Let me see if I am getting this straight...

[Cold Fusion38]

You're just about positively wrong.

Well I guess I don't have to be pissed at him for voting for the "Patriot" act then.

unfortunately you do because he did. grrrrr i hate the patriot act.

and you never did clarify why you think my original post in this thread was disgusting when I said

What was so disgusting about my post?

All I said was:

1) The enemies on the battle field should be shot on sight
2) Those who we do capture should be given quick military tribunals after interrogation

easy peasy

whats so disgusting about that?

i am very persistant and wont shut up until you say something

Sorry misread as not taking prisoners. I obviously got it confused with another post that said to kill EVERYONE.......My sincere appologies.

 

[xotoxi]

Sirhan Sirhan is serving more time than other murderers because he shot a Kennedy.

He assassinated a US Senator.

How long do you think he should be held?

It was a Kennedy.
He should receive a medal for public service.

Charles, every morning, just after my coffee and breakfast, and just before my shower, I fill the toilet bowl with shit that is more intelligent than you.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Well I guess I don't have to be pissed at him for voting for the "Patriot" act then.

unfortunately you do because he did. grrrrr i hate the patriot act.

and you never did clarify why you think my original post in this thread was disgusting when I said

What was so disgusting about my post?

All I said was:

1) The enemies on the battle field should be shot on sight
2) Those who we do capture should be given quick military tribunals after interrogation

easy peasy

whats so disgusting about that?

i am very persistant and wont shut up until you say something

Sorry misread as not taking prisoners. I obviously got it confused with another post that said to kill EVERYONE.......My sincere appologies.

Basically I was saying take no prisoners, if they are shoooting at you kill them.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

Now as a left leaner I find it EASIER to find fault in far right conservative viewpoints just as a right leaning person would find it easier to find fault with far left liberals. The one fact that I hope I made clear though it has litttle to do with my OP is that I DESPISE the "Patriot" act.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Now as a left leaner I find it EASIER to find fault in far right conservative viewpoints just as a right leaning person would find it easier to find fault with far left liberals. The one fact that I hope I made clear though it has litttle to do with my OP is that I DESPISE the "Patriot" act.

Me too.

 

[slackjawed]

Now as a left leaner I find it EASIER to find fault in far right conservative viewpoints just as a right leaning person would find it easier to find fault with far left liberals. The one fact that I hope I made clear though it has litttle to do with my OP is that I DESPISE the "Patriot" act.

Then why o why did you vote for a supporter of the patriot act?

Senate Vote Roll Call on U.S. Patriot Act 2001 & 2006

 

[Cold Fusion38]

unfortunately you do because he did. grrrrr i hate the patriot act.

and you never did clarify why you think my original post in this thread was disgusting when I said

i am very persistant and wont shut up until you say something

Sorry misread as not taking prisoners. I obviously got it confused with another post that said to kill EVERYONE.......My sincere appologies.

Basically I was saying take no prisoners, if they are shoooting at you kill them.

Yeah I guess waiting for them to run out of ammo wouldn't be the best tactic to use. LOL!


I agree if our troops are being shot at that they should return fire....and here's one that will blow MM mind....I don't think we should tippy toe around civilian areas being used by insurgents. Of course we should TRY to limit civilian deaths but if they are shooting at us from an orphanage then THEY are responsible for civilian deaths NOT our soldiers.

 

[nodoginnafight]

yes that is the penalty for fighting in a war and being AN ILLEGAL COMBATANT as defined by the good folks who met in Geneva.

Are you saying that they have been - and should continue to be - treated in accordance with the Geneva Convention?

Yep. illegal combatants have NO rights under the Geneva convention. I blame bush for the fact they are still alive.

So you are saying yes, they are treated in accordance with the Geneva Convention? When the document itself makes it clear that it does not apply to them? So your position is that by NOT applying Geneva Convention standards, we have applied Geneva Convention standards?

Geneva Convention doesn't apply. Let's just leave it there.

And when we want to punish someone, we go to the courts. It's in that whole seperation of powers thingy. Military Tribunals are for military people - Geneva says that doesn't apply here.

It's the correct venue - although I've waffled before on this issue over the past few days, I think this is the right call.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

Now as a left leaner I find it EASIER to find fault in far right conservative viewpoints just as a right leaning person would find it easier to find fault with far left liberals. The one fact that I hope I made clear though it has litttle to do with my OP is that I DESPISE the "Patriot" act.

Then why o why did you vote for a supporter of the patriot act?

Senate Vote Roll Call on U.S. Patriot Act 2001 & 2006

The lesser of two EVILS.

 

[slackjawed]

Are you saying that they have been - and should continue to be - treated in accordance with the Geneva Convention?

