Obama: Day 1.

[FlipKing]

I must say, impressive. Good first steps.

1. He froze White House Executive salaries.
2. He drafted a document to close the detention center in guantanamo bay.
3. He already called many middle eastern leaders.

[NewGen33]

Lets not turn this into a stupid racist thread please!!! Proceed...

[Spectic Tank]

I must say, impressive. Good first steps.

0. Smoke a 'Port'
1. He froze White House Executive salaries.
2. He drafted a document to close the detention center in guantanamo bay.
3. He already called many middle eastern leaders.

Nothing like nicotine first thing in the morning...

[blacknightteg]

yeah, it seems like he is stepping up well. and the good thing i like to, is that from the get go we already know what he is doing.

[Revmaynard]

Nothing like nicotine first thing in the morning...


That was the weakest ''joke'' since ''knock, knock''.

[G.C]

That was the weakest ''joke'' since ''knock, knock''.

True.

[Alan®]

wrong section and I disagree with closing Guantanamo

[Master Shake]

with all the plans he's making. i heard the luncheon for him cost like $120 mil. don't know how true that is though.

[Catnip]

wrong section dipshit




:ninja:

[Spectic Tank]

That was the weakest ''joke'' since ''knock, knock''.

I was actually serious, but OK.

[JITB]

wrong section and I disagree with closing Guantanamo


i mean alot of people there were being held for no reason at all....

[blaknoize]

I was actually serious, but OK.
That was a seriously terrible joke, like awful :no: I feel sorry for u and all of us that just witnessed such a joke, disgusting :no:

But yes, progress is already in the works and the public is notified. LOVE IT. Makes u feel like ur actually part of something

[Sledlude]

i like. gettin shit done already.

[Alan®]

i mean alot of people there were being held for no reason at all....
Ok so protocols need to be changed. But to close down Guantanamo? Come on what does that solve?

[ksniperfox]

Nothing like nicotine first thing in the morning...



repped for TRUTH

[Catnip]

wrong section dipshit




:ninja:

What he said.

[FlipKing]

^^ you are gay and I was trying to have a serious conversation. Not about politics, but about peoples feelings about him stepping up so quickly. Politics is a meaningless process about money. I feel Obama may be above such things. We shall see with time.

[Buttons]

there is news that he is not legally president, since he and that guy said the oath wrong.

but whatevs.

[Catnip]

^^ you are gay and I was trying to have a serious conversation. Not about politics, but about peoples feelings about him stepping up so quickly. Politics is a meaningless process about money. I feel Obama may be above such things. We shall see with time.


When you talk


I like dick in or around my mouf

is all we hear.

[FlipKing]

THat talk is just people trying to start shit. Evan :-p we all know you love black people. Really meant to be serious tho.

[NewGen33]

there is news that he is not legally president, since he and that guy said the oath wrong.

but whatevs.
The constitution states the president elect becomes president on January 20th at 12 O'clock regardless of the oath.

[Buttons]

The constitution states the president elect becomes president on January 20th at 12 O'clock regardless of the oath.

oh okay :) just checking.

[Catnip]

THat talk is just people trying to start shit. Evan :-p we all know you love black people. Really meant to be serious tho.

MAH NEW WOMANZ IS A WHITE HONKEY, DON'T BE LETTIN HER KNOW.

[collins]

Chill out guys... It's just his first day. I'm anxious to see how he handles whatever his first challenge might be.

[ksniperfox]

Chill out guys... It's just his first day. I'm anxious to see how he handles whatever his first challenge might be.



reminds me of someones first day at work, fuckin shit up, catchin shit from everyone. "its my first day"

and everythings ok

[NewGen33]

oh okay :) just checking.
I'm here to help :yes:

[Vteckidd]

Closing Gitmo is going to have all kinds of problems. Where do the detainees go now? most countries dont want them, so .......

And there are people there that were resposible for 9/11, how do we try them now?

Hope he has a plan for all that

[JITB]

Closing Gitmo is going to have all kinds of problems. Where do the detainees go now? most countries dont want them, so .......

And there are people there that were resposible for 9/11, how do we try them now?

