41
   

Snowdon is a dummy

 
 
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Wed 19 Nov, 2014 09:55 am
@oralloy,
I'd say your proposal to kill all Gitmo prisoners is actually more humane than the current situation. Actually that's what many of the inmates have been trying to do: kill themselves by way of not eating, but they have not been allowed to do that...
revelette2
 
  1  
Reply Wed 19 Nov, 2014 10:09 am
@Olivier5,
You really have to think of something negative to say even if someone is trying to their hardest make the situation better. You just have a grudge and it shows. Do you really expect those in charge of prisoners to let prisoners commit mass suicide?

I think after getting a declaration from congress to fight IS, Obama should declare the war over in Afghanistan and then release the prisoners. I mean we can't be in a war with them until the very last one dies.
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Wed 19 Nov, 2014 10:12 am
@revelette2,
I am pretty aggravated by the US hypocrisy on this issue, yours included. At least oral is speaking his mind clearly.
revelette2
 
  1  
Reply Wed 19 Nov, 2014 10:25 am
@Olivier5,
Frankly I don't give a rat's behind you think.
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Wed 19 Nov, 2014 10:44 am
@revelette2,
You think I care whether you care?

Of course you couldn't care less if innocent people are being tortured daily in your name and with your tax money. It's not like you give a damn for that. The only thing you care for is reputational damage to the US.
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 19 Nov, 2014 11:03 am
@revelette2,
revelette2 wrote:
If you think there is nothing shameful of the history of Guantanamo, there is no sense talking to you about it. I don't remember the exact quote, but I think it goes something like, "a country is judged on how it keeps it's prisoners." Well, no wonder we are judged so harshly concerning this situation.

The conditions at Guantanamo are consistent with an acceptable POW camp.

If anyone chooses to judge us harshly for having done nothing wrong, that is good reason for ignoring their views.


revelette2 wrote:
We pay taxes right now for Guantanamo. From what I understand the conditions are horrible because the place is decaying, many of the inmates are aging and getting sick.

The conditions at Guantanamo are consistent with an acceptable POW camp.


revelette2 wrote:
He has been trying transfer some prisoners to lead new lives in other countries, but it is hard to find a country willing to accept them.

Not all detainees are going to be released. We'll be keeping some of them forever.


revelette2 wrote:
It is a terrible shameful and against all international laws to keep this situation ongoing.

That is incorrect. International law respects our right to detain captured enemy fighters until the end of the war.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 19 Nov, 2014 11:03 am
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:
I'd say your proposal to kill all Gitmo prisoners is actually more humane than the current situation. Actually that's what many of the inmates have been trying to do: kill themselves by way of not eating, but they have not been allowed to do that...

Exactly how is it inhumane to detain a captured enemy fighter until the end of the war?

I'd be willing to let them choose to starve to death if we were given a guarantee that no one would then blame us for said death.
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 19 Nov, 2014 11:04 am
@revelette2,
revelette2 wrote:
I think after getting a declaration from congress to fight IS, Obama should declare the war over in Afghanistan and then release the prisoners.

If Mr. Obama were to release the 9/11 attackers, he'd be impeached and removed from office.

If you only mean those low-level prisoners who we cannot release because no one will take them, where do you suggest we release them to?

Should we use military force to coerce other countries into accepting them?


revelette2 wrote:
I mean we can't be in a war with them until the very last one dies.

Yes we can.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 19 Nov, 2014 11:04 am
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:
I am pretty aggravated by the US hypocrisy on this issue, yours included. At least oral is speaking his mind clearly.

I do not perceive any hypocrisy. What are you referring to?
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 19 Nov, 2014 11:05 am
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:
Of course you couldn't care less if innocent people are being tortured daily in your name and with your tax money.

No one is being tortured at Guantanamo.
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Wed 19 Nov, 2014 11:10 am
@oralloy,
Quote:
I'd be willing to let them choose to starve to death if we were given a guarantee that no one would then blame us for said death.

Again, it's all about the US reputation... The fate of these poor boys be damned.
revelette2
 
  1  
Reply Wed 19 Nov, 2014 11:17 am
@Olivier5,
No I don't think you care.

I have already said what I felt about the situation over there. I let it stand on it's merits as to it's credibility.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Wed 19 Nov, 2014 11:19 am
The only reason they keep gitmo open is to allow the torture of prisoners outside US territory. The only reason, but that's still against domestic and international laws.

