ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
President Obama announced Monday that military trials will resume for detainees at the Guantanamo Bay prison camp, a move that won praise from Republicans, who say the president has finally "seen the light" on the value of trying such detainees at the facility.
Obama, saying he wants to "broaden our ability to bring terrorists to justice," issued an executive order outlining the changes Monday afternoon, as Defense Secretary Robert Gates rescinded a January 2009 ban against bringing new charges against terror suspects in the military commissions.
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
Not sure anyone loves Gitmo, but the Republicans blocked his efforts to close it and pretty much blocked his efforts for civilian trials.. what is he supposed to do, ignore the need to get something done???
This stuff will not go away, it is better to do something than nothing... it was a bad idea from the onset, and will not go away.
__________________ "Being the best doesn't mean you always win. It just means you win more than anyone else".. tweet from Kurt Warner to Tom Brady.
Not sure anyone loves Gitmo, but the Republicans blocked his efforts to close it and pretty much blocked his efforts for civilian trials.. what is he supposed to do, ignore the need to get something done???
This stuff will not go away, it is better to do something than nothing... it was a bad idea from the onset, and will not go away.
What a load, the pubs weren't in a position to block anything during his first term. Matter of fact he could close Gitmo without any action by congress.
As to the trials, it was predicted they would fail. The big objection to the KSM trial in Manhattan was led by the 2 dem senators.
__________________
"Some guys play in all-star games, some guys don't. I don't know who picks all those all-star teams. In all honesty, I don't know who picks the combine, for that matter," Belichick said. "How does (Miami-Ohio offensive lineman Brandon) Brooks not get invited to the combine? How did Vollmer not get invited to the combine? I don't know. We can't really worry about that. We just have to try to evaluate them the best we can."
What a load, the pubs weren't in a position to block anything during his first term. Matter of fact he could close Gitmo without any action by congress.
As to the trials, it was predicted they would fail. The big objection to the KSM trial in Manhattan was led by the 2 dem senators.
The Republicans and all their lemmings made the most noise, and led the uprising.. remember the brou ha ha when there was a suggestion that they move it to the vacant facility in Illinois???
What would be a viable choice for these detainees?? No one will answer that question, just criticize.
There was an effort to try some of them in NY, however there was a subsequent reconsideration after Rep. King made the most noise as well as the associated security costs.. the Dems followed suit, due to the public opinion associated with this trial.
We have become the countries in the mideast that we are currently opposing, indeterminate detentions without due process... are they prisoners?? Are they Prisoners of War?? Are they detainees pending trial?? What is their legal status??
Our inability to resolve this democratically on the world stage is shameful..
__________________ "Being the best doesn't mean you always win. It just means you win more than anyone else".. tweet from Kurt Warner to Tom Brady.
Asked by CBS' Steve Kroft about releasing prisoners who have returned to terrorist groups, Obama replies: "There is no doubt that we have not done a particularly effective job in sorting through who are truly dangerous individuals . . . to make sure [they] are not a threat to us."
Yet, the president maintains, the Bush administration's policy on detainees at Guantanamo -- including long incarcerations without trial -- was "unsustainable."
Now that's what I call "sustainable development". It apparently is suddenly sustainable.
Quote:
We have become the countries in the mideast that we are currently opposing, indeterminate detentions without due process... are they prisoners?? Are they Prisoners of War?? Are they detainees pending trial?? What is their legal status??
Indeterminate detentions without due process is SOP in those countries. Not just for unlawful enemy combatants, but for anyone that catches their eye.
The detainees are unlawful enemy combatants. In order to be a prisoner of war they would have to have been in uniform and operating as part of an identifiable military force. Part of the problem here is that terrorists are non-state actors. There is no state with whom we can negotiate their release or work out terms for an end to hostilities. If there was an identifiable entity with whom we were waging war and they had been in uniform, they would be POWs. The due process for a POW is to keep them in detention (subject to Geneva protections) until hostilities have ended so that you don't send someone right back to the battlefield to try to kill your soldiers. Because terrorists have not followed these rules they are not afforded that status. It would be foolish to do so (in my opinion) as it would remove any incentive for a potential adversary (i.e. an organized military) to play by those same rules.
The difficulty with civilian trials is that you are dealing with a battlefield environment. You can't send a CSI team to gather forensic evidence while bullets are flying around. Furthermore, it would create the need for soldiers to leave the battlefield and testify. That would be not only unworkable but would jeopardize their personal security (reveal their identities).
So we have a quandry...one that neither Bush nor Obama have been able to figure out. Both apparently settled on military tribunals.
Where the argument comes is from the liberties that were apparently taken with the definition of "battlefield". There are or have been detainees who were picked up from their home using the argument that essentially the whole world is a battlefield in the War on Terror. I haven't read whether people who fit that description are a particular focus (i.e. to resolve their status quickly) for the new administration or not so I am not sure if that has changed.
How do you feel about simply killing suspected terrorists with drone attacks as opposed to capturing and detaining them? That appears to be the direction of the new admin. What due process is involved there?
Quote:
Our inability to resolve this democratically on the world stage is shameful..
Now that's what I call "sustainable development". It apparently is suddenly sustainable.
Indeterminate detentions without due process is SOP in those countries. Not just for unlawful enemy combatants, but for anyone that catches their eye.