Hope he has a plan for all that


trial for anyone in Gitmo? lol Like i said before.. most of them dont even kow why they are there, in the first place. its all based on loose information. And we dont have time or money to give these people a trial, with out any evidence. and you definatly cant lock up or execute people based on who they know, or hang out with. That place is like a trophy case, for the past 8 years...to show the world "hey look what we got"

[redrumracer]

i mean alot of people there were being held for no reason at all....
yes this is an asshole comment but i honestly dont give a damn what happens to them, i dont know them, dont care about them. but it is a bad decision to to close them, but if they do release them then send them back to where they came from so they get killed if they were actually involved in it. cause im sure they wont trust them.(remember i dont care what happens to them)

[collins]

reminds me of someones first day at work, fuckin shit up, catchin shit from everyone. "its my first day"

and everythings ok
I'm just saying he has alot to prove. That's all. And you're exactly right... He IS the new guy in the office. I HOPE he doesn't fuck up. But only time will tell.

[JITB]

yes this is an asshole comment but i honestly dont give a damn what happens to them, i dont know them, dont care about them. but it is a bad decision to to close them, but if they do release them then send them back to where they came from so they get killed if they were actually involved in it. cause im sure they wont trust them.(remember i dont care what happens to them)


i mean me neither too much. but its a waste of money...OUR money. We pay for them to sleep/eat/workout etc.. everyday to keep that place open. its a big waste for not much but a bunch of henchmen, or friends of known terrorists etc.

if they really thought these guys at Gbay were guilty, they woudl have been put on trial, sentenced.. and been serving time. more than half of those guys are just there.

Im sure they wont just throw them back into society, or jsut release the gates and let them walk out the door. but this also isnt really an obama thing.. it has been in talks for awhile now.. to close gbay.

[Alan®]

trial for anyone in Gitmo? lol Like i said before.. most of them dont even kow why they are there, in the first place. its all based on loose information. And we dont have time or money to give these people a trial, with out any evidence. and you definatly cant lock up or execute people based on who they know, or hang out with. That place is like a trophy case, for the past 8 years...to show the world "hey look what we got"
I'm sorry but no offense I found this a little humorous. We don't have the time or money to give these people a trial but we have money to throw out there for all the extra bull shit that was in the bailout and Obama's already proposing $850B stimulus after the last one didn't work. Oh yea. The guy is really learning. I think the best idea I have heard regarding any kind of stimulus came out of Texas. Instead of adding to the problem by printing off more money on top of the $700B bailout suspend Federal Tax witholdings for 60 days. IMHO the stimulus is flawed. What we need right now is people spending money not socking it away or paying down credit cards and thats exactly what they did with the stimulus and only a select people got it. If you suspended Federal Tax witholdings for 60 days regardless of age or income, think about all the kids that would have a couple hundred extra bucks every two weeks to blow on stupid shit they otherwise couldnt get. That more than anything would help.

[NewGen33]

As long as they have a plan set forward for when they close it I'm ok with it. Plus them being sentenced to life is cheaper than executing them.

[redrumracer]

As long as they have a plan set forward for when they close it I'm ok with it. Plus them being sentenced to life is cheaper than executing them.
not if you just use one of the nukes that we need to disarm anyways.

[NewGen33]

not if you just use one of the nukes that we need to disarm anyways.
Ya that would stir up even more trouble and I don't think we should ever disarm anymore nukes. Especially now with all the warm wars we got building up.

[redrumracer]

Ya that would stir up even more trouble and I don't think we should ever disarm anymore nukes. Especially now with all the warm wars we got building up.
fuck em.

[NewGen33]

fuck em.
LOL

[RedEj8]

Uhhhh I wouldn't really call it good. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/01/21/families-outraged-obama-suspend-guantanamo-war-crimes-trials/

The courts here will let them go. Perhaps not every single one, but the bulk of these Terrorists will go free.

They will get apologies, and even perhaps money for the time they were held for the crimes they planned, committed and participated in.

[LS2ner]

I think closing Gbay is a good idea. The only purpose it is serving is holding supposed terrorists or war criminals. Our soldiers guard it and all its done is caused us problems. People being tortured, humiliated, molested, etc. I mean if our soldiers were being kept in something like this we would be raising mortal hell. IMO, shut it done, move the prisoners that are actually guilty of something to Alcatraz and send the rest to Australia.

[RedEj8]

lol..Australia...Alcatraz.