Yep. illegal combatants have NO rights under the Geneva convention. I blame bush for the fact they are still alive.

So you are saying yes, they are treated in accordance with the Geneva Convention? When the document itself makes it clear that it does not apply to them? So your position is that by NOT applying Geneva Convention standards, we have applied Geneva Convention standards?

Geneva Convention doesn't apply. Let's just leave it there.

And when we want to punish someone, we go to the courts. It's in that whole seperation of powers thingy. Military Tribunals are for military people - Geneva says that doesn't apply here.

It's the correct venue - although I've waffled before on this issue over the past few days, I think this is the right call.

the text is included in this definition.

have someone read it to you....

 

[Claudette]

These guys are TERRORISTS. They would kill us all if they could.

GWB declared war on TERRORISTS . Our congress did not. These guys have no RIGHTS at all. Especially not the Rights of an American Citizen.

My idea. Shoot on site. If you absolutely have to take one prisoner. Get all the info you can and then exectute them all. The dirtbags would kill you, your family anyone they could and not bat an eye while doing it my friends. They would show you not one iota of mercy.

 

[nodoginnafight]

ah yes, the condescending insult argument .... how very persuasive

 

[Midnight Marauder]

Now as a left leaner I find it EASIER to find fault in far right conservative viewpoints

You find it easier because it's intellectual laziness you're describing, and suppression of intellectual honesty. That's the disease of all partisans, no matter their stripe.

 

[nodoginnafight]

GWB declared war on TERRORISTS . Our congress did not. These guys have no RIGHTS at all. Especially not the Rights of an American Citizen.

Doesn't matter and trying them in Federal court is not an attempt to bestow rights they do not qualify for.
It is simply operating OUR government according to OUR Constitution.

 

[nodoginnafight]

"Steven G. Calabresi, one of the country’s most prominent conservative legal scholars, Tuesday defended the Obama administration’s decision to try Sept. 11 terror suspects in New York and took his fellow conservatives to task for their criticism. ...

Calabresi, a co-founder of the conservative Federalist Society, said “Obama has lived up to his oath of office by scheduling these trials before a life-tenured judge and jury.”

..."No Article III court or jury – no constitutional power to punish. It is a simple question of the separation of powers – something I had thought conservatives believed in passionately.”

“This ought not to be a very controversial proposition,” he said.

... while Congress makes the law and the president executes it or enforces it, only the life-tenured Article III courts assisted by a jury can impose punishments.”

While most of his fellow conservatives have urged the use of military commissions for trials of terrorism suspects, Calabresi said such proceedings should only be used “for the purpose of maintaining military discipline. No one thinks the trials of the 9/11 terrorists have anything to do with military discipline. They have to do with well-deserved punishment. When our government wants and needs to punish, it must go to court to accomplish that.” ..."

Leading conservative backs N.Y. trials - Fred Barbash - POLITICO.com

 

[Midnight Marauder]

Doesn't matter and trying them in Federal court is not an attempt to bestow rights they do not qualify for.
It is simply operating OUR government according to OUR Constitution.

Why then will KSM still be held indefinitely, even if he is found not guilty on the charges? Why will the vast majority of Gitmo detainees still be held indefinitely, most without ever having a trial at all?

You believe this is about principle and not politics? Then explain the above contradictions. Also explain why new detainees are given to other countries for interrogation now, with a wink and nod knowing there will still be "torture."

 

[nodoginnafight]

Doesn't matter and trying them in Federal court is not an attempt to bestow rights they do not qualify for.
It is simply operating OUR government according to OUR Constitution.

Why then will KSM still be held indefinitely, even if he is found not guilty on the charges? Why will the vast majority of Gitmo detainees still be held indefinitely, most without ever having a trial at all?

You believe this is about principle and not politics? Then explain the above contradictions. Also explain why new detainees are given to other countries for interrogation now, with a wink and nod knowing there will still be "torture."

if you want to punish people - you go to the court. That's just the law. It doesn't have to to be reconciled with your interpretation of other events. Don't blame ME for any perceived inconsistencies - I didn't WRITE the law. I just advocate following it.

 

[Claudette]

Yes. I became condescending after 9-11.

Kill them all. They will surely kill you if given the chance.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Yes. I became condescending after 9-11.

Kill them all. They will surely kill you if given the chance.

I see - your position is that to fight crime you have to be a criminal?

I disagree - I believe the greatest nation this planet has ever seen can defeat these thugs without having to stoop to their level.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

These guys are TERRORISTS. They would kill us all if they could.

GWB declared war on TERRORISTS . Our congress did not. These guys have no RIGHTS at all. Especially not the Rights of an American Citizen.

My idea. Shoot on site. If you