can a kinder gentler nation survive?

[ilbob]

dasmi:

So, you think we ought to change the rifle platoon MTOE to include a defense lawyer to read enemy combatants (lawful & otherwise) their Miranda rights and to be their advocate from the minute we snatch the RPG from their hand?

The lawyerization of our society is near complete when you can't wage war without a lawyer on your back and the folks back home so clueless as to think it is the proper way to do things.

No, of course not.   But I do think once a person has been detained, they deserve a trial.  Especially if they are to be detained indefinitely. 

What would you charge them with at trial?

And since so many of you want to give them POW status, if you did that, there is never a trial until the war is over. It may well be decades before we defeat radical Islam.

[Len Budney]

I don't recollect anyone promoting the torture of innocents.  Just because there is a slope, does not always mean it will become slippery.

I'm NOT making a slippery slope argument. I'm specifically saying that some of the detainees at Gitmo are completely innocent, but nevertheless are subject to "aggressive interrogation methods." The US tortures accused and suspected terrorists, not convicted terrorists, and they aren't all guilty. They're doing that TODAY.

"are completely innocent..."  and you know that, how?

Because even the United States admitted they were innocent, and eventually released them.

--Len.

[Len Budney]

Len: Your response belongs in a work of hysterical fiction.  Poor, old Kalid Sheik Mohammed was an innocent bystander just caught up in the merciless grip of OD-wearing JBTs.

You might want to study up on the difference between "there are innocent people at Gitmo" and "everyone at Gitmo is innocent." 

[Len Budney]

'm specifically saying that some of the detainees at Gitmo are completely innocent, but nevertheless are subject to "aggressive interrogation methods." The US tortures accused and suspected terrorists, not convicted terrorists, and they aren't all guilty. They're doing that TODAY.

Innocent of what? Just because they have not been convicted of anything does not make them innocent.

You mean, "They may not be terrorists, enemy combatants or anything else, but by golly they must be guilty of something!" 

See my previous reply. The United States has admitted that some of them are innocent, and released them. Since they're held without charges or any other sort of due process, we can be certain that other mistakes have also been made.

--Len.

[Paddy]

And since so many of you want to give them POW status, if you did that, there is never a trial until the war is over. It may well be decades before we defeat radical Islam.

It amazes me that some people still buy this fearmongering crap.  They got lucky once because we totally ignored all the warnings, that's all.  'Radical Islam' is a small, small minority of Islam worldwide.  There is no justification for this country to engage in any of this 'detainee' crap.  We're better than that.  Unfortunately, we have a couple of knuckledragging slopeheads in the executive branch that either believe their propoganda, or are using this opportunity to ripoff hundreds of billions of $ from the public treasury.

In any event, this administration will go down in history as the most corrupt criminal enterprise ever to seize control of a democracy.  Thankfully, it will all be over by January 20, 2009.

And I predict that when GWB and Cheney die, the location of their graves will remain secret, because future generations will dig up their sorry rotting carcasses and hang them.

[RevDisk]

. . . would it be worth maintaining that high road if it meant more troops or civilians died from lack of intelligence? . . .

People who insist that we follow the high road without deviation, at any cost . . . are seldom the ones who will be paying that cost.

Clearly, people who like torture are twisted . . . but there's something really wrong with the mindset of the person who is willing to let Americans die because they insist on good treatment for captured jihadis.

Sigh.  Ask the Soviet Union if torture and genocide will preserve a country.  In the short run, yes.  In the long run, obviously not.

Folks always pull out the "24" style ticking bomb situation as a justification.  If our government showed very clearly such acts were reserved exclusively for such situations, most Americans would be understanding.  However, statistics unfortunately do not show that.   Gitmo allegedly had a total of 775 detainees, 355 detainees currently.   420 have been released.   The DoD has admitted they only plan on bringing less than a 100 to trial, more likely 60 to 80.  The rest are scheduled for release.  Someday.  So roughly 1 in 10 are seen as too dangerous to be released.  I'm failing to see "something really wrong" with questioning the need for routine torture if there is a 90% of innocence.  If the numbers were flipped, you'd have a case to make an argument.

