Why close a prison camp in WARTIME?

[Gumby]

The UN wants us to close the camp at Gitmo and let all the little osamas free.

Did Al Qaida send their surrender terms to Al Jazeera and I missed it?

I mean I know I get wrapped up at work for weeks at a time and dont read news; but I thought I would have heard that.


But I guess this just points out that the rest of the world doesnt treat our declaration of war any more seriously than the democrat party does.

But we are at war; and so long as a war is being prosecuted you dont close your 'prisoner of war' camps nor your 'enemy combatant' camps. Hell, Russia kept their German prisoners from WWII until 1952 or 55. Germany had to have special negotiations to get the 5,000 or so who survived from about a half million back.

Some of these countries complaining about us holding prisoners captured on a battlefield arrest their own citizens without a trial and disappear them. But hypocrisy is nothing new at UN.

[wistahpatsfan]

Originally Posted by Gumby

...But I guess this just points out that the rest of the world doesnt treat our declaration of war any more seriously than the democrat party does.

But we are at war; and so long as a war is being prosecuted you dont close your 'prisoner of war' camps nor your 'enemy combatant' camps...

What makes you say we are at war? There has been no "declaration of war". We don't behave as if we are at war either domestically or internationally other than building bases and fending off insurgent combatants.

I do respect your referring to the "enemy" as combatants, when most other pro-war people tend to call anyone with a gun who isn't a Yank or Brit a "terrorist". At least you recognoze they are really combatants and are a threat to our troops in Iraq.

[Gumby]

you obviously dont understand the definition of the word 'combatant' in militay legal terminology. my paraphrasing below:

It means someone not deserving of Geneva Convention protections who is fighting against you.

A terrorist is a 'combatant in a peacetime environment who generally targets civilians without warning'.

These guys are mostly terrorist thugs; although some do qualify as pure 'enemy combatants' and a limited few actually qualify as 'prisoners of war' (i.e. Saddam Hussein and a limited few others)

[All_Around_Brown]

Originally Posted by Gumby

you obviously dont understand the definition of the word 'combatant' in militay legal terminology. my paraphrasing below:

It means someone not deserving of Geneva Convention protections who is fighting against you.

A terrorist is a 'combatant in a peacetime environment who generally targets civilians without warning'.

These guys are mostly terrorist thugs; although some do qualify as pure 'enemy combatants' and a limited few actually qualify as 'prisoners of war' (i.e. Saddam Hussein and a limited few others)

Can you verify that everyone at Gitmo is a combatant? Is it on the Defense Department website?

[dryheat44]

Here's my take FWIW. Some of those held in Gitmo are enemy fighters. A large percentage are not, but were rounded up on suspicion on having Al Qaeda ties.

The first should have been shot dead in combat, the second should be released. Any intelligence they are going to give has already been obtained. A reasonable time by any definition for holding suspects has passed, and we should know if they are enemy or not. If they are, kill them. If not, release them.

Then close Gitmo, and in the future do it right, kill the enemy. And don't arrest those who we don't know are the enemy.

[BlueTalon]

Originally Posted by dryheat44

Here's my take FWIW. Some of those held in Gitmo are enemy fighters. A large percentage are not, but were rounded up on suspicion on having Al Qaeda ties.

The first should have been shot dead in combat, the second should be released. Any intelligence they are going to give has already been obtained. A reasonable time by any definition for holding suspects has passed, and we should know if they are enemy or not. If they are, kill them. If not, release them.

Then close Gitmo, and in the future do it right, kill the enemy. And don't arrest those who we don't know are the enemy.

A killed enemy can provide a whole lot less intelligence information than a live one can. And soldiers in a combat zone don't "arrest" anyone, they capture prisoners. A small semantic difference, perhaps, but I think it's a clue to your thinking. If you think of the Gitmo prisoners as POWs, perhaps it might help a little bit. POWs get released when the war is over -- it's their bad luck that their compatriots have no intention of stopping any attacks until they are all captured or dead. But it's their good fortune that they ended up at Gitmo rather than about anywhere else on the planet.

[Harry Boy]

Instead of worrying about Gitmo why isn't the Sleazy little Smirking Weasle Crook Koffi Annan trying to stop the Rampaging Muslim Savages that are going insane over a "Cartoon"?

Hollywood:
After the Far Left Liberal Democratic Party allows the "Muslim Religion" to occupy and Take Over the United States Of America among the first people to DIE at the hands of the Religious Muslims will be the "Hollywood Wife Swappers" the very people that assisted them in their "War On Christianity"

The chickens will come home to roost for Penn, Baldwin, Striesand and GANG.

[BlueTalon]

Originally Posted by Harry Boy

Instead of worrying about Gitmo why isn't the Sleazy little Smirking Weasle Crook Koffi Annan trying to stop the Rampaging Muslim Savages that are going insane over a "Cartoon"?

Because it's easier to complain to us than it is to actually do anything.

[Harry Boy]

Koffi Crook Annan wants every country on the planet to run to him and get his permission before they go to the bathroom.

GW Bush will never kiss Koffi's or the UN's A-s for anything.

The next "Bomber" to hit America is probably sitting in Gitmo right now waiting for Koffi to get him released.

[Patters]

Do you have any evidence that Annan isn't trying to stop the cartoon riots? Certainly, if statements have been aimed at that? What else do you think he should do? Did you want the UN to come into America in the 60s when we had riots? C'mon, bluetalon and harry, are you advocating more power to Kofi Annan? Do you think he should call out the troops?