Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 22

Thread: Liberal/Democrat View on Enemy Treatment?

  1. #1

    Liberal/Democrat View on Enemy Treatment?

    Ok my Liberal and Democrat and "Indpendant-but-Flamingly-Liberal" friends, I have a homework assignment for you:

    I would like to know what YOU would allow in terms of treatment and handling of enemy combatants (non-uniformed) captured in the ongoin "War on Terror".

    --What would you allow?

    --What tactics would you use to get info?

    --How would you treat them in terms of captivity (where, how long) &

    --What methods and rights would you proscribe them for "clearing their name".

    And please, before you try the simple answer, remember that non-uniformed combatants do not qualify under the Geneva Convention. You can certainly say you'd extend those rules, but show us how much you know (since we know you know alot) and explain what that would allow and no allow.

    This topic courtesy of me watching half and hour of Bill Maher on HBO.

    Conservatives/Republicans......do us all a favor, and stay out of this one. We know where you stand. It's the Liberal stand that appears to be undecided.

  2. #2
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    On some beach... somewhere...
    Posts
    3,735
    I don't fit the mold of the audience you addressed, however, I have no problem with Jack Bauer / CTU tactics.

    Like the death penalty, I have no moral issues with being wrong once in a while if it means saving many more as a result.

    Good of the many outweighs the good of the few... or the one. In this instance.

    JMO, no debate necessary.

  3. #3
    TMahoney
    Guest
    [QUOTE=Warfish]Ok my Liberal and Democrat and "Indpendant-but-Flamingly-Liberal" friends, I have a homework assignment for you:

    I would like to know what YOU would allow in terms of treatment and handling of enemy combatants (non-uniformed) captured in the ongoin "War on Terror".

    --What would you allow?

    --What tactics would you use to get info?

    --How would you treat them in terms of captivity (where, how long) &

    --What methods and rights would you proscribe them for "clearing their name".

    And please, before you try the simple answer, remember that non-uniformed combatants do not qualify under the Geneva Convention. You can certainly say you'd extend those rules, but show us how much you know (since we know you know alot) and explain what that would allow and no allow.

    This topic courtesy of me watching half and hour of Bill Maher on HBO.

    Conservatives/Republicans......do us all a favor, and stay out of this one. We know where you stand. It's the Liberal stand that appears to be undecided.[/QUOTE]

    You can call terrorists non-uniformed combatents and get off on that technicality, but your own collective conscience as a country has already spoken on that. We don't want torture to be an official policy of the United States.

    If somewhere in some prison cell halfway around the world some CIA operative tortures an Terrorist cell leader to find out where another one is, fine, I don't want to know about it. And if I find out, I want that CIA operative charged with war crimes. If we as a country condone torture, every single one of our troops that is captured will most certainly be tortured as well. Torture also gives us an even worse name in the international community. Sometimes every law must be broken. If I had to torture someone who knew the whereabouts of the 9/11 hijackers on 9/9, I would've done it regardless of the law. But that does not mean that we should allow torture.

    Some of you flag waving "fortunate son" (CCR) Americans who think we can live outside of international law and above their srcutiny have to come back to earth. Regardless of whether you like it or not, sometimes we need the international community.

    I'm a civilian, I've never served in uniform, I can't tell you that torture is always wrong nor will I admit to it being an effective and just means to get information to fight the war on terror.

    But I do know this:

    We're the United States of America. A country based on ideals, ingenuity, freedom and respect for human life. No way in hell should the official policy of the United States condone torture.

  4. #4
    You'e failed to answer the questions Carl. While you moral outrage is entertaining, it doesn't answer the ACTUAL issue at hand.

    Fine, our official Policy is NO torture. Ok, so answer the questions:

    --What WOULD you allow?

    --What tactics would you use to get info?

    --How would you treat them in terms of captivity (where, how long) &

    --What methods and rights would you proscribe them for "clearing their name".

    Moral outrage is easy. Dealing with the issue isn't so easy. If you dislike what we're doing, what is YOUR alternative?

  5. #5
    It's simple. Just follow the Geneva Conventions which is something that every American govt. has done in every war since they were signed.

    This is what all the American military wants us to do, because they want American soldiers taken as prisoner treated according to the conventions also. Now you may say that terrorists don't follow them and your are right but we can't always be sure that our soldiers will not be taken in the future by signers of the convention and we don't want them to interpret it the way they see fit.