Harsh interrogation techniques are one thing.  Scarring someone for life with electroshock, sensory deprivation, sexual molestation, etc when our government has proven that the overwhelming majority of detainees are being released?  First off, anyone who sexually abuses a prisoner needs to be shot.  Period.  Sorry I seem twitchy on the subject, but I know some rape survivors.  There is no justification for it, regardless of ANY circumstances.  The rest, might be justified under extreme circumstances.  EXTREME circumstances, not routine pickups. 

Do me a favor and drop the sensationalist fearmongering.  Extreme cases such as the 'ticking bomb' example are very, very rare.  You'd be hard pressed to find more than two such cases in a decade.  The very common example is a local rat narcing out someone he has a personal grudge against.  Or mistaken identity.  Those happen a dozen times a day.  Please explain how torture is justified with those far more common scenerios?

[Scott]

How about playing Barry Manilow records 24/7 until they talk?

That was completely unneccessary and in bad taste. What next Liberace? The horrors.

[drewtam]

Folks always pull out the "24" style ticking bomb situation as a justification.  If our government showed very clearly such acts were reserved exclusively for such situations, most Americans would be understanding.  However, statistics unfortunately do not show that.   Gitmo allegedly had a total of 775 detainees, 355 detainees currently.   420 have been released.   The DoD has admitted they only plan on bringing less than a 100 to trial, more likely 60 to 80.  The rest are scheduled for release.  Someday.  So roughly 1 in 10 are seen as too dangerous to be released.  I'm failing to see "something really wrong" with questioning the need for routine torture if there is a 90% of innocence.

I challenge you to read Micheal Yon's reporting and field analysis copied below and still tell me these folks are innocent. Just because they are released DOES NOT mean they are "innocent".

For the record, I am against any sort of torture; it is against the very nature of who we are. It is the reason why we have a
"cruel and unusual punishment" clause in our Constitution. I think George Washington said something like "We might not win our fight, but will battle in such a way that we deserve to win."
I will always support taking the high ground. When it comes to surrendered captives.



http://www.michaelyon-online.com/wp/gates-of-fire.htm

The doctors rolled LTC Kurilla and the terrorist into OR and our surgeons operated on both at the same time. The terrorist turned out to be one Khalid Jasim Nohe, who had first been captured by US forces (2-8 FA) on 21 December, the same day a large bomb exploded in the dining facility on this base and killed 22 people.

That December day, Khalid Jasim Nohe and two compatriots tried to evade US soldiers from 2-8 FA, but the soldiers managed to stop the fleeing car. Then one of the suspects tried to wrestle a weapon from a soldier before all three were detained. They were armed with a sniper rifle, an AK, pistols, a silencer, explosives and other weapons, and had in their possession photographs of US bases, including a map of this base.

That was in December.

About two weeks ago, word came that Nohes case had been dismissed by a judge on 7 August. The Coalition was livid. According to American officers, solid cases are continually dismissed without apparent cause. Whatever the reason, the result was that less than two weeks after his release from Abu Ghraib, Nohe was back in Mosul shooting at American soldiers.

LTC Kurilla repeatedly told me of - and I repeatedly wrote about - terrorists who get released only to cause more trouble. Kurilla talked about it almost daily. Apparently, the vigor of his protests had made him an opponent of some in the Armys Detention Facilities chain of command, but had otherwise not changed the policy. And now Kurilla lay shot and in surgery in the same operating room with one of the catch-and-release-terrorists he and other soldiers had been warning everyone about.

[Joe Demko]

It must be nice to be able to cloak sadism in patriotism and not have to feel so...dirty.

[Manedwolf]

It must be nice to be able to cloak sadism in patriotism and not have to feel so...dirty.

The people who risk their lives each and every day to keep your comfortable nation and neighborhood safe...do a lot of things that you might find distateful. A lot of things that will probably be with them for the rest of their lives, too.