[collins]

Is Alcatraz even still in operation? I thought they shut that down a long time ago, or am I thinking of something else?

[mad3nch1na]

there is news that he is not legally president, since he and that guy said the oath wrong.

but whatevs.
that is the most retarded thing i have ever heard

[redrumracer]

I think closing Gbay is a good idea. The only purpose it is serving is holding supposed terrorists or war criminals. Our soldiers guard it and all its done is caused us problems. People being tortured, humiliated, molested, etc. I mean if our soldiers were being kept in something like this we would be raising mortal hell. IMO, shut it done, move the prisoners that are actually guilty of something to Alcatraz and send the rest to Australia.
no the prisoners from our country are just killed by cutting the head off, no jail for them.

[redrumracer]

Is Alcatraz even still in operation? I thought they shut that down a long time ago, or am I thinking of something else?
yes it is shut down.

[LS2ner]

no the prisoners from our country are just killed by cutting the head off, no jail for them.


So? I wonder if thats the reason we've ripped taliban members bodies in half with 50 cal's? Im not saying its the same thing. I was saying if the position was reversed we wouldve already shoved a few thousand missles up someones ass. Us holding prisoners and torturing them is against the Geneva Convention, which if im not mistaken, Iraq, Iran, and other middle eastern countries aren't apart of.

[LS2ner]

Is Alcatraz even still in operation? I thought they shut that down a long time ago, or am I thinking of something else?


Yea its shut down, but we could reopen it im sure.

[JITB]

I'm sorry but no offense I found this a little humorous. We don't have the time or money to give these people a trial but we have money to throw out there for all the extra bull shit that was in the bailout and Obama's already proposing $850B stimulus after the last one didn't work. Oh yea. The guy is really learning. I think the best idea I have heard regarding any kind of stimulus came out of Texas. Instead of adding to the problem by printing off more money on top of the $700B bailout suspend Federal Tax witholdings for 60 days. IMHO the stimulus is flawed. What we need right now is people spending money not socking it away or paying down credit cards and thats exactly what they did with the stimulus and only a select people got it. If you suspended Federal Tax witholdings for 60 days regardless of age or income, think about all the kids that would have a couple hundred extra bucks every two weeks to blow on stupid shit they otherwise couldnt get. That more than anything would help.


Not too many people were fond of the bailout, but it had a purpose, just like the stimilus does. But Gbay is a waste of money..there is no way around it. you dont even have a reason for it to remain open. Those people arent being charged, sentenced for anything just being held captive and being taken care of by us. And wat people did with their money noone can control.. so thats pointless to discuss.

Point is.. Gbay is a waste of money...to take care of prisoners who arent being put thru the justice system, just being detained for years..

[redrumracer]

So? I wonder if thats the reason we've ripped taliban members bodies in half with 50 cal's? Im not saying its the same thing. I was saying if the position was reversed we wouldve already shoved a few thousand missles up someones ass. Us holding prisoners and torturing them is against the Geneva Convention, which if im not mistaken, Iraq, Iran, and other middle eastern countries aren't apart of.
if they are members of the taliban then i dont care if they got ripped to pieces or even quartered. the worse the better imo. also i doubt we would have "shoved" a couple missiles up there asses. hell like i said, what they do with POW's from America is far worse than what we do to them.

[LS2ner]

if they are members of the taliban then i dont care if they got ripped to pieces or even quartered. the worse the better imo. also i doubt we would have "shoved" a couple missiles up there asses. hell like i said, what they do with POW's from America is far worse than what we do to them.


Your obviously missing my point.

[BanginJimmy]

So? I wonder if thats the reason we've ripped taliban members bodies in half with 50 cal's?

This isnt even a comparison. You are talking about combat and prisoners.


Im not saying its the same thing.

Then what are you saying?



I was saying if the position was reversed we wouldve already shoved a few thousand missles up someones ass.

I would hope that we would do everything in our power to avoid the mistakes of Vietnam and actually get our POWs back.




Us holding prisoners and torturing them is against the Geneva Convention, which if im not mistaken, Iraq, Iran, and other middle eastern countries aren't apart of.

