How do you feel about

#30
#30
Nothing like getting yourself captured on a battlefield and winning an all expense paid set of civil rights.
 
#32
#32
There are no laws, no treaties, nothing that applies to terrorists. We go above and beyond taking acre of them, giving them their religious freedom etc when there's nothign thta requires us to do so.

I think some people believe we should fight the war like it was 1776. War isn't pretty, and you have to act accordingly.
 
#34
#34
maybe we should just behead them with a knife and post the video on youtube. the world didn't seem to mind when the terrorists were doing that, yet there was much wringing of hands and frothing at the mouth over grainy images of Lindy England laughing at some schmuck with a sandbag over his head.
 
#36
#36
OrangeEmpire said:
What about the detainees on the prison ships and in eastern europe?

You are foolish enough to believe there are only a couple of hundred?
Click to expand...


I haven't read the opinions, but my understanding was that it applied only to Gitmo. In fact, I got the impression that critics were saying that what will happen is that the detainees won't be sent here -- they'll just keep them over there in perpetutity, avoiding the ruling.


MG1968 said:
no, it's not just OE, 30 detainees that were released have returned to the battlefield to kill again. Read Scalia's dissenting opinion.
Click to expand...


Were they from Gitmo?

And the problem of course with that observation is that they were released even before the ruling. So, you see, the mere fact of going through the process isn't the only way that could happen.


allvol123 said:
Candidates have different views on the ruling.

McCain: Guantanamo Ruling One of the ‘Worst Decisions’ in History - America’s Election HQ
Click to expand...


That's the easy and obvious political position to take. Have to say I'm a bit surprised given his own experience and his unwillingness earlier to adopt administration positions on treatment of detainees.
 
#37
#37
Maybe we should give them a trial. Try them as if they were Americans being held for the same reason on Iraqi or Iranian soil. Give them the same rights and access to legal counsel as an American would get over there. Penalize them in the same fashion as an American would be penalized if found guilty.
 
#38
#38
superdave1984 said:
Maybe we should give them a trial. Try them as if they were Americans being held for the same reason on Iraqi or Iranian soil. Give them the same rights and access to legal counsel as an American would get over there. Penalize them in the same fashion as an American would be penalized if found guilty.
Click to expand...


That surely appeals to our sense of vengeance and appeases our desire to exact revenge, but in the long run we are better off if we hold ourselves to the standards we claim to be defending.
 
#39
#39
lawgator1 said:
That surely appeals to our sense of vengeance and appeases our desire to exact revenge, but in the long run we are better off if we hold ourselves to the standards we claim to be defending.
Click to expand...
ou treatment of prisoners has nothing to do with our being better off. Our natinal well being is about our maintaining the most powerful military in the world and keeping economic sway over everyone.
 
#40
#40
Why fight men unless you are prepared to do what is necessary to defeat evil?

Criminals thrive on the indulgence of society's understanding.
 
#43
#43
BigPapaVol said:
ou treatment of prisoners has nothing to do with our being better off. Our natinal well being is about our maintaining the most powerful military in the world and keeping economic sway over everyone.
Click to expand...


Our national "well-being" may be about military and economic security, but the point of building and maintaining that in the first place is to have something worth protecting.

Look, I'm not getting all rhetorical. Like I said, I wouldn't have blinked twice at an alternative ruling. I'm just saying that a case can be made for the decision that was handed down by the majority and that its not necessarily a bad thing, over the long haul.
 
#44
#44
lawgator1 said:
Our national "well-being" may be about military and economic security, but the point of building and maintaining that in the first place is to have something worth protecting.

Look, I'm not getting all rhetorical. Like I said, I wouldn't have blinked twice at an alternative ruling. I'm just saying that a case can be made for the decision that was handed down by the majority and that its not necessarily a bad thing, over the long haul.
Click to expand...

the moral high ground just hasn't proven a very useful spot in this modern world full of Russia, France, China and the rest of the 100% self interested turds out there.
 
#46
#46
I like the message that we view you, Mr. Terrorist, as an enemy combatant and we're not giving you any rights whatsoever, except those afforded someone who intended to do us harm and intends to in the future. We're not going to kill you so you can get your virgins. We are going to make your life miserable for as long as we both shall live.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top