You're here, in a safe, comfortable country, where the lights are on, the water runs clean, and the police will come if you call...and not shake you down for a bribe. And they're out there on the ragged edge, dealing with people, no, not even people, but animals who would saw someone's head off with a dull machete without hesitation. They get to see what those animals do to the innocent civilians over there, too. Things that don't happen here.

Be thankful. And grateful.

Bad things happen in wars. Things nobody wants to talk about or think about. And that's just reality.

[Len Budney]

The people who risk their lives each and every day to keep your comfortable nation and neighborhood safe...do a lot of things that you might find distateful.

Bleah. They're making me less safe, not more safe, and I never asked them to. It's not only dishonest, it's insulting, to suggest that I'm in any way to blame for deploying them in an aggressive, expensive and counter-productive war.

A lot of things that will probably be with them for the rest of their lives, too.

Since you do support deploying them in a counter-productive war of aggression, I hope that rests on your conscience. They're being scarred for life in order to make nobody any safer.

--Len.

[De Selby]

I'm surprised to see that there is an actual debate about the use of torture.  I would've thought that sort of thing was done with since medieval times, but apparently the right political agenda will re-enable almost anything.

Reminds me of a class vote I once saw on whether or not the Korematsu case (allowing the US military to arrest and intern people based on race alone) was rightly decided-after about 20 percent said yes, the prof noted that before September 11th you'd be lucky to find even one person who thought it was rightly decided.

Sad times indeed.

[grampster]

It must be nice to be able to cloak ignorance and bliss in safe self righteous land.

It constantly amazes me how some people can stand in the middle of a herd of cows and cry "Where's the beef."

 

[RevDisk]

Folks always pull out the "24" style ticking bomb situation as a justification.  If our government showed very clearly such acts were reserved exclusively for such situations, most Americans would be understanding.  However, statistics unfortunately do not show that.   Gitmo allegedly had a total of 775 detainees, 355 detainees currently.   420 have been released.   The DoD has admitted they only plan on bringing less than a 100 to trial, more likely 60 to 80.  The rest are scheduled for release.  Someday.  So roughly 1 in 10 are seen as too dangerous to be released.  I'm failing to see "something really wrong" with questioning the need for routine torture if there is a 90% of innocence.

I challenge you to read Micheal Yon's reporting and field analysis copied below and still tell me these folks are innocent. Just because they are released DOES NOT mean they are "innocent".

For the record, I am against any sort of torture; it is against the very nature of who we are. It is the reason why we have a
"cruel and unusual punishment" clause in our Constitution. I think George Washington said something like "We might not win our fight, but will battle in such a way that we deserve to win."
I will always support taking the high ground. When it comes to surrendered captives.

My apologies.   I meant legally found 'innocent', or at least not guilty enough to convict.  Lot of bad people here in the US walk too. 

[MechAg94]

My main issue is that these days people define torture as sneezing in the same building as the "detainees".


German POW's were detained in Texas without a trial also.  I guess they weren't considered "detainees". 

Personally, I don't have a problem with drawing a line against torture, but some of the rhetoric and witch hunts go too far.  I remember the story about that officer who fired his pistol next to the head of a captured insurgent.  I think he was finally allowed to retire with rank after it became public, but I can't remember. 

[De Selby]

My main issue is that these days people define torture as sneezing in the same building as the "detainees".


German POW's were detained in Texas without a trial also.  I guess they weren't considered "detainees". 

Personally, I don't have a problem with drawing a line against torture, but some of the rhetoric and witch hunts go too far.  I remember the story about that officer who fired his pistol next to the head of a captured insurgent.  I think he was finally allowed to retire with rank after it became public, but I can't remember. 

Holding them as POW's is fine-indeed, most of the "bleeding hearts" are crying out for holding these folks as POW's, and that's what most of the international outcry demands.

Indefinite detention with no rights to be visited by anyone, including the red cross, in a "war on terror" that ends not with any defined goal or defeat of a particular country isn't POW status though.  The Germans in WWII were being treated like guests of honor at the Hilton in comparison to what the gitmo detainees get. 

If they're crooks, they deserve punishment.  But it needs to be proven that they're crooks.

If they're POW's, they should be treated like POW's. 

What's going on now is an attempt to punish them criminally, using only the same procedures (or usually fewer procedures) that would apply to making someone a POW.

[Len Budney]

My main issue is that these days people define torture as sneezing in the same building as the "detainees".

Straw man. We're talking about water-boarding, sleep deprivation, sensory deprivation, extremes of heat and cold--but not "sneezing in the same building."

[Joe Demko]

The sadists I'm talking about aren't the sadists doing the torture.  The sadists I'm talking about are right here.  This is all upside for them.  They get to feel patriotic because this is for America.  They get to feel morally superior to those of us who are against the activity because they care more about other people than we do.  They get to feel smarter than those of us who are against the activity because we just don't understand the real world like they do.  Last, but not least, they get to feel stronger, cooler, and harder than those of us who are against it becuase they're like Jack Bauer and we aren't.  All this gained from cheerleading activities that when the Soviets or Vietnamese did it were reprehensible!

[gunsmith]

How about playing Barry Manilow records 24/7 until they talk?

I would rather be waterboarded!

[roo_ster]

If they're crooks, they deserve punishment.  But it needs to be proven that they're crooks.

If they're POW's, they should be treated like POW's. 

They are not POWs, the vast majority are unlawful combatants.  Anything better than a round in their skull at apprehension is better than they deserve and are due under the conventions.

The conventions the USA signed on to had both carrot and stick: treat others' combatants well and don't do things contrary to the conventions or laws of war, and you'll be treated well.  Do otherwise, and no protections are due.

[De Selby]

If they're crooks, they deserve punishment.  But it needs to be proven that they're crooks.

If they're POW's, they should be treated like POW's. 

They are not POWs, the vast majority are unlawful combatants.  Anything better than a round in their skull at apprehension is better than they deserve and are due under the conventions.

The conventions the USA signed on to had both carrot and stick: treat others' combatants well and don't do things contrary to the conventions or laws of war, and you'll be treated well.  Do otherwise, and no protections are due.

Unlawful combatant=criminal.  It's a crime; that's why they have to give them some sort of process (at a minimum, military tribunal) to determine if they are in fact unlawful combatants.  And if they're unlawful combatants, they are entitled to be tried for crimes committed in the course of their unlawful combat activity.

There's no precedent in American law or western custom for labelling someone a criminal without any process whatsoever; there's no such thing as a crime that can be proved summarily by the executive branch.

[Paddy]

They are not POWs, the vast majority are unlawful combatants. 

  What the hell are 'unlawful combatants', anyway?  I don't remember hearing that term before GWB decided he wanted to avoid laws and treaties by calling anybody he chose to 'detain' as such.

[Finch]

What the hell are 'unlawful combatants', anyway? 

Just another cute little catch phrase engineered to facilitate the willing sacrifice of freedom for perceived security. Kind of like "They Hate us For Our Freedoms" "Fundamental Islamic Extremists" and the all time Guiliani favorite - "Islamofacist".

[brer]

Get off of your high horse ManedWolf.

There are several of us here that also fought to ensure that everyone was safe and comfy back home. Quite a few of us are very unconfortable with the actions that are happening  in our countries name.

The government and its agents betraying the fundamental principals under which we swore to is not going to serve our country best in the long run. That is a truthism.  If we fall into torture as a matter of policy, we can expect it from our government soon enough.

[Manedwolf]

Get off of your high horse ManedWolf.

There are several of us here that also fought to ensure that everyone was safe and comfy back home. Quite a few of us are very unconfortable with the actions that are happening  in our countries name.

The government and its agents betraying the fundamental principals under which we swore to is not going to serve our country best in the long run. That is a truthism.  If we fall into torture as a matter of policy, we can expect it from our government soon enough.

Please provide definitive proof that this is happening. Because all I've seen is fearmongering about our government. Oh, yeah, and a lot of supposition from black-helicopter sites, and rhetoric from Kos Kids...in between their pro-Hezbollah rallies.

Or did you come here right from there, perhaps? Gotta wonder with an early post that presumptuous.

Proof? Provide it.

And:

That is a truthism troofism.

FTFY.