War on Terror prisoners - suggestions...

[SlowwHand]

Bull****.

[Zylka]

Maybe they should partition a small piece of inner Asian land as "Terroristan" for all the prisoner's safe return. The U.S. could then promptly, and legally, bomb it

?

[Vesayen]

Being a "terrorist" is not an international crime. Fighting the American goverment, is not an international crime.

What precisley would we put them on trial for? Most of these people have not commited any crimes we could possibly charge them with.

[Kuciwalker]

Zylka's sig

[Zylka]

Being a "terrorist" is not an international crime. Fighting the American goverment, is not an international crime.

What precisley would we put them on trial for? Most of these people have not commited any crimes we could possibly charge them with.

Unlawful combaticism. Being the ideological scum of the earth. Whatever non binding charge you can come up with and make sure they spend several more years in a cell. You sound like a real lawyer on this subject, though the truth is - the lawyers aren't needed in cut and dry cases where only international loopholes prevent justice.

btw, does anyone believe the "story" of those two British detainees who were recently released? Talk about DODGY little ****s

"We were just in the wrong place at the wrong time, mate. We were actually going to a wedding in Pakistan, and then this... this guy was there... and Afghanistan happened... and we were kind of in and around the area... then we didn't really know and maybe it wasn't good to go back... and it might not have been a good idea and it was a good idea

I've never seen such a guilty looking, evasive and vague explanation in my life. They obviously didn't dip into combatant roles themselves, but honestly. You go to an area of looming war as a hothead youngster curious (and probably supportive) of the war rally - you deserve several years in lawless sewage

I love the EMPATHY they show for young Canadian combatant Omar who's still being held in the camp for the murder of an allied soldier. Fair trial my ass. No 15 year old on earth should be allowed to kill a legal combatant without sitting in a cage for two years to think about what he's done, before going to court.

[Vince278]

Shoot 'em all and let Allah sort them out.

[Vesayen]

Unlawful combaticism. Being the ideological scum of the earth. Whatever non binding charge you can come up with and make sure they spend several more years in a cell. You sound like a real lawyer on this subject, though the truth is - the lawyers aren't needed in cut and dry cases where only international loopholes prevent justice.

There is no such thing as an "unlawful combatant" and I would ask anyone who says there is to explain the following things to me.

1. What is an unlawful combatant.
2. In what ways is an unlawful combatant similar and disimilar to a member of an army.
3. In what ways is an unlawful combatant similar and disimilar to a civilian inside a country commiting a crime against that specific country.

"Gosh dem dere lawyers! You can't be trusting those lawyer types, gosh darnit!"

Being scum is not a crime. We do not let our emotions or our feelings rule our actions(or at least we are not supposed to). If I had judicial power and ruled by feeling...... well you would not like that, would me? Most Americans would not, regardless of who "me" is.

There is no "justice" to carry out. If anyone wants to prosecute these people, that would be the Afghani or Iraqi goverment for crimes against the laws of those countries. This is not a matter of international law. This is not a case where a crime has been commited against the U.S.

Shooting an American or bombing an American or blowing up an American is *NOT* a crime. This sentence originally included "or beheading" an American, but I left that out. Executing prisoners of war is a crime.

btw, does anyone believe the "story" of those two British detainees who were recently released? Talk about DODGY little ****s

It does not seem impossible. I really want more details but of course, we can't get them.

I love the EMPATHY they show for young Canadian combatant Omar who's still being held in the camp for the murder of an allied soldier. Fair trial my ass. No 15 year old on earth should be allowed to kill a legal combatant without sitting in a cage for two years to think about what he's done, before going to court.

Killing an enemy soldier in war, is not a crime.


I would extend this past the sphere of legality to morality.

It is not immoral for you to kill another person in a justified war.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Shooting an American or bombing an American or blowing up an American is *NOT* a crime.

... I know you are trying to be cute, but I really don't think its working with the strawmen you are throwing out there. Nice... well, not really nice, but whatever.. try.

I doubt you'll find anyone here who would come close to saying 9/11 was not a crime, but whatever.

[Vesayen]

This really is not a straw man. It appears to be Zylka's view that killing an American in war is a crime which demands justice be inflicted on the killer. This is untrue. If this is not his position, then I revoke my statement, I am genuinly convinced this is his opinion.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Vesayen
This really is not a straw man. It appears to be Zylka's view that killing an American in war is a crime which demands justice be inflicted on the killer. This is untrue. If this is not his position, then I revoke my statement, I am genuinly convinced this is his opinion.

I think it is more on the lines of conspiracy to commit terrorism (terrorism against civilian populations is a crime against humanity).

[Vesayen]

I am not an expert on international law. Which body of international law(which the U.S. is a party to) has "conspiracy to commit terrorism" as a crime?

Even then, alot of these guys are not guilty of that, it seems we picked up alot of them straight off the battle field in Afghanistan and have held them since.

