War on Terror prisoners - suggestions...

[David Floyd]

First of all, I think the argument about the detainees in Gitmo is kinda silly. If the intelligence value of prisoners has been exhausted, why NOT try them in US courts? I would assume there is enough evidence to put them in federal prison without revealing or compromising significant US secrets, right? If so, I'd rather see them in US prison, where they will be automatically at the bottom of the totem pole for prisoners, possibly even below child molesters, where, if they aren't killed, they will certainly be ass-****ed by Tyrone the armed robber and Jim-Bob the red neck killer on a regular basis. Sounds like a suitable punishment - I'm guessing that the fear some skinny Afghani can create sorta fizzles in that sort of environment. As an added plus, feed them only pork and other unclean food.

Secondly, I have an even better idea on what to do with terrorists who are captured abroad. Find a friendly country whose laws don't include civil protections. "Encourage" that nation to set up the most medieval, brutal "prisons" (read: torture facilities) available. Any terrorist captured outside of the United States gets extradited to that country, where they automatically get sent to that "prison". They are then subjected to torture and brutality until they give up information leading to the capture or death of at least one terrorist. At that point, they are transferred elsewhere for life imprisonment, possibly to the US court system for conviction and incarceration in US federal prison. Torture is worthless if the information given up is unverifiable, but this way, it only stops if the information is verified.

Sounds brutal, but my sympathy for you is limited if you are going to strap a bomb to your chest and blow up civilians, or hijack airliners, or plant bombs in subways.

Anyone think this would be effective?

[Arrian]

And the innocent ones?

-Arrian

[David Floyd]

Don't send them. Duh

[David Floyd]

Besides, what's an innocent terrorist? Someone who hasn't blown anyone up.....yet?

[Arrian]

I mean (some of the) Gitmo detainees. I was being glib, too, and read over this:

I would assume there is enough evidence to put them in federal prison...

If that's the assumption, um, ok. Though I think it's a faulty one. I think in many cases the evidence will be lacking. Which is one reason they've hesitated to try these people.

-Arrian

[Lorizael]

Originally posted by David Floyd
Besides, what's an innocent terrorist? Someone who hasn't blown anyone up.....yet?

Yes. Someone who hasn't committed a crime would, in fact, be innocent.

[Kuciwalker]

Secondly, I have an even better idea on what to do with terrorists who are captured abroad. Find a friendly country whose laws don't include civil protections. "Encourage" that nation to set up the most medieval, brutal "prisons" (read: torture facilities) available. Any terrorist captured outside of the United States gets extradited to that country, where they automatically get sent to that "prison". They are then subjected to torture and brutality until they give up information leading to the capture or death of at least one terrorist. At that point, they are transferred elsewhere for life imprisonment, possibly to the US court system for conviction and incarceration in US federal prison. Torture is worthless if the information given up is unverifiable, but this way, it only stops if the information is verified.

I'm thinking of something... it's coming to me... could it be called "extraordinary rendition?"

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Lorizael


Yes. Someone who hasn't committed a crime would, in fact, be innocent.

Unfortunately, this bit of logic seems to fail some.

JM

[Imran Siddiqui]

Secondly, I have an even better idea on what to do with terrorists who are captured abroad. Find a friendly country whose laws don't include civil protections. "Encourage" that nation to set up the most medieval, brutal "prisons" (read: torture facilities) available. Any terrorist captured outside of the United States gets extradited to that country, where they automatically get sent to that "prison". They are then subjected to torture and brutality until they give up information leading to the capture or death of at least one terrorist. At that point, they are transferred elsewhere for life imprisonment, possibly to the US court system for conviction and incarceration in US federal prison. Torture is worthless if the information given up is unverifiable, but this way, it only stops if the information is verified.

BOOOO! It's funny how libertarians turn into authoritarians at the slightest fearmongering.

What ever happened to your ideas on natural rights, Bush wannabe? .

[Vesayen]

Fighting against the United States goverment is not a crime. You do not try these people. You set them free and send them home. The war in Iraq and Afghanistan is over, or so we have been told.

All of them get off scot free and go home unless there is reason to believe they have commited some ACTUAL crime. Fighting the U.S., is not a crime.


The next generation of Americans will grow up having no idea what the word "terrorist" actually means. It has been so grossly distorted. A terrorist is not anyone who disagrees with or fights against your goverment. A terrorists is not any Arab or Muslim who owns a gun or a bomb. A terrorists is not anyone who is unpatriotic or not a republican.

A terrorist is a person who intentionally attacks a civilian population and is not a member of a standing army, though they can be materially supported by a goverment. They can not be state actors, if so, they are state actors, not terrorists. Goverments can target civilian populations, agents of goverments can target civilian populations, this makes them deplorable bastards, not terrorists.

A terrorist can not be an agent of any goverment. That automatically discounts every member of the Taliban as a terrorist.

A large portion or even a majority of those in gitmo are not terrorists, they are fundamentalist (pick an explitives) who fought for opressive goverments.... though once we got into Iraq, we started filling up with lots of those who just hated the U.S. and are not neccesarily fundamentalist (pick an explitives).



...and to add 2 more cents, I would not say I am a libretarian but I would say that libretarian ideology should be at the basis of almost every goverment decision... does this action infringe on the rights and liberties of the citizens, or grow goverment? Can this infringment of liberty or growth of goverment be justified due to a suitably pressing concern?

Not all of us libretarians are nut jobs. Some of us believe *VERY* strongly in the rule of law. The U.S. should support every treaty it has ratified, not because of any external pressure(see my other comments about international law being illegitamite) but because internally, we agreed to.

Open Gitmo tommorow and send 90%+ of them home.

[Jon Miller]

A Vesayen post I agree with!

JM

[Vesayen]

How can that be?




I should add on also that being a "terrorist" is not even neccesarily a crime the U.S. can or should charge them for. Being a terrorist against the Iraqis or Afghanis is not a crime for a U.S. court, it is a crime for a Iraqi or an Afghani court, an internal matter.

I don't recall "being a terrorist" as something in the Geneva conventions which merits a red hot poker up your *******.

[Tuberski]

Sounds brutal, but my sympathy for you is limited if you are going to strap a bomb to your chest and blow up civilians, or hijack airliners, or plant bombs in subways.

How exactly would you go about arresting someone that did this?



ACK!

[Zylka]

It's great to hear that these combatants are finally getting the fair trials they deserve. Yet at the same time, the 2.5+ year period of lawless enclave hell they spent in the camps was more or less a fair amount. Yes, they deserve fair trials, but not straight away. This is a grey area situation where the USM applied appropriate period of grey area handling

[Vesayen]

They do not deserve trials, they deserve being sent home. The overwhelming majority of them could not of POSSIBLY commited any crimes which we have jurisdiction to put them on trial for.....