    I'm not an expert on what the conventions allow and don't allow so I can't answer your specific questions.
    Last edited by Queens Jet Fan; 10-29-2006 at 02:49 PM.

  6. #6
    TMahoney
    Guest
    [QUOTE=Warfish]

    --What WOULD you allow?

    --What tactics would you use to get info?

    --How would you treat them in terms of captivity (where, how long) &

    --What methods and rights would you proscribe them for "clearing their name".

    [/QUOTE]

    1. Follow the Geneva conventions even if our adversaries don't. Its not about technicalities. Being the only superpower left, we can afford to play by the "rules" even if our enemies don't. We don't want our young men and women overseas to become what we're fighting. Being a soldier is one thing, but torture is not all part of the rich history of Honor in our armed services.

    2. Now on your part about getting information. Since when was torture the only way? Have we not been able to acquire reliable intelligence in the past without torture? The real question should be "Is there ever a time in which torture is justifiable given extremely rare and dire circumstances?" And the answer to that question should unequivocally be yes. But for the United States of America to officially sanction the use of torture in the world climate, is a foolish mistake that will end up biting us in the ass down the road. As I said before, there are places and times far away from the lives of ordinary civilians when torture will be used to get valuable information. There is no doubt that will happen. But for a government to officially recognize torture as a reasonable tool to gather intelligence and on the other hand keep condoms out of high school because its "morally reprehensible" to give teenagers the "tools" to have sex safely is straight up bullsh*t.

    3 and 4: Follow the Geneva Convention.

    There will be times when torture will be an option on the table and in those cases, send the f*ckers to an Israeli prison camp and let them do it. ;)

  7. #7
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,793
    ....some homegrown criminals right here in the good ol US of A or just as bloodthirsty and have the same regard for human life as terrorists do. Ever been to Bed-Stuy? Should we detain them for an indeterminate period of time and subject them to torture until they give up all the names of the members of their gangs?

  8. #8
    [QUOTE=PlumberKhan] Ever been to Bed-Stuy? Should we detain them for an indeterminate period of time and subject them to torture until they give up all the names of the members of their gangs?[/QUOTE]
    What the hell is this??? Why don't you go grace Bed-Stuy with your openmindedness before writing garbage like this. I know enough fantastic people from Bed-Stuy and have been there (despite what you insinuate, there is nothing horrifying to see) to turn your description of them as a dangerous population on its head. You are talking about b.s. generalities, largely garnered from TV news or something and even then the gang problems are not with a population, but with teen gang culture. They weren't dancing in the streets of Bed-Stuy on 9/11, I'm embarrassed to even have to mention that. Cut it out.

  9. #9
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    On some beach... somewhere...
    Posts
    3,735
    [QUOTE=PlumberKhan].... Should we detain them for an indeterminate period of time and subject them to torture until they give up all the names of the members of their gangs?[/QUOTE]

    Yes.

    As for your ability to tie to coherent arguments together, you have no clue.

  10. #10
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,793
    [QUOTE=sackdance]What the hell is this??? Why don't you go grace Bed-Stuy with your openmindedness before writing garbage like this. I know enough fantastic people from Bed-Stuy and have been there (despite what you insinuate, there is nothing horrifying to see) to turn your description of them as a dangerous population on its head. You are talking about b.s. generalities, largely garnered from TV news or something and even then the gang problems are not with a population, but with teen gang culture. They weren't dancing in the streets of Bed-Stuy on 9/11, I'm embarrassed to even have to mention that. Cut it out.[/QUOTE]


    Relax...It was a metaphor, Chris.

  11. #11
    [QUOTE=PlumberKhan]Relax...It was a metaphor, Chris.[/QUOTE]
    Oh is that what it was? I'm relaxed now, Rob. I have full confidence that Jetdawgg will save the day and correct you on employing racial stereotypes. :rolleyes:

  12. #12
    As an Ex-Marine I say that we "stay the course". Follow the Geneva Convention. It is tried and true.

    Since these newer captives are without uniforms, I would still follow the GC. I think that any other methodology would cause more enemies and even friends to become enemies.
    Last edited by Jetdawgg; 10-30-2006 at 10:41 AM.

  13. #13
    [QUOTE=Jetdawgg]Ax an Ex-Marine I say that we "stay the course". Follow the Geneva Convention. It is tried and true.

