Can you trust findings of Guantanamo military tribunals? - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-20-2007, 02:19 PM   #31
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 04:10 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500


Well stated.
Post 9/11, many Americans reacted with hand wringing guilt and asked "Why do they hate us?" "Our unflinching and steadfast support of Israel" being one of their most common answers.


can you really compare hang wringing to the bellicosity and starting of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan?

also, is self-reflection bad? should we not ask questions about how our actions reverberate throughout the world?



Quote:
But certainly, failing to recognize America's obligations to back Israel against the Fascist states and sadistic fanatics who wish to terrorize and ultimately destroy them.
while i agree with this point, are we also to ignore the effects of occupation? are we to hold the Israelis 100% blameless in their actions? does the occupation of the West Bank not inspire the very terrorism it is supposed to protect against?

or do we not ever doubt ourselves?


Quote:
Anyway, regardless of the current "confessions" of these detainees, can there be any doubt that they wanted to kill as many Americans as they could?
does this justify what has happened at Gitmo? does this justify the holding of uncharged individuals in a legal netherworld for over 5 years? is this not a grotesque violation of human rights - we think you could maybe one day be dangerous, so we're just going to lock you up until we can pin something on you? and, my goodness, if you're so convinced that they want to kill as many Americans as possible, why is it so hard to formally charge these individuals with some kind of crime? does this, in turn, not inspire hatred and resentment for the United States? that we are willing to violate the human rights of others because someone in Gitmo might, at some point, maybe, possibly, be a threat to the US? do we violate human rights because of their suspected potential to harm US citizens? to what lengths do we go to in order to protect US citizens from suspected potential?

and do you not realize that Bush now has the power to do this to you, Indy? he can lock you up at his own discretion, and never charge you with anything, deny your rights to legal counsel, effectively "disappear" you.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 03-20-2007, 02:31 PM   #32
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 03:10 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511

and do you not realize that Bush now has the power to do this to you, Indy? he can lock you up at his own discretion, and never charge you with anything, deny your rights to legal counsel, effectively "disappear" you.
Why do you think he's so loyal to Bush?
__________________

__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 03-20-2007, 03:30 PM   #33
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 04:10 PM
i guess i wish the country had the time to really sit down and debate these isssues, as opposed to the 2002/3 dictates from the White House that said, in no uncertain terms, you are with us or against us and if you disagree with anything we do in what we deem to be the best way to prosecute the "war on terror" then you are aiding and abetting the enemy.

i think history will judge that complete Republican control of all branches of government in 2002/3 turned out to be a total disaster. a divided government would have kept them honest.

instead, we got a Soviet-style junta.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 03-20-2007, 03:47 PM   #34
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 03:10 PM
Quote:
bellicosity
Wow, talk about a vocabulary builder.

Quote:
does this justify what has happened at Gitmo? does this justify the holding of uncharged individuals in a legal netherworld for over 5 years?
On balance I believe it does. Can you tell me how a parallel world without Gitmo would differ? Anyway, the Geneva conventions allow for the detainment of enemy combatants for the duration of the conflict.
Quote:
why is it so hard to formally charge these individuals with some kind of crime?
Did you see the Moussaoui circus? What of the problems of presenting evidence into trial without hampering on going investigations or harming national security. What about the costs and security issues involved with further civil trials?
Quote:
do we not ever doubt ourselves?
Doubt or blame? Because some seem to relish in the latter.
Quote:
do you not realize that Bush now has the power to do this to you, Indy? he can lock you up at his own discretion, and never charge you with anything, deny your rights to legal counsel, effectively "disappear" you.
The ol' Habeas Corpus, R.I.P. (1215 - 2006) red herring.
Well, here's your chance to give me the name of a "disappeared by Bush American."
x___________________
__________________
INDY500 is offline  
Old 03-20-2007, 03:57 PM   #35
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 07:10 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoManiac


It's exactly this type of black and white thinking that has gotten us to the point where we are now and the reason why if current tactics don't change the "war on terror" will never be won.

In the terrorists eyes they are good and we are evil "The Great Satan", which is only natural from a human nature point of view. So we have to find a way to show them otherwise and invading a foreign country on false pretenses is not exactly the best way to do it.
You want to show them that your not evil, then convert to Islam and work tirelessly to bring about Taliban style governance where you live and bring an end to the unholiness that the west perpetuates.

