Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <The terrorists have already won. Our Constitution has been peed on. Our stature in the world has been diminished more than I ever thought possible.> I strongly disagree.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <I think we have become the bad guys. It's unfortunate, but true.> But it's not true.
Originally Posted By DAR I'm just wondering when President Obama gives the order to torture someone if some of you are going to act so outraged.
Originally Posted By dshyates Yes, I will. But I highly doubt he would do that. But if he does. Then yes, I will still be against torture.
Originally Posted By DAR <<But I highly doubt he would do that. >> He's a politician and thus bound to disappoint us at some time.
Originally Posted By dshyates "He's a politician and thus bound to disappoint us at some time." I agree with that, but International War Crimes probably going to be it.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>I'm just wondering when President Obama gives the order to torture someone if some of you are going to act so outraged.<< Fortunately, some of us aren't so married to the person as we are the ideals. I would be upset if he did so, I'd also be surprised and deeply disappointed. I would be let down. Contrast this with some Bush leftover supporters who simply abandon their ideals to defend the man. I guess if you defend the indefensible, you don't have to worry about being let down.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <<I'd really like to hear some specifics. I've listened to what he's proposing, and have heard nothing to support your claims.>> <Then you haven't been paying attention. Here's a recent quote:> There's nothing in that quote that, if followed, makes us less safe. There's no good reason why we can't deal with these prisoners in a way consistent with our own Constitution (that says habeas shall not be suspended except in cases of rebellion or invasion, and it applies to anyone under US jurisdiction, which includes these prisoners), and international conventions to which we are a signatory. Doing so will not make us less safe, and in fact will help restore our reputation. All Obama is saying there is that we could have treated those at Gitmo in a way consistent with our laws, the way we did after the first WTC attack, which resulted in those people's convictions. It's a conservative fantasy that doing it that way rather than shuttling them off to a black hole somewhere somehow led to the second WTC attack, but that is not true. Had they been shuttled off to a black hole, bin Laden would still have been determined to attack us, and would have.
Originally Posted By DAR <<All Obama is saying there is that we could have treated those at Gitmo in a way consistent with our laws, the way we did after the first WTC attack, which resulted in those people's convictions. >> So he wouldn't necessarily close Gitmo.
Originally Posted By DAR Let's just admit it we don't have any evidence of how those first WTC suspects were treated.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <So he wouldn't necessarily close Gitmo.> He's said he would. Gitmo's location itself allows for some of the subterfuge, by allowing some to claim (with a straight face) that it's not "US soil.") McCain has also said he'd close Gitmo.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <There's nothing in that quote that, if followed, makes us less safe.> Of course you'd think that. It doesn't make it so.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh You should read this: <a href="http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NTFhZTdmZWZlMGExNDRjOWRlZWUxYzEwNjg0MWEzZDc=" target="_blank">http://article.nationalreview....MWEzZDc=</a>
Originally Posted By dshyates "How is that strategy of prosecuting him in the criminal-justice system working out?" So how's W.'s strategery working out? W. has invaded 2 countries and killed how many civilians? And where's bin Laden? It seems to me that the results have been the same only W. has killed thousands, run the wheels off the military, and given the national treasury to Halliburton and Blackwater.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh President Bush wasn't just concerned about prosecuting bin Laden; he wanted to end the threat of al Queda. And that's looking pretty good right now.
Originally Posted By X-san That's an interesting article, and I am concerned with some of Obamas comments myself however, why is it so impossible to find the middle ground here? No, they are not common, American criminal defendants. Nor should they be treated as vermin with no rights whatsoever. Why can't they be treated the way society has always handled war criminals? That's the part I don't get.
Originally Posted By dshyates Are you kidding me the Taliban just broke a bunch of Taliban and Al Quida guys out of prison and are taking over villages in Afgahnistan. Or did you miss that.