    Since these newer captives are without uniforms, I would still follow the GC. I think that any other methodology would cause more enemies and even friends to become enemies.[/QUOTE]


    good post

    if we don't follow the rules, who will?

  14. #14
    [QUOTE=bitonti]good post

    if we don't follow the rules, who will?[/QUOTE]

    That is EXACTLY the point. The Geneva Convention DOES NOT APPLLY to this type of combatant. Do you think they forgot them? Do you think it was overlooked? No, this type of combatant was left our fo the Convention on purpose, as the Geneva Convention was not designed to handle non-uniformed, non-Nation State enemies, and certainly not ones who follow NO rules of War whatsoever.

    Be serious, do you REALLY think that us following the Generva Convention guidlines for Nation-State Prisoners will make these people NOT cut the heads off our captured men? What on Earth gives you THAT idea?

  15. #15
    [QUOTE=Warfish]That is EXACTLY the point. The Geneva Convention DOES NOT APPLLY to this type of combatant. Do you think they forgot them? Do you think it was overlooked? No, this type of combatant was left our fo the Convention on purpose, as the Geneva Convention was not designed to handle non-uniformed, non-Nation State enemies, and certainly not ones who follow NO rules of War whatsoever.

    Be serious, do you REALLY think that us following the Generva Convention guidlines for Nation-State Prisoners will make these people NOT cut the heads off our captured men? What on Earth gives you THAT idea?[/QUOTE]

    The GC is proven guidline for war. It has been the policy of humane societies for decades. We should not stoop to the level of the enemy. How would we hold the moral high ground then?

    These "terrorists" are nothing more than street gang types with a different purpose. They are fighting what they believe are "oppressive policies".
    I don't see how cutting their heads off makes us better.

    The GC is a measuring stick of how nations should treat prisoners. My feeling is we should continue that policy. I can't control how the other countries will treat our POW's. I don't see the gain by stooping to their level though.

  16. #16
    [QUOTE=Warfish]Ok my Liberal and Democrat and "Indpendant-but-Flamingly-Liberal" friends, I have a homework assignment for you:

    I would like to know what YOU would allow in terms of treatment and handling of enemy combatants (non-uniformed) captured in the ongoin "War on Terror".

    --What would you allow?

    --What tactics would you use to get info?

    --How would you treat them in terms of captivity (where, how long) &

    --What methods and rights would you proscribe them for "clearing their name".

    And please, before you try the simple answer, remember that non-uniformed combatants do not qualify under the Geneva Convention. You can certainly say you'd extend those rules, but show us how much you know (since we know you know alot) and explain what that would allow and no allow.

    This topic courtesy of me watching half and hour of Bill Maher on HBO.

    Conservatives/Republicans......do us all a favor, and stay out of this one. We know where you stand. It's the Liberal stand that appears to be undecided.[/QUOTE]

    This is a simple question.
    Simply follow the Geneva Convention rules. You treat other combatatnts the same way you would want our soldiers to be treated. You extend them the same rights, you believe our soldiers should have extended to them. WHether they reciprocate this to our soldiers is irrelevant. SO long as we consider ourselves the Moral Leaders of the world we should be doing what WE consider to be the right thing. Stop comparing what we should do to what a gang of criminals do. Our standards are much higher.

    Fish, here is a question to you: Scores of Military/Intelligence experts continue to say that information obtained by detainees under durress (as is under torture tactics) tends to be unreliable. Why is it that you insist we usetechniques that at the very least boarder on torture when the experts say it is not very helpful. Do you know something that they dont? Do you have any research that shows that info under durress CAN be relied upon? Please share with us.

  17. #17
    [QUOTE=Warfish]Ok my Liberal and Democrat and "Indpendant-but-Flamingly-Liberal" friends, I have a homework assignment for you:

    I would like to know what YOU would allow in terms of treatment and handling of enemy combatants (non-uniformed) captured in the ongoin "War on Terror".

    --What would you allow?

    --What tactics would you use to get info?

    --How would you treat them in terms of captivity (where, how long) &

    --What methods and rights would you proscribe them for "clearing their name".

    And please, before you try the simple answer, remember that non-uniformed combatants do not qualify under the Geneva Convention. You can certainly say you'd extend those rules, but show us how much you know (since we know you know alot) and explain what that would allow and no allow.