[Zylka]

Originally posted by Vesayen

There is no such thing as an "unlawful combatant" and I would ask anyone who says there is to explain the following things to me.

1. What is an unlawful combatant.
2. In what ways is an unlawful combatant similar and disimilar to a member of an army.
3. In what ways is an unlawful combatant similar and disimilar to a civilian inside a country commiting a crime against that specific country.

I said non-binding. That means I don't care if the charges are written in a book, I don't care if the defense lawyers try to discount what the American soldiers say about each individual on trial.

If there are Allied soldiers as eyewitness to their combatant roles, they are guilty. If they have been picked up on strictly associative intent, then they deserve another half a decade in lawlessless AT LEAST before being sent back to the hole they came from, only to be monitored like a bug until they do something worth being eliminated over.

"Gosh dem dere lawyers! You can't be trusting those lawyer types, gosh darnit!"

Strawman. Sad, redneck kicking crutch. I'll respond in kind like you're a granola chomping leftist who just drank mushroom tea if the same type of strawman is resorted to again.

Being scum is not a crime. We do not let our emotions or our feelings rule our actions(or at least we are not supposed to). If I had judicial power and ruled by feeling...... well you would not like that, would me? Most Americans would not, regardless of who "me" is.

There is no "justice" to carry out. If anyone wants to prosecute these people, that would be the Afghani or Iraqi goverment for crimes against the laws of those countries. This is not a matter of international law. This is not a case where a crime has been commited against the U.S.

Shooting an American or bombing an American or blowing up an American is *NOT* a crime. This sentence originally included "or beheading" an American, but I left that out. Executing prisoners of war is a crime.

The although simplistic "If those combatants aren't following the same convention that we're supposed to, then we can scrimp on acknowledging the loopholes that let them back into organizing new combat" argument comes to mind. Do you have a better suggestion for what should be done with these detainees, in keeping the safety of a first victimized United States in mind?

It does not seem impossible. I really want more details but of course, we can't get them.

Please get to it in a new thread, unless that topic has already been beaten to death. I'm open minded of explanations as to why they were there, but common sense thus far pervades in stating that they deserved their time.

Killing an enemy soldier in war, is not a crime.

I would extend this past the sphere of legality to morality.

It is not immoral for you to kill another person in a justified war.

Have the Taliban and Al-Qaeda been fighting legally?

Are their respective wars raging in both Afghanistan and Iraq by which these often foreign, hodge-podge detainees can still remain dangerous and unclassified?

Is it murder when a Pakistani, Iranian or Canadian kills an American soldier in an Afghani war terrain?

Why should the US rush to convict known combatants when wars they particpated in are still echoing? When the combatants may get out in early time to re-organize due to international loopholes? When the enemy has not, even on the whole - been waging war by Geneva convention standard?

Those are morale questions I can not shake as justifiable in non-trial answer. The books may be on your side, though the scum that scream for allowance of such are part of a body that can not be argued as respecting the same written law(s) in their own conduct and methods of "trial"

You get what you give, and they gave first, and they gave it in Spades. That's western morality, which takes over when western law provides situational flaw. Prove me wrong.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Vesayen
I am not an expert on international law. Which body of international law(which the U.S. is a party to) has "conspiracy to commit terrorism" as a crime?

Terrorism is a Crime Against Humanity under international law:

http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/ccno10.htm

Conspiracy is a US (and just about every other common law country come to think of it) crime. We've taken criminal jurisdiction by invading and occupying the country.

Even then, alot of these guys are not guilty of that, it seems we picked up alot of them straight off the battle field in Afghanistan and have held them since.

That is true... and thus I believe trials should go forth as quickly as possible, so we can find out who is really guilty of being Al Queda folks and who were just kind of hanging out and doing nothing wrong.

Also there are Taliban troops, who weren't involved with Al Queda, who have no business being in Gitmo. That should be found out as well.

[SlowwHand]

Originally posted by Vince278
Shoot 'em all and let Allah sort them out.

Don't bring Allah into it. These people bastardize Allah's word like David Duke and others bastardize Christianity.

[Vesayen]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


Terrorism is a Crime Against Humanity under international law:

http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/ccno10.htm

I see crimes against peace(we invaded Iraq and Afghanistan and in any case, individual soldiers can not be responsible for their nation declaring war).

I see no war crimes(for most of the ones arrested).

I see no crimes against hummanity for most of them.

I do not see "terrorism".

Conspiracy is a US (and just about every other common law country come to think of it) crime. We've taken criminal jurisdiction by invading and occupying the country.

Iraq has its own goverment(supposedly). Its their problem, not ours.

That is true... and thus I believe trials should go forth as quickly as possible, so we can find out who is really guilty of being Al Queda folks and who were just kind of hanging out.

If anyone in Iraq was Al Queda, they must of been tourists there on vacation. Iraq had no real connection to Al Queda.