Discussion in 'Latest US & World News' started by Space_Time, Dec 10, 2021.
Interesting. How were you involved? Were you appointed to review his case?
I had intelligence responsibilities that covered Africa at that time.
I love to read people’s sympathy for killers who seek to destroy us. 911 was simply proof they were serious about trying.
The things their people do are mostly all against the Geneva Convention because like Asians, they are old and different civilizations and dance to their own drummers.
At least we didn’t cut their throats on TV.
I agree they should all have been given due process and sentenced, and executed if necessary, but that becomes a political calculation.
But much of our population has lost the will to survive in the face of evil.
So why do you think he is guilty?
Because I know his background and the case.
Kowing for sure that he is guilty has a huge impact on whether he deserved to be imprisoned for 14 years. You are unable to provide any detail on this past your claim that you know the case.
Yes. There are reasons why the system of holding sites outside the US was established. It was to detain individuals whose threat to the US was known, but who could not, for a variety of reasons, be brought to trial or have their cases made public.
Why is the US unable to bring these cases to trial?
Nonsense, it is the Geneva conventions defining of "Prisoner of War" that defines those who are not POWs. Geneva didnt give a name for combatants who do not meet the Geneva requirements for POW status, so the US did so.
A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:.......
(2) Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions:
(a) that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
(b) that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;
(c) that of carrying arms openly;
(d) that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.
(3) Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power.
Illegal "enemy combatant" is just easier than Illegal who IS NOT"conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war" when they send a suicide bomber into a crowd dressed in civilian attire
Many reasons. Dead witnesses, protection of sources and methods, ongoing operations, etc.
No evidence? They used different techniques in Gitmo like sleep depredation, and exposing to extreme temperatures, and force them into weird positions for hours, seriously loud music and beatings were common. We got the red cross to thank for uncovering those facts. It's their word, the word of the victims against the culprits. The jig is up. Get over it.
Sorry, haven't seen the evidence. None of those things strike me as very effective torture if they are torture at all.
While we can debate whether or not water boarding is torture .. Assad's torture methods are well established.
When anyone tries to claim that the United States was created on the basis of natural rights, remind them of what we did to the people we locked up in GITMO.
Aww, boo hoo! Terrorist scumbag whom we should banish of Afghanistan to be killed by a drone strike.
Thank you for making my point. Bush and the Neocons created a new term out of thin air to rationalize their crimes against humanity. A complimentary move was removing the US from the International Criminal Court so that they could place themselves above the law. That's what despots do.
No, they created a new term because it was easier than quoting the geneva convention to label those combatants who dont qualify as POWs.
Ah. You've been living for +15 years in an alternative reality.
The finding that the handling of prisoners detained and interrogated at Guantánamo amounted to torture came after a visit by a Red Cross inspection team that spent most of last June in Guantánamo.
We did the right thing.
Sorry, I don't buy it. Nothing you mentioned is injurious and, hence, not torture. Spare me the insult. It makes you look very bad and immature.
Ah when the Red Cross says it's torture, you did your own facebook like research and claim to know best. How immature indeed and does it look like I care about your personal opinion? lol
LOL, yes and it was REALLY easier than telling the truth and following the US Constitution concerning declaration of war.
Are you seriously suggesting that America needs to set its standards based on what Assad does?
If THAT is how we set our standards, what do we have left to communicate to the world that is actually positive?
Your ideas might make more sense if you tried to address the topic.
The very fact that we failed to be able to charge so many, and thus had to let them go free is proof of failure, not success.
There are reasons for the Geneva conventions. WE worked to establish that.
Guantanamo is a STRONG statement that we do NOT believe in our justice system AND we do NOT believe in the conventions we signed.
It leaves one wondering what we DO believe, as we self righteously preach to the world how good we are in our respect for the law.
Separate names with a comma.