When Bush says that the terrorists hate freedom the irony is that the freedoms they hate (sex, music, faggotry, divorce, abortion etc.) are many of the same ones devout Christians stand against; there is no ground to give on issues of secularism and liberty, it can't be negotiated especially when Islamist advocacy front groups push for restrictions.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 03-20-2007, 04:21 PM   #36
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 03:10 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer

When Bush says that the terrorists hate freedom the irony is that the freedoms they hate (sex, music, faggotry, divorce, abortion etc.) are many of the same ones devout Christians stand against; there is no ground to give on issues of secularism and liberty, it can't be negotiated especially when Islamist advocacy front groups push for restrictions.
We don't stand against the freedoms, at least I don't. Only to point out that there truly are consequences (good and bad; to the individual and to society as a whole; in this life and in the next) to the choices we make.

It's why The Three Little Pigs isn't just for kiddies.
__________________
INDY500 is offline  
Old 03-20-2007, 04:23 PM   #37
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 07:10 AM
Leaving it up to individual choice means having it legal and letting individuals act how they see fit, not using force (the law) to stop it; seeing how Islam codifies a religiously virtuous society at the exclusion of choice it's going to have similarities to others that want their religious ethics and morals to be the guiding hand of government.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 03-20-2007, 04:36 PM   #38
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 10:10 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
You want to show them that your not evil, then convert to Islam and work tirelessly to bring about Taliban style governance where you live and bring an end to the unholiness that the west perpetuates.

When Bush says that the terrorists hate freedom the irony is that the freedoms they hate (sex, music, faggotry, divorce, abortion etc.) are many of the same ones devout Christians stand against; there is no ground to give on issues of secularism and liberty, it can't be negotiated especially when Islamist advocacy front groups push for restrictions.
The problem here is rather that many people became terrorists just over the last years.
The war in Iraq, every bomb that hit the wrong house, the occupation (at least seen by them as one) and especially Guantanamo or Abu Ghraib turned many people into supporters of Al Quaida or other terrorist organisations. More than the Al Quaida could ever have recruited.

The USA have lost credibility not only in the Islamic world, but also in the Western world.

And this "war on terror" just got out of control. Now you will find it much harder to ever "win" this war.

Bush has done a disservice to the USA and Israel as well.

And torture, abolishment of human or legal rights and the treatment of the values of the Western world are not justifiable. It is a step back into the middle ages out of the ignorance to think about how it could come to a situation that America gets the target of such terroristic attacks which peaked in 9/11.

Now you are fighting an enemy, which is, as said before, a hydra, and you are fighting yourself with the pointless and naive black and white thinking.

As long as you suppress any alternative proposals by condemning the liberals/Democrats as enemies you shouldn't try to fight an enemy such as a terroristic organisation. Because you can't win that way, and this battle is hard enough to win.
__________________
Vincent Vega is offline  
Old 03-20-2007, 04:48 PM   #39
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 07:10 AM
Were not talking about the poor downtrodden masses, it's middle class educated men very often raised in western nations who have the means to spend their time getting indoctrinated and a million excuses to justify jihad (when it wasn't Iraq and Afghanistan it was Chechnya or Bosnia or Palestine or Islamophobia or Uncovered Women etc,). Al Qaeda as an entity doesn't even seem to exist, it's attacks by bunches of guys with grudges and a internet connections that pop up anywhere without having to have outside help.

Im hardly codemning liberals over the issue when I make the point that they have more to loose and that the social conservatives have more common cause (which has been explicitly stated by the likes of Pat Buchanan) with Islamic fundamentalists. The points about balancing these liberties in the face of a security threat has consistently been raised by liberals.

Maybe just pulling back and having a policy of razing religious shrines in retribution of any future attack is a better idea, since human life doesn't seem to factor into the calculus of a true believer.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 03-20-2007, 05:11 PM   #40
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 07:10 AM
Quote:
while i agree with this point, are we also to ignore the effects of occupation? are we to hold the Israelis 100% blameless in their actions? does the occupation of the West Bank not inspire the very terrorism it is supposed to protect against?
Now has the withdrawl from Gaza done much to stem the power of Hamas? Are we to expect a full withdrawl to pre-1967 borders to somehow ameliorate the stated objective of liberating Palestine (from Jordan to the Mediterranean.

A moot point in the long run, when Iran goes nuclear (which it will) Israel can be knocked off by the economic (and then demographic) effects of being a nuclear target. Who knows, perhaps history will see the biggest fault of Bush to have set the stage for the US being internationally hamstrung in a malaise for the next decade or two.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 03-20-2007, 05:11 PM   #41
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 04:10 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500

Wow, talk about a vocabulary builder.


i used to teach SAT classes.


