sportschick
Active Member
Bush has decided that the Geneva Conventions apply to all U.S. prisoners after all.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2265447,00.html
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2265447,00.html
Geneva Conventions U-turn
- Thread starter sportschick
- Start date
A
alleyallen
Guest
My argument to Bush back then would have been, "We should set the example we'd like the world to follow." Plain and simple.
Armchair_QB
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2003
- Messages
- 36,813
Be nice if the folks who were beheading our uniformed soldiers and non-combatant civilians would realize that too.
But they won't. Even if we had set an example by treating non-uniformed terrorists like POWs.
But they won't. Even if we had set an example by treating non-uniformed terrorists like POWs.
A
alleyallen
Guest
Armchair_QB said:
I'm not saying us obeying the convention will save our troops while in the hands of others. But neither does it mean we ought to abandon all thoughts of civility and right and wrong just because someone else did.
F
Fenian_Bastard
Guest
Also, this is election-year -- also Day Of The Hamdan Hearings In Congress -- window-dressing.
Doesn't address the CIA prisons overseas, and I don't believe these clowns will follow through on it anyway.
Doesn't address the CIA prisons overseas, and I don't believe these clowns will follow through on it anyway.
Armchair_QB
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2003
- Messages
- 36,813
alleyallen said:
Not sure how we abandoned all thoughts of civility and right and wrong by actually locking up terrorists. And let's not go down the Abu Ghirab route again seeing as how that was a bunch of whack jobs who should be treated the way they treated those prisoners.
F
Fenian_Bastard
Guest
Armchair_QB said:
You honestly believe the "few bad apples" argument, given what we now know about the legal underpinnings of what this adminstration believes its powers are during its self-declared "wartime."? I can't any more.
Armchair_QB
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2003
- Messages
- 36,813
Fenian_Bastard said:
Given that there's zero evidence that type of crap went on anywhere else, yeah I do. Hell, we've got guys who go through the day having ****, **** and god knows what else thrown at them down at Guantanamo yet they still allow those animals to hold their daily prayers and read their Koran. I'd say we're treating the prisoners with more compassion than they deserve.
A
alleyallen
Guest
Fenian_Bastard said:
I would quickly like to steer you away from that line of argument, FB, simply because my beef is with the administration, not the military. THat's not to say the military is fault-free, but given the steaming pile they've been handed, the majority is trying to do the best it can.
D
D-Backs Hack
Guest
Well, la-de-****ing-da.
The Bushies, who lie with breathtaking impunity, can say one thing. Doesn't mean they won't do another.
And when they inevitably do, who's going to hold the administration accountable? Same with the recent smackdown they got from the Supreme Court -- who is going to enforce it?
The rubber-stamp Republican Congress?
The brain-dead, scared-of-their-own-shadow Democrats?
The fourth-graders in the Washington press corps?
Yawn. Move along, nothing new to see here.
The Bushies, who lie with breathtaking impunity, can say one thing. Doesn't mean they won't do another.
And when they inevitably do, who's going to hold the administration accountable? Same with the recent smackdown they got from the Supreme Court -- who is going to enforce it?
The rubber-stamp Republican Congress?
The brain-dead, scared-of-their-own-shadow Democrats?
The fourth-graders in the Washington press corps?
Yawn. Move along, nothing new to see here.
BTExpress
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2002
- Messages
- 28,736
It's not those people we are trying to influence. They are who they are.
It's the OTHER 22 million people in Iraq . . . the ones we are trying to win the hearts and minds of . . . the ones we are trying to convince that WE do it the right way . . . the ones whose help we need to finally stand up against the insurgency. It's hard to do that if we are considered no better than the insurgents.
Why am I even making this argument? It's so freaking simple it should go without saying.
Armchair_QB
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2003
- Messages
- 36,813
And those who hate us will hate us whether we treat these animals with respect or we don't. Those who were Baathists were going to hate us no matter what. Those who weren't were either going to hate us or like us depending upon how much they were persecuted by, or benefited from, Saddam.
Oh, it's not only the people in Iraq that should prompt us to follow the Geneva Conventions. It's every person in the world, every soldier we enlist, every country we might someday join in a fight or fight against. That's the reason we honor these rules.
To sit here and think otherwise is incredibly short-sighted and stupid.
Of course, incredibly short-sighted and stupid is a rather accurate description of the dumbass occupying the White House.
To sit here and think otherwise is incredibly short-sighted and stupid.
Of course, incredibly short-sighted and stupid is a rather accurate description of the dumbass occupying the White House.
F
Fenian_Bastard
Guest
Sorry, alley --
I think this went too far up the chain of command to let the military completely off the hook. The biggest problem -- as I said -- is the theory that the Executive is beyond all restraint, oversight, and constitutional limits during "wartime," and that "wartime" is whenever the Executive says it is. That's a fair summary of where we're at.
We're also beginning to see the "Brutes Don't Appreciate What We've Done For Them" arguments start to appear, as they inevitably do when one country forcibly occupies another. No surprise.
I think this went too far up the chain of command to let the military completely off the hook. The biggest problem -- as I said -- is the theory that the Executive is beyond all restraint, oversight, and constitutional limits during "wartime," and that "wartime" is whenever the Executive says it is. That's a fair summary of where we're at.
We're also beginning to see the "Brutes Don't Appreciate What We've Done For Them" arguments start to appear, as they inevitably do when one country forcibly occupies another. No surprise.
I'm gonna disagree a bit there, Fenian.
The problem that the military is facing is that the Fredo administration has removed every military consultant that has disagreed with what they want to do. Look at all the generals who have said, in one way or the other, that they disagreed about an aspect of this war during one stage or another. Immediately, whenever one of these guys say they recommended something else, Fredo's gang trots out some other general who says he signed off. And it's always a different general. We've got one guy who agreed with the initial war plan, another who agrees on the current plan, another who's signing off on the Gitmo ****, and so on.
This administration, you've got to give 'em credit, are excellent at circumventing the rules, the Constitution, common sense and morality to get what they want.
I agree with Allen. These soldiers have been given absolute **** to deal with here. I give these guys all the leeway in the world. Some bad **** has happened, no doubt. But at the same time, you've taken kids, placed them in a very emotional, very hostile, very scary place, you've extended their tours and broken their wills and many of them are snapping. Who's to blame for that?
The problem that the military is facing is that the Fredo administration has removed every military consultant that has disagreed with what they want to do. Look at all the generals who have said, in one way or the other, that they disagreed about an aspect of this war during one stage or another. Immediately, whenever one of these guys say they recommended something else, Fredo's gang trots out some other general who says he signed off. And it's always a different general. We've got one guy who agreed with the initial war plan, another who agrees on the current plan, another who's signing off on the Gitmo ****, and so on.
This administration, you've got to give 'em credit, are excellent at circumventing the rules, the Constitution, common sense and morality to get what they want.
I agree with Allen. These soldiers have been given absolute **** to deal with here. I give these guys all the leeway in the world. Some bad **** has happened, no doubt. But at the same time, you've taken kids, placed them in a very emotional, very hostile, very scary place, you've extended their tours and broken their wills and many of them are snapping. Who's to blame for that?
A
alleyallen
Guest
dog428 said:
That's precisely my point, Dog. Just because Iraqi terrorists are willing to behead soldiers doesn't mean ever enemy we face will do the same thing. Nor does it mean we should, either. And you're right, winning the hearts and minds of <insert name here> is what's important, because they're the ones who will help us defeat an enemy that would cost us even more lives fighting them ourselves.
