This Festering Abomination Persists.....

[Xaquin44]

Yes, they are all held as illegal combatants. That's been clear from the first day. But, like the liberal/libertarians, you keep ignoring that illegal adjective.

when did I say they weren't?

I just asked if they had been charged.

 

[Xaquin44]

Wrong. You called them detainees. He called them what they are. Prisoners of War.

You're calling me wrong for .... calling them detainees?

It's a synonym ....

I don't care if you call them susan. All I asked was if they had been charged (which I finally got the answer for).

 

[itsbob]

Just out of curiosity, have the detainees been formally charged?

If yes, then there is no big deal.

If no, then why bother holding them?

Since when do POW's get charged with ANYTHING!??

They aren't US citizens, so we can't be violating their rights, and they are supplied with 3 meals, comfortable place to sleep. acess to the Red Cross.. so I'd say .."Geneva Convention.. CHECK"

WE haven't decaptitated anyone lately, so they're doing much better than anyone the other side has captured..

All in all I really don't see what they have to complain about.

 

[itsbob]

oh pfaaa!

It's obvious they're terrorists isn't it? If they're in Gitmo, they must be terrorists. Our government never makes mistakes...

and you can quote me on that!

Interesting,, how many of these innocents have been released, only to be killed later on a battlefield trying to kill Americans.. aGAIN..

 

[tomchamp]

I agree, they should have just put a bullet in their grapes in Afghanistan and buried them in a trench.

In pigs Blood.

 

[Toreadoralpha]

In pigs Blood.

Damn, I forgot that, thanks!

 

[cwo_ghwebb]

You're calling me wrong for .... calling them detainees?

It's a synonym ....

I don't care if you call them susan. All I asked was if they had been charged (which I finally got the answer for).

Sorry, just got home from work. No they have not been charged. Do they need to be charged seems to be the point of contention. I don't believe so. Our military is not a police force. We aren't rounding them up for soliciting hookers and incurring the expense of shipping them to Club Gitmo. We've treated them far better than any POWs from any war from any side.

Since they're not in uniforms of any kind, we could save a ton of money by having field trials and executions by beheading immediately. Oh wait, they do that. Since they had the idea first we can't copycat.

Just a question. Did most of you have the same objections to war during Bosnia?

 

[Sonsie]

In pigs Blood.

Feeding their bodies to pigs would actually make a better statement.

 

[donbarzini]

You're calling me wrong for .... calling them detainees?

It's a synonym ....

I don't care if you call them susan. All I asked was if they had been charged (which I finally got the answer for).

It's not a synonym. It's a euphemism designed to do two things. One, is to make the liberals feel better about themselves because, Lord knows, we don't actually want to be involved in a war. The second is so that the liberals can thump their chests and rail at the administration about when they are going to be released.

You release Prisoner's of War when the war is over. Not until then.

 

[Lenny]

You release Prisoner's of War when the war is over. Not until then.

As a Prisoner of War, these illegal combatants would have certain limited rights and the retaining country would have specific responsibilities as outlined in the Geneva Accords. However, the Geneva Accords deal with relations between countries which are signatories to the Accords.

If someone expects to invoke the Geneva Accords as a protection or grounds for complaint, they must have behaved in manners outlined in the earlier chapters of the Accords which include being a part of an organized military service, wearing of identifiable uniforms, avoidance of wanton disregard for the safety of noncombatants, etc.

The combatants held in the Guantanamo stockades were members of guerilla groups, wore no uniforms, violated protections of noncombatants and generally fail all provisions of the Accords which would have classified them as prisoners of war. Thus, the characterization as illegal combatants.

If someone believes these few retained personnel at Guantanamo stockade are simple soldiers, you probably also buy the contention that Mr. William Jefferson Clinton is qualified to be President of the United States. These were classified as high-value members of the combatant organizations following field interrogations. They are being held because they are believed to hold information on the membership, organization, leadership and plans of these groups. They are not being held because they broke international laws and need to be tried in a court of law.

 

[Xaquin44]

It's not a synonym. It's a euphemism designed to do two things. One, is to make the liberals feel better about themselves because, Lord knows, we don't actually want to be involved in a war. The second is so that the liberals can thump their chests and rail at the administration about when they are going to be released.

You release Prisoner's of War when the war is over. Not until then.

I don't give a rats ass about liberal or conservative or horse #### like that, but detainee and prisoner are synonyms =)

 

[Lenny]

I don't give a rats ass about liberal or conservative or horse #### like that, but detainee and prisoner are synonyms =)

You, obviously, have not read the Accords. If you believe the MSM, you will say they're the same. But they are not.

 

[Dead Eye]

Feeding their bodies to pigs would actually make a better statement.

I say send them to there home village. Just put them on a plane and throw them out over there hut from about 10 thousand feet, so that all there fellow peoples will know Allah threw them from heaven

 

[nhboy]

Loon Report

This Festering... 01-14-2008 01:17 PM You are so stupid.

This Festering... 01-15-2008 12:45 AM C'mon Forrest, you can do better than that. You are such a tool.