is telling you is true? The incentives are for him to tell you something, anything, so that the pain stops.
Show me torture works. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 7:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
NPR's Juan Williams: B. Obama has not dealt with the problem's complexities.
NPR Reports
NPR Reports |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 9:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
NPR's Juan Williams: B. Obama has not dealt with the problem's complexities.
NPR Reports
NPR Reports |
No, he hasn't.
Its a fucking mess because the Bush Administration decided to play cowboy and ignore the UNANIMOUS advice of JAGs throughout the armed services (far trumping Clinton's supposed scorn for the military) to not torture these individuals.
If the Bush Administration had worked to set up a secondary court system for these suspects, they could have VERY EASILY have had:
a) reduced burden of proof
b) limited periods of detentions without trials (90-180 days w/o charges is still MUCH superior to unlimited detention)
c) more efficient due process requirements than present in civilian courts
And the Supreme Court would have upheld it 7-2 give or take a vote.
Its not a problem Obama can just hit out of the park in his first week. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 10:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| Its a fucking mess because the Bush Administration... |
No. We have accomplished "change." "Yes, we could," and supposedly we did. B. Obama presents himself as a reconciliationist and a leader. We have extremely, perhaps even unworldly, hopes for him.
Very well, then. Lead. This means the anti-W. Bush diatribes belong in the past. W. Bush is gone, Kuros. This is Barack Obama's administration. Time to talk about Barack Obama.
What is he going to do?
I would like the Messianic cheerleading to stop and I would like us to get past the easy campaign speeches and the five-minute executive orders, and ask this question: what is Barack Obama going to actually do about this and other issues...? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MothraAttack
Joined: 20 Jan 2009
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 4:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Baer was not an analyst but a spy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ED209
Joined: 17 Oct 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 4:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Not so much a spy as a government agent.
Unfortunately it is true that in a free society you can't lock up people if you lack evidence against them. This story shows another failure of Gitmo, that the guilty are set free while innocent men are locked up. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 5:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Actually, a case officer in the operations directorate, apparently the Middle East Division, but who cares about accurate specifics here...? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Insidejohnmalkovich
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
Location: Pusan
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 5:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Never understood Guantanamo detention. These terrorists should have been shot in battle, not rounded up to cause further trouble. And those who were captured in non-combat situations shoudl have been turned over to their home governments: few of the established Arab governments like Islamic extremists. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 5:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Insidejohnmalkovich wrote: |
| Never understood Guantanamo detention. |
I agree. But W. Bush's govt and its problems notwithstanding, I remain interested in the B. Obama administration. He claims he can and will protect the national security. Supposedly he will not be a J. Carter (Iran and Nicaragua) or a B. Clinton (Somalia) and permit leftist dogma paralyze him to the point where we become vulnerable.
I continue giving him the benefit of the doubt. He has surrounded himself with people I respect, especially including R. Gates. Let us see what he does.
I hope, however, that he does not release these people into the United States or simply enable their returning to Al Qaeda.
What is he going to do with them, when, how, etc.? He needs to be specific here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 6:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Putting away the 1993 world trade center bombers cost 30 million dollars.
It cost 30 million dollars to put away 7 guys.
70,000 trained in Al Qaeda camps during the 1990s.
To put all of the Al Qaeda fighters , (not to mention Hezbollah fighters )away would bankrupt and overwhelm the US justice system.
Using the US criminal system would also mean the US govt would have to reveal its sources and methods of intel gathering.
Everytime there is a terror trial the US needs to provide massive security for the judge , the jury the witnesses as well as the defendant.
No exaggeration the US justice system isn't up to dealing with Al Qaeda. Not even close. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jandar
Joined: 11 Jun 2008
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 6:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The prisoners should be classified as POWs and held until the end of hostilities between the US and AQ.
How hard is that to understand and enforce.
Enemy combatants are prisoners of war.
Criminals are criminals there is a difference.
Shut down Gitmo sure then you can hold the POWs within the theater of operations. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 8:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
To call an Al Qaeda fighter a prisoner of war diminishes the status of POWs.
They fight for an illegitimate cause, using illegitimate techniques, hiding among civilians to attack civilians, without any uniform or any accountability whatsoever in a war paid for by illicit funds.
Illegal combatant is the correct status. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JMO
Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Location: Daegu
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 9:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
To call an Al Qaeda fighter a prisoner of war diminishes the status of POWs.
They fight for an illegitimate cause, using illegitimate techniques, hiding among civilians to attack civilians, without any uniform or any accountability whatsoever in a war paid for by illicit funds.
Illegal combatant is the correct status. |
Splitting hairs surely. It is a war on terror after all. I think the point is that classifying them as POWs would be a good solution to the problem at hand. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