None of them are protected under the rules of the Geneva Accords. They are not wearing a recognizable uniform and they are purposefully dressing as civilians in order to blend into the population before an attack. Under those conditions they have no protections.
More to the point though, waterboarding is not considered torture by the Geneva Accords. It is considered an interrogation tactic in the same manner that sleep deprivation is as there is no chance of death or permanent damage. All it does is give you the feeling of drowning. Someone that is comfortable in water would not be susceptible to this method.

[On_Her_Face]

Closing Gitmo is going to have all kinds of problems. Where do the detainees go now? most countries dont want them, so .......

And there are people there that were resposible for 9/11, how do we try them now?

Hope he has a plan for all that

I pray they keep it up and keep the detainees there.

[BanginJimmy]

As far as what to do with them, the latest word I ahve heard is that Fort Levenworth is at the top of the suggestions.

If they tried to put the terrorists on trial here in the US each one of them would be found not guilty or have a hung trial. The govt cannot be forced into providing info on intel operations or methods and if they dont state those methods n court there will be little to no evidence. On top of that, I seriously doubt our soldiers ook the time to collect forensic evidence when each of them was captured.

As far as the ones that have already been released, about 70% have been recaptured or killed on other battlefields within 6 months of their release. This tells me that we are doing a pretty damn good job and finding the guilty ones. Too bad we didnt just summarily execute them on the battlefield.

[Vteckidd]

trial for anyone in Gitmo? lol Like i said before.. most of them dont even kow why they are there, in the first place. its all based on loose information. And we dont have time or money to give these people a trial, with out any evidence. and you definatly cant lock up or execute people based on who they know, or hang out with. That place is like a trophy case, for the past 8 years...to show the world "hey look what we got"
respectfully you are mis-informed

5 trials were to start THIS WEEK

[Kasper]

whats your point? that we signed a piece of paper saying we'll feed, house, cloth, and shit to your army while you slaughter ours? GBay has its goods and its bads, but im sorry there are to many soft bodied pussys running this country. they wanna spend billions of dollars on chance info instead of takeing one prisoner that WANTS TO KILL ALL AMERICANS and getting the info we need in order to settle this whole ordeal. yeah some people may be there for no reason, but lemme ask you this, would you rather take the chance that that person is trying to commit war crimes against this country, or remove all doubt because hes stuck in a damn cage? i mean come on your worried about people that wanna see us dead, what about your sympathy for the guys that put there lives on the line for you while you sit beating your dick in a comfy bed, while they havent slept in days, there wives and girlfriends dont know if there alive or dead, and there worried about the possible sucide bomber thats waiting in the building ready to die for a twisted religion? we didnt ask for this war, but you better believe i plan to see this to the end, and if it causes the enemy some discomfort for us to find an ending and keep our men alive with good intel, you better believe i'd be the one maken sure that towel head doesnt sleep for 60 hrs straight. end rant

[C-loS109]

i heard that some presidents even refuse the oath. or maybe its vice presidents. i dont even know...

here is a question for u geniouses. who was the only president to take the oath over the bible.

[Alan®]

Not too many people were fond of the bailout, but it had a purpose, just like the stimilus does. But Gbay is a waste of money..there is no way around it. you dont even have a reason for it to remain open. Those people arent being charged, sentenced for anything just being held captive and being taken care of by us. And wat people did with their money noone can control.. so thats pointless to discuss.

Point is.. Gbay is a waste of money...to take care of prisoners who arent being put thru the justice system, just being detained for years..
Yea and they were so slow at implementing the bailout they are coming back asking for more. Good job congress.

As far as Gitmo goes we will never fully understand the importance of it cause for the most part what goes on down there is classified. If we are getting credible intel leading to saving more lives in Afghanistan/Iraq/at home, can you really put a price tag on it?

As far as your point on the bailout.It's worth talking about if we are about to commit more money that we dont have to it. Why does anyone think that this one will work when the first one backfired? What cause were throwing more money at it?

[SicStang03]

All I know is that every dollar wasted by the gov't over the past couple days on lunch's and shit bugs the fawk out of me.

[collins]

Yea its shut down, but we could reopen it im sure. so if we reopen alcatraz, what in gods name would be the point of shutting down g'bay?

[LS2ner]

This isnt even a comparison. You are talking about combat and prisoners.



Then what are you saying?




I would hope that we would do everything in our power to avoid the mistakes of Vietnam and actually get our POWs back.