[q]On balance I believe it does. Can you tell me how a parallel world without Gitmo would differ? Anyway, the Geneva conventions allow for the detainment of enemy combatants for the duration of the conflict.[/q]

and what will the end of this conflict look like? will we have an unconditional surrender by all Islamists, everywhere, in the manner in which we received surrender from Japan and Germany?

it's not so much the existence of Gitmo, it's the placing of Gitmo, firstly, in Gitmo (not the US, hence, not the same laws), and the stripping of these prisoners of any legal standing. it's not like they are being denied rights. it's that they aren't even accorded any rights at all. by all means, the Geneva Conventions don't necessarily apply to these specific people, that i can understand, but that does not give us license to hold people indefinitely because we refused to define who they are and what kind of threat they represent.

it's the result of bad thinking, of indecisiveness, on ar part.


[q]Did you see the Moussaoui circus? What of the problems of presenting evidence into trial without hampering on going investigations or harming national security. What about the costs and security issues involved with further civil trials?[/q]

i confess i'm not sure what you're talking about -- it doesn't strike me as accurate that we cannot hold a trial without it being a violation of national security. i'd have to know more.


[q]Doubt or blame? Because some seem to relish in the latter.[/q]

are we never to blame? i think there's a difference between saying, "it's because of the homos that this happened," and saying, "American foreign policy has been defined by the propping up of terrible dictators across the Arab world who foster radicalism in their populations." but "blame" is to simplify this too much. pointing fingers (like some in the EU, for example, tend to do, and did to me when i was living in Europe) isn't helpful, but rectifying behavior and understanding how we might not always be doing the right thing isn't a sign of weakness, it's a sign of strength. "my country, right or wrong" is for those who refuse to think because they are too insecure to do so.


[q]The ol' Habeas Corpus, R.I.P. (1215 - 2006) red herring.
Well, here's your chance to give me the name of a "disappeared by Bush American."
x___________________
[/q]

well, if they were truly disappeared, we wouldn't know about it, would we? but this is besides the point -- simply according Bush the power to do this is a massive violation of ... well, EVERYTHING the US has ever stood for, you know, all that liberty and democracy and pursuit of happiness that we're supposed to be defending.

but you want a name, i'll give you one: Jose Padilla.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 03-20-2007, 05:14 PM   #42
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 04:10 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500


We don't stand against the freedoms, at least I don't. Only to point out that there truly are consequences (good and bad; to the individual and to society as a whole; in this life and in the next) to the choices we make.

It's why The Three Little Pigs isn't just for kiddies.


perhaps you don't, but conservatives like, say, Dinesh D'Souza enthusiastically admire the ability of Islamic societies to use religion as a brilliant method to regulate and control social behavior so that society doesn't suffer from such consequences.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 03-20-2007, 05:15 PM   #43
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 04:10 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Vincent Vega


The problem here is rather that many people became terrorists just over the last years.
The war in Iraq, every bomb that hit the wrong house, the occupation (at least seen by them as one) and especially Guantanamo or Abu Ghraib turned many people into supporters of Al Quaida or other terrorist organisations. More than the Al Quaida could ever have recruited.

The USA have lost credibility not only in the Islamic world, but also in the Western world.

And this "war on terror" just got out of control. Now you will find it much harder to ever "win" this war.

Bush has done a disservice to the USA and Israel as well.

And torture, abolishment of human or legal rights and the treatment of the values of the Western world are not justifiable. It is a step back into the middle ages out of the ignorance to think about how it could come to a situation that America gets the target of such terroristic attacks which peaked in 9/11.

Now you are fighting an enemy, which is, as said before, a hydra, and you are fighting yourself with the pointless and naive black and white thinking.

As long as you suppress any alternative proposals by condemning the liberals/Democrats as enemies you shouldn't try to fight an enemy such as a terroristic organisation. Because you can't win that way, and this battle is hard enough to win.


impressive. can't believe you're only 16.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 03-20-2007, 05:18 PM   #44
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 04:10 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
[B]Now has the withdrawl from Gaza done much to stem the power of Hamas? Are we to expect a full withdrawl to pre-1967 borders to somehow ameliorate the stated objective of liberating Palestine (from Jordan to the Mediterranean.

there's so much to say, and such long sentences to write, but i'll just write two:

1. often, when Isreal defends itself in a manner necessary to maintian its security, it weakens its security in proportion to the methods used to strengthen it.

2. totally fucked situation.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 03-20-2007, 05:20 PM   #45
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 07:10 AM
Quote:
American foreign policy has been defined by the propping up of terrible dictators across the Arab world who foster radicalism in their populations
Oppose the Bush agenda, oppose military action, oppose proping up the House of Saud, Mubarraks and Musharrafs; support liberal democrats, trade unionists, socialists (the free secular alternatives to Islamist radicalism against dictators) in the region - watching liberals side with conservatives who want a return to the stability that has marked the middle east over the last 50 years is stupefying.

Looking at how much government has messed up and abused power every step of the way it's clear this is an issue to important to be trusted with it.
__________________

__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com