The detainees are unlawful enemy combatants. In order to be a prisoner of war they would have to have been in uniform and operating as part of an identifiable military force. Part of the problem here is that terrorists are non-state actors. There is no state with whom we can negotiate their release or work out terms for an end to hostilities. If there was an identifiable entity with whom we were waging war and they had been in uniform, they would be POWs. The due process for a POW is to keep them in detention (subject to Geneva protections) until hostilities have ended so that you don't send someone right back to the battlefield to try to kill your soldiers. Because terrorists have not followed these rules they are not afforded that status. It would be foolish to do so (in my opinion) as it would remove any incentive for a potential adversary (i.e. an organized military) to play by those same rules.
The difficulty with civilian trials is that you are dealing with a battlefield environment. You can't send a CSI team to gather forensic evidence while bullets are flying around. Furthermore, it would create the need for soldiers to leave the battlefield and testify. That would be not only unworkable but would jeopardize their personal security (reveal their identities).
So we have a quandry...one that neither Bush nor Obama have been able to figure out. Both apparently settled on military tribunals.
Where the argument comes is from the liberties that were apparently taken with the definition of "battlefield". There are or have been detainees who were picked up from their home using the argument that essentially the whole world is a battlefield in the War on Terror. I haven't read whether people who fit that description are a particular focus (i.e. to resolve their status quickly) for the new administration or not so I am not sure if that has changed.
How do you feel about simply killing suspected terrorists with drone attacks as opposed to capturing and detaining them? That appears to be the direction of the new admin. What due process is involved there?
What's your solution?
Do not agree with the whole drone thing either, as there is too much collateral damage(women and children)...
The issue here is that Guantanamo was not a well thought out decision, and there was no planning involved.. Bush could not get much done, and neither can Obama..
Without regard Obama does not seem to have much choice, and at least there is some direction.. these folks cannot just languish in limbo for an indefinite period of time.
__________________ "Being the best doesn't mean you always win. It just means you win more than anyone else".. tweet from Kurt Warner to Tom Brady.
Sorry, can't backtrack on this one. It's time to face the facts. Before he was elected, he wasn't privy to the information he has now about what is being done at Gitmo. All he knew before was that bad stuff happened. Now, he's probably seeing some of the other reports coming out that probably tell him it's not worth it to close because 1) there is a question of what to do with the remaining detainees AND/OR 2) there is actually usable intelligence coming out that is above the media's pay grade/clearance level and isn't getting reported.
__________________
We get what we deserve.
------------------ “On a day when they could have had impact players David Terrell or Koren Robinson..they took Georgia defensive tackle Richard Seymour, who had 1 sacks last season in the pass-happy SEC and is too tall to play tackle at 6-6 and too slow to play defensive end. This genius move was followed by trading out of a spot where they could have gotten the last decent receiver in Robert Ferguson and settled for tackle Matt Light, who will not help any time soon.”
Sorry, can't backtrack on this one. It's time to face the facts. Before he was elected, he wasn't privy to the information he has now about what is being done at Gitmo. All he knew before was that bad stuff happened. Now, he's probably seeing some of the other reports coming out that probably tell him it's not worth it to close because 1) there is a question of what to do with the remaining detainees AND/OR 2) there is actually usable intelligence coming out that is above the media's pay grade/clearance level and isn't getting reported.
All moot arguements for the existentence of Gitmo. Not even touching on why we find it acceptable to have a base in Cuba....It is against the law of the land to hold anyone without charge. Obama and everyone else who perpetuates this fraudulent and offensive practice is in violation of the Constitution and every other so-called virtue of "American justice". Obama is perpetuating and therefor, committing a war crime. Period. If you're going to suspend the Constitution, just do it and get it over with. Obama sucks.
And all you rumpswabs who make excuses for this are full of *****. It was wrong when bush did it and it still is.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
All moot arguements for the existentence of Gitmo. Not even touching on why we find it acceptable to have a base in Cuba....It is against the law of the land to hold anyone without charge. Obama and everyone else who perpetuates this fraudulent and offensive practice is in violation of the Constitution and every other so-called virtue of "American justice". Obama is perpetuating and therefor, committing a war crime. Period. If you're going to suspend the Constitution, just do it and get it over with. Obama sucks.
And all you rumpswabs who make excuses for this are full of *****. It was wrong when bush did it and it still is.
Clearly solid rationale based upon the moral high-ground that is (supposedly) the foundation of our nation...or at least on paper, it is.
I'll admit, I don't know what "the right thing to do" is regarding Gitmo. I do know this...if I had to do something immoral or illegal to protect the lives of my family members, I'd do it in a heart-beat and carry no remorse over that decision.
I'm not sure if this rationale applies to Gitmo or not, but I'm just putting it out there for discussion. If releasing these men resulted in an the deaths of Americans, should that risk be taken? Who would have blood on their hands and would the American people be ok with, "hey, we had to let them go and take the chance because that's what America stands for"
Tough one Wistah...very tough.
So the question then becomes, how can the United States prevent terrorist attacks upon Americans? Would you be ok with an American Mossad-like force? Are you ok with the Israel's Mossad?
"rumpswabs"....not sure if I'm insulted or not, but I like that term Wistah!
__________________ "No one walking this earth knows what is truly righteous"
Last edited by PatriotsReign; 03-08-2011 at 10:14 AM..
What a load, the pubs weren't in a position to block anything during his first term. Matter of fact he could close Gitmo without any action by congress.
True. All the more reason he should have said "f*** the GOP" and did whatever the hell he wanted. You know, like the previous badministration.
This man's constant reaching across the aisle continues to screw him over and over again.
Obama Loves Gitmo
Linear Mode