None of them are protected under the rules of the Geneva Accords. They are not wearing a recognizable uniform and they are purposefully dressing as civilians in order to blend into the population before an attack. Under those conditions they have no protections.
More to the point though, waterboarding is not considered torture by the Geneva Accords. It is considered an interrogation tactic in the same manner that sleep deprivation is as there is no chance of death or permanent damage. All it does is give you the feeling of drowning. Someone that is comfortable in water would not be susceptible to this method.


1. I was referring to the retaliation that we apply to middle eastern soldiers. I know that excessive force has been used out of anger.

2. I was implying that us torturing war criminals is not justifiable to the extremes they have used.

3. I was make a generalization in that statement. I was trying to say that we could've done everything in our power to get our POW's back.

4. Im not very familiar with specifics to the geneva accords, but im sure sodomy, beating, and etc. isn't listed in them as interrogation tactics. Before you even say that it hasn't happened, it has.

[redrumracer]

4. Im not very familiar with specifics to the geneva accords, but im sure sodomy, beating, and etc. isn't listed in them as interrogation tactics. Before you even say that it hasn't happened, it has.
see the flawed part is that soldiers that perform those type of acts and are found out about are dealt with according to military law.

[LS2ner]

whats your point? that we signed a piece of paper saying we'll feed, house, cloth, and shit to your army while you slaughter ours? GBay has its goods and its bads, but im sorry there are to many soft bodied pussys running this country. they wanna spend billions of dollars on chance info instead of takeing one prisoner that WANTS TO KILL ALL AMERICANS and getting the info we need in order to settle this whole ordeal. yeah some people may be there for no reason, but lemme ask you this, would you rather take the chance that that person is trying to commit war crimes against this country, or remove all doubt because hes stuck in a damn cage? i mean come on your worried about people that wanna see us dead, what about your sympathy for the guys that put there lives on the line for you while you sit beating your dick in a comfy bed, while they havent slept in days, there wives and girlfriends dont know if there alive or dead, and there worried about the possible sucide bomber thats waiting in the building ready to die for a twisted religion? we didnt ask for this war, but you better believe i plan to see this to the end, and if it causes the enemy some discomfort for us to find an ending and keep our men alive with good intel, you better believe i'd be the one maken sure that towel head doesnt sleep for 60 hrs straight. end rant

No one ever said they didnt have sympathy for our soldiers. No one ever said we should just release them. But something needs to be done about it.

[LS2ner]

so if we reopen alcatraz, what in gods name would be the point of shutting down g'bay?


They are talking of moving the detainees to another location. Thats why i said alcatraz.

[Alan®]

They are talking of moving the detainees to another location. Thats why i said alcatraz.
So where are they talking about moving them to?Hopefully not U.S. Soil. That would be a mistake.

[TheGodfather]

Yeah free the terrorists!

Fucking asswipe. Good job Hussein Obama.

They should put all the detainees on another island. AND BLOW IT THE FUCK UP!

[Vteckidd]

Alcatraz will never be re-opened its too expensive to run and our maximum facilities are more than equipped to hold todays criminals

[Whiteboy™]

Well, I must say that I didn't get my bag lunch tonight. I am in the Navy, and I have a night class from 1500-2300. Every night we get a bag lunch since we miss breakfast (Bottle Water, Sandwich, 2 Slices of bread, Jelly, Peanut Butter, Apple, Fruit Juice, and some Cookies). Know let me say that it probably ain't his falt, but his first day in office and we don't get our bag lunch. I don't like him already. lol

[Blitanicle99]

F the president.

[civic95]

I want to know his plan to help the economy. Besides rebuilding roads, and bridges. That's just redistributing money already in the country (money from taxpayers AKA: the ones that are suffering). We need to develop something to sell to other countries.

I can take money out of my wallet, and give it to my wife. That doesn't make our household any richer....

[§treet_§peed]

we are fucked... doesn't matter, the greatest dynasties only lasted a few hundred years anyways.

[Kevykev]

I am in the Navy, and I have a night class from 1500-2300.


You are DEFINITELY in the Navy, talkin/typin' like that!

[BanginJimmy]

1. I was referring to the retaliation that we apply to middle eastern soldiers. I know that excessive force has been used out of anger.

What middle eastern soldiers? Every uniformed soldier that surrendered was humanely treated and let go.