Some people will 'never get it.'

All Obama has to do is tell the military to close it. If they don't follow orders, he can fire them from their jobs. It's that easy. Congress don't have any control over the CIC in these matters - except threats.

But Obama lacks ethics or any backbone.
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 19 Nov, 2014 11:48 am
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:
Again, it's all about the US reputation... The fate of these poor boys be damned.

I'm not sure if it's reputation exactly, as anyone who blamed us would be unreasonable and therefore would have an invalid viewpoint. It's more that I just don't feel like listing to more nonsensical false accusations when we haven't done anything wrong.

Which poor boys are you talking about? The ones who carried out 9/11 and who would be happy to attack France if they ever had the chance? Or the low-level Yemenis who haven't been released because no one will take them?

I can sympathize with the plight of the low-level Yemenis (why don't you guys let us settle some of them in France), but I don't have a lot of sympathy for the 9/11 attackers.
revelette2
 
  1  
Reply Wed 19 Nov, 2014 12:25 pm
@cicerone imposter,
You are ignorant, congress has passed a law forbidding the transfer of the prisoners to the US. It is tied up with up with National Defense Authorization Act. If he defies, some senators are threatening to impeach him. The only way he could defy it is by signing an executive order saying congress over stepped it bounds when the Defense bill comes up in December. If those senators are serious about impeaching him over it, he may have to wait until close to his term is over.
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Wed 19 Nov, 2014 12:41 pm
@revelette2,
revelette2 wrote:
congress has passed a law forbidding the transfer of the prisoners to the US. It is tied up with up with National Defense Authorization Act. If he defies, some senators are threatening to impeach him. The only way he could defy it is by signing an executive order saying congress over stepped it bounds when the Defense bill comes up in December. If those senators are serious about impeaching him over it, he may have to wait until close to his term is over.

No one with the power to impeach is actually going to do so. Clinton was impeached because of the long string of outright felonies that he was committing in the White House. Mr. Obama isn't committing any crimes.

Court action where the Republicans argue that executive orders should be struck down, though, that's pretty likely.

(That's my guess at least. I confess that the Republicans have not shared their official plans with me.)
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 19 Nov, 2014 12:46 pm
@revelette2,
It's not about transferring gitmo prisoners to the US; it's about closing gitmo. Where they transfer those prisoners outside the US is to send them from where they originated from. Probably a country in the Middle East.
I never claimed they had to be sent to the US.
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Wed 19 Nov, 2014 01:15 pm
@oralloy,
Most of the guys in Gitmo had nothing to do with AQ or the Taliban. They were just average dudes who found themselves in the wrong spot at the wrong time, typically somewhere around Kabul in late 2001... For someone ready to burn all Italians alive out of one single murder trial, you don't seem too bothered by your own country jailing and torturing dozens of innocent people without trial.
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Reply Wed 19 Nov, 2014 01:37 pm
@Olivier5,
You're spot on! Here's an article from Wiki(leaks) that explains the problems of gitmo.
https://wikileaks.org/gitmo/

This paragraph explains enough to prove gitmo is unlawful and unreliable in almost every way.
Quote:
7. Detainee Threat
This section is the most significant from the point of view of the supposed intelligence used to justify the detention of prisoners. After "Assessment," which reiterates the conclusion at 3b, the main section, "Reasons for Continued Detention," may, at first glance, look convincing, but it must be stressed that, for the most part, it consists of little more than unreliable statements made by the prisoners’ fellow prisoners — either in Guantánamo, or in secret prisons run by the CIA, where torture and other forms of coercion were widespread, or through more subtle means in Guantánamo, where compliant prisoners who were prepared to make statements about their fellow prisoners were rewarded with better treatment. Some examples are available on the homepage for the release of these documents: http://wikileaks.ch/gitmo/


These crimes against humanity is illegal under domestic and international laws. Our government is guilty of crimes that we permit in our name.
0 Replies
 
revelette2
 
  1  
Reply Wed 19 Nov, 2014 01:45 pm
@cicerone imposter,
A lot of them have been sent home. The ones who are left are ones are deemed to be dangerous but the information gotten on them are not useable, (probably from those "enhanced interrogation." The other ones, countries will not accept them.

If they can't be tried, I personally think they should be dismissed but that is risky if they really are dangerous. I don't claim to know the answer, but there has to be one.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Snowdon is a dummy
  3. » Page 588
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 06/27/2024 at 11:49:55