Bergdahl Prisoner Swap:Obama Obeys ONLY the Laws He Wants To.

In the end, it was finally decided (see my previous post) that the Taliban was afforded the rights of the Geneva Conventions but not POW's. I would have to look and see the rights non POW's receive under the GC to know exactly which rights they have. However, the reason a distinction was made was in case we needed to do prisoner exchanges and that is the main point to the whole line of this particular discussion of the difference between the Taliban and AQ.

As far as the thirty rule, the administration's stated reasons really don't matter in the end, they made a signing statement (of which is perfectly legal) which sort of nullifies the thirty day rule because the rule itself was unconstitutional as it infringed on the separation of the powers and the commander in chief ability of flexibility.

Bush's adventure going into Iraq created untold thousands of terrorists,

Quote:

Bush's adventure going into Iraq created untold thousands of terrorists,

They would be there without Bush. The ideology(Islam) has a system to churn out killers. As soon as the oil money rolled in the system kicked into high gear. The period when they lay low is called "hudna." It means nothing more than preparing for the next Islamic conquest in the long road of eternal war that is a religious obligation.

Putting the blame on Bush is misplaced. The blame is all Islams.

In the end, it was finally decided (see my previous post) that the Taliban was afforded the rights of the Geneva Conventions but not POW's.

I know, I have seen headlines of the Iraq situation. I just wish we never went over there, and now that I look back (hindsight being 20/20)wish we took another approach to getting Bin Laden rather than invading Afghanistan.

Moreover, we should now raze Gitmo.

Saddam was not much of a Moslem. He was a Saddamite,
but he might have nuked us anyway.
He was intolerably dangerous.
His sons were worse.

He didn't have any nukes.

Biden: “Iraq is going to be one of the great achievements of this administration”

Saddam was not much of a Moslem. He was a Saddamite,
but he might have nuked us anyway.
He was intolerably dangerous.
His sons were worse.

He didn't have any nukes. How was he intolerably dangerous?

Moreover, we should now raze Gitmo.

What about the people we are detaining there? Summary executions?

Signing statements aren't worth the paper they are written on if they attempt to nullify a law.

There is some question as to whether the law can be litigated before someone has standing to bring it before the court. In this case no one may have had standing until the President violated the law as written. Then the courts can decide whether it meets the Constitutional test when the President's actions are challenged.

Signing statements aren't worth the paper they are written on if they attempt to nullify a law. A President is free to feel part of a law is unconstitutional but a signing statement doesn't make it unconstitutional.

There is some question as to whether the law can be litigated before someone has standing to bring it before the court. In this case no one may have had standing until the President violated the law as written. Then the courts can decide whether it meets the Constitutional test when the President's actions are challenged.