2. I was implying that us torturing war criminals is not justifiable to the extremes they have used.

What torture? Waterboarding is NOT torture by any defination except bleeding heart liberals. Neither the Geneva Accords or the UN classify waterboarding as torture.


3. I was make a generalization in that statement. I was trying to say that we could've done everything in our power to get our POW's back.

I would hope that we would. The problem with the current conflict is that they dont take POWs. They cut their heads off with a dull knife and put it online.


4. Im not very familiar with specifics to the geneva accords, but im sure sodomy, beating, and etc. isn't listed in them as interrogation tactics. Before you even say that it hasn't happened, it has.

I'm sure most of those have happened, though I'm not convinced on sodomy. If that is the case though, then those responsible are being tried for their crimes. This isnt a policy issue, it is a personell issue so it cannot be attached to the Bush administration.

[LS2ner]

What middle eastern soldiers? Every uniformed soldier that surrendered was humanely treated and let go.




What torture? Waterboarding is NOT torture by any defination except bleeding heart liberals. Neither the Geneva Accords or the UN classify waterboarding as torture.



I would hope that we would. The problem with the current conflict is that they dont take POWs. They cut their heads off with a dull knife and put it online.



I'm sure most of those have happened, though I'm not convinced on sodomy. If that is the case though, then those responsible are being tried for their crimes. This isnt a policy issue, it is a personell issue so it cannot be attached to the Bush administration.


1. That may be the case for the majority of the people, but does it always happen.

2. I never said waterboarding.

3. Yes it is true. Im not trying to argue that point.

I guess your misunderstanding what i was trying to say. Im not saying that we should just let them go free or anything. But housing them and feeding them when they aren't being tried for anything, or aren't being useful is just stupid and a waste of our money. I mean fuck, execute them for all I care, but atleast do something than let them have a free home.

[RedEj8]

You know what else is a waste of money? Pretty much everything the government does. We need a smaller government not a larger one.

[willum14pb]

Lets not turn this into a stupid racist thread please!!! Proceed...

shut up n1gger

[BanginJimmy]

1. That may be the case for the majority of the people, but does it always happen.

What soldiers were not treated humanely then released? I know we ignored their religion fairly often by feeding them pork, but that was the extent of the 'abuse' they suffered. I will agree that that isnt right, especially for a country that holds freedom of religion so highly, but it is still an exceedingly minor issue.


2. I never said waterboarding.

I havent heard of any other forms of torture being used with the belessing of the administration. I do know there was an issue in Asscrackistan where Asscrackistani interrogators were using much more forceful methods, but those instances were not under US control.




I guess your misunderstanding what i was trying to say. Im not saying that we should just let them go free or anything. But housing them and feeding them when they aren't being tried for anything, or aren't being useful is just stupid and a waste of our money. I mean fuck, execute them for all I care, but atleast do something than let them have a free home.

Some of them I do believe are innocent of anything more than knowing someone. Others, like the guy being reported on today are released then head out to Yemen and join back up with Al-Qaeda again. Each of them needs to be pumped for any info they have then tried by a military tribunal. If they are found guilty then need to be imprisoned there at Gitmo for their sentence or executed, also at Gitmo. None of them should ever touch US soil or be eligable for the protections of american criminal law.

[SuperChicken]

Some of them I do believe are innocent of anything more than knowing someone. Others, like the guy being reported on today are released then head out to Yemen and join back up with Al-Qaeda again. Each of them needs to be pumped for any info they have then tried by a military tribunal. If they are found guilty then need to be imprisoned there at Gitmo for their sentence or executed, also at Gitmo. None of them should ever touch US soil or be eligable for the protections of american criminal law.

Here is where I have some issues...How can we hold ourselves up to the world as the ultimate arbiters of right and wrong; of fairness and equanimity--as defined by our Constitution--and allow these people to be held outside of the protections that that very document specifies? If we truly believe in the rights and protections of our Constitution, shouldn't we apply them equally to ALL humans? Yeah, the Geneva conventions allow it, as they are not uniformed soldiers; but, from an idealists standpoint, shouldn't the Constitution supersede the Geneva accords? Wouldn't that stance reinforce to the rest of the world that we stand behind that document at ALL times, rather than when it is 'convenient' for us to do so? Just asking to see what others think...this has gnawed at me as long as Gitmo has been operating, and I'm not sure where I really stand about it.

edit: On further thought, is it not true that the Geneva accords don't really apply here, as they do not really address the concept of war against an ideology--that of terrorism and jihad--as opposed to war against a country, with a flag, an organized army, etc.? Again, just putting it out there.

[BanginJimmy]

Here is where I have some issues...How can we hold ourselves up to the world as the ultimate arbiters of right and wrong; of fairness and equanimity--as defined by our Constitution--and allow these people to be held outside of the protections that that very document specifies? If we truly believe in the rights and protections of our Constitution, shouldn't we apply them equally to ALL humans? Yeah, the Geneva conventions allow it, as they are not uniformed soldiers; but, from an idealists standpoint, shouldn't the Constitution supersede the Geneva accords? Wouldn't that stance reinforce to the rest of the world that we stand behind that document at ALL times, rather than when it is 'convenient' for us to do so? Just asking to see what others think...this has gnawed at me as long as Gitmo has been operating, and I'm not sure where I really stand about it.

I had this issue for a while also, but it really comes down to the fact that our criminal court system has become so liberal and so slanted towards the defense that the inability to have evidence in the typical sense would lead to pretty much every one of those that are in Gitmo to being released. I dont agree with them sitting there for years at a time with no trial or anything, but that doesnt mean bring them to the US and put them under the same protections as someone arrested for a crime on US soil. In fact, there isnt a single state or federal court that could claim to have juristiction in the case.



edit: On further thought, is it not true that the Geneva accords don't really apply here, as they do not really address the concept of war against an ideology--that of terrorism and jihad--as opposed to war against a country, with a flag, an organized army, etc.? Again, just putting it out there.

You are right. There is no formal documentation to cover a situation like this. That is why I believe most people are reverting to the Geneva Accords for their rules of engagement. I dont know if it will ever be addressed either. We all know the UN is completely ineffectual on all fronts, and without the US its rubber stamp wont even hold the ink for anything.

[SuperChicken]

Your point about jurisdiction is well taken. It would seem that a military tribunal is indeed the proper venue for such cases. It is, however, inexcusable that such tribunals have not been convened within a reasonable time frame.

And, while I agree about the lack of precedent for rules of engagement for the current circumstances, that is where I begin to think that we need to set the standard for proper treatment of these individuals. Is it not incumbent on us to rise above the tactics of Al-Qaida? To not display the barbarism that we did at Abu Graib? I'm still embarrased about those events...whether the perpetrators have been addressed or not.

[BanginJimmy]

To not display the barbarism that we did at Abu Graib? I'm still embarrased about those events...whether the perpetrators have been addressed or not.

I agree, but we cannot hold anyone but the people that committed the crimes responsible for those crimes.

[SuperChicken]

Agreed. My point in mentioning those events was to illustrate the damage to world perception of our ideals and integrity with respect to our 'holiest document'.

[Total_Blender]

I agree, but we cannot hold anyone but the people that committed the crimes responsible for those crimes.

What about the leaders who maintained lax discipline/supervision. Someone at some level of command there should have prevented what happened.

[BanginJimmy]

Agreed. My point in mentioning those events was to illustrate the damage to world perception of our ideals and integrity with respect to our 'holiest document'.



I'm like the Israelis. I couldnt possibly care less what a country that doesnt like us anyways think about us.

[BanginJimmy]

What about the leaders who maintained lax discipline/supervision. Someone at some level of command there should have prevented what happened.

I agree completely. Those at the top were not doing their jobs, but the military has already addressed this issue. The commander and XO were both relieved with letters in their jacket that will prevent them from ever getting another command. The top enlisted was basicly retired. Those that physically committed the offenses have been tried and found guilty.

How much further should they go up the chain?

[SuperChicken]

There is a slight difference in that analogy, in that Israel doesn't hold itself up to the rest of the world as the 'shining light of democracy'. That said, I unconditionally support Israel in their struggles, and hope that the US continues to do so as well.

Also, it damaged the opinion of our Allies as well as the "countries that don't like us anyway".

[BanginJimmy]

Also, it damaged the opinion of our Allies as well as the "countries that don't like us anyway".

The only unconditional ally we have is England and they have been there with us the entire way, even though they have a PM that campaigned agaisnt the war.

Germany, France and all the others are fair weather fans of ours. We could do no wrong in WWII when we were saving their ass, but they have continually harassed us since then. We even had to deal with France, Germany, and Russia supplying Iraq with military equipment during the embargo. These were the same countries that benefitted mostly with the oil for food scandal.

[redrumracer]

Here is where I have some issues...How can we hold ourselves up to the world as the ultimate arbiters of right and wrong; of fairness and equanimity--as defined by our Constitution--and allow these people to be held outside of the protections that that very document specifies? If we truly believe in the rights and protections of our Constitution, shouldn't we apply them equally to ALL humans?
simple, they arent American's, so therefore they arent subject to the same rights we have.

[SuperChicken]

I think you missed the point.

[redrumracer]

I think you missed the point.
my point is they dont have rights, they arent innocent until proven guilty. imo they are guilty until proven innocent

[SuperChicken]

So you believe that the Constitution should be a matter of convenience, rather than a matter of principle and conscience. Ok.......:???::thinking:

[redrumracer]

So you believe that the Constitution should be a matter of convenience, rather than a matter of principle and conscience. Ok.......:???::thinking:
no the constitution is reserved for those that are Americans.

[BanginJimmy]

no the constitution is reserved for those that are Americans.

I actually agre with super chicken to a degree. We should hold ourselves to a higher standard than others hold themselves.

[redrumracer]

I actually agre with super chicken to a degree. We should hold ourselves to a higher standard than others hold themselves.
not when they are trying to wage war with us i dont.

[Apollo]

OBAMA=EPIC FAIL!

[SuperChicken]

not when they are trying to wage war with us i dont.

So, by extension, you advocate kidnappings and televised beheadings of the so-called perpetrators?
I will agree with your position on one condition, and one condition ONLY:
that the USA immediately ceases to represent itself to the world as the beacon of democracy and justice for all. Anything less is simply Nationalized Hypocrisy in the extreme. I truly want to believe that we, as a nation, are better than that. Were we to adopt your stance, I think we damage ourselves more than we impact our opponents; and negate many of the ideals that have given us reason to enjoy the national pride that has helped shape this country over the last 200+ years. :2cents:

[Reaper]

Buddy of mine that I work with is in the reserves in the "ceebeas" for the navy. they do a lot of construction and what not...he was given the option to deploy for 6 months and help take down bases and what not.

according to what he's being told they are withdrawing 20% of the troops from the sandbox over the next year or two...its not exactly what Obama wanted, but he's coming to terms that we'll never be fully out of the middle east.

+1 for Obama, and I'm a republican.

[redrumracer]

So, by extension, you advocate kidnappings and televised beheadings of the so-called perpetrators?
I will agree with your position on one condition, and one condition ONLY:
that the USA immediately ceases to represent itself to the world as the beacon of democracy and justice for all. Anything less is simply Nationalized Hypocrisy in the extreme. I truly want to believe that we, as a nation, are better than that. Were we to adopt your stance, I think we damage ourselves more than we impact our opponents; and negate many of the ideals that have given us reason to enjoy the national pride that has helped shape this country over the last 200+ years. :2cents:
not with televised beheadings(or any beheadings), dont let what i said get out of hand. i just dont think they deserve the same rights as an American, especially when they are at war with us. even the illegals that come here to work and better themselves deserve more than them.

but hey, if you want to behead them, go for it.

[SuperChicken]

not with televised beheadings(or any beheadings), dont let what i said get out of hand. i just dont think they deserve the same rights as an American, especially when they are at war with us. even the illegals that come here to work and better themselves deserve more than them.

but hey, if you want to behead them, go for it.

No, beheading is barbaric, period. But I do feel that applying our standards and ideals to everyone, regardless, shows that we are willing to walk the walk, rather than just talk the talk. Selective application of our national principles diminishes us as a nation. We SHOULD hold ourselves to a higher standard.

[redrumracer]

No, beheading is barbaric, period. But I do feel that applying our standards and ideals to everyone, regardless, shows that we are willing to walk the walk, rather than just talk the talk. Selective application of our national principles diminishes us as a nation. We SHOULD hold ourselves to a higher standard.
i dont have a problem with holding ourselves to higher standard with people that deserve it, these people dont.