    This topic courtesy of me watching half and hour of Bill Maher on HBO.

    Conservatives/Republicans......do us all a favor, and stay out of this one. We know where you stand. It's the Liberal stand that appears to be undecided.[/QUOTE]

    Clear rules for handling enemy combatants agreed to by Congress and the President. We are a country of laws not of field commandos

    Prescribed rules for charging enemy combatants in a timely manner and rules for trial with representation. Military tribunals are fine with me. Their should be some Habeas Corpus right to a court whether civilian or military I don't really care but there has to be some oversight and appeal.

    In the case of a clear and present immediate danger where severe methods may be needed, a secret rotating court whether military or civilian should have to sign off on it and records should be released to the public in a reasonable time frame specified by law.

    The question shouldn't be how whiny Libs are coddeling mass murderers or sadist Conservatives are willing to torture innocent clerics :eek: the question is are we a country of laws and rules that we live by or are we just another rogue State with the biggest stick?

  18. #18
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    On some beach... somewhere...
    Posts
    3,735
    Personally I am getting tired of this "moral leadership" "moral highground" crap.

    I am even getting tired of the "moral majority" crap from the GOP.

    Morals my ass. Do what you need to do to save lives. That is the primary role of the govt. Everything else is just B.S. to create jobs for politicians.

    Deal with these non-uniformed combatants in whatever means it takes to save more lives. Do it behind closed doors, do it in Israel whatever, I don't care. Just get the friggin job done.

    While you're at it, spend a month with such a friggin' overwhelming force and offensive in these damn middle east hotspots that you wipe these crap heads off the face of the earth and then pull out and secure the borders. Be done with this already. It's becoming tiresome.

  19. #19
    [QUOTE=JetFanTransplant]Personally I am getting tired of this "moral leadership" "moral highground" crap.

    I am even getting tired of the "moral majority" crap from the GOP.

    Morals my ass. Do what you need to do to save lives. That is the primary role of the govt. Everything else is just B.S. to create jobs for politicians.

    Deal with these non-uniformed combatants in whatever means it takes to save more lives. Do it behind closed doors, do it in Israel whatever, I don't care. Just get the friggin job done.

    While you're at it, spend a month with such a friggin' overwhelming force and offensive in these damn middle east hotspots that you wipe these crap heads off the face of the earth and then pull out and secure the borders. Be done with this already. It's becoming tiresome.[/QUOTE]


    Where/when did you serve in the Military? The though of me (Marines) or my children (too young to serve right now) in the hands of the enemy after we use extremely cruel measures to extract bad intelligence (that stuff again) does what good?

    The gov't keeps us alive by having rules and laws. We don't like all of the rules/laws but we obey them. There has to be a standard or else you get chaos.

    We are a civilized (?) people. The GenCon attempts to help keep people civil even under the duress of war.

  20. #20
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    On some beach... somewhere...
    Posts
    3,735
    [QUOTE=Jetdawgg]Where/when did you serve in the Military? The though of me (Marines) or my children (too young to serve right now) in the hands of the enemy after we use extremely cruel measures to extract bad intelligence (that stuff again) does what good?

    The gov't keeps us alive by having rules and laws. We don't like all of the rules/laws but we obey them. There has to be a standard or else you get chaos.

    We are a civilized (?) people. The GenCon attempts to help keep people civil even under the duress of war.[/QUOTE]


    Fortunately for me, generations of family members, including my father, 3 of his brothers and a sister, My brother, and a handful of cousins have or are currently serving (many in theater) so I didn't have to.

    By-the-way, thank you for your service to our country.

    As for the rest, my point is go at it with such an overwhelming force and aggression and end it now and get our kids home. God bless the Marines for what they do, I know they believe that a war is not won without boots on the ground and a rifle in the face of the enemy, but I just assume we use the tools, technology and long range weaponry to beat them down so badly and then let the Iraqi's clean it up themselves. Same for Afghanistan, Darfur and wherever else.

    Further, if you believe for a second that these terrorist, non-uniformed combatants, radical douchebags are going to treat you any differently if you are captured whether we abide by GenCon or not, you are terrible naive.

    Now I fully support GenCon if we were dealing with the types of enemies they were written for.

    I know this is probably an unrealistic approach... I am just tiring of the debate about the war, the approach we are currently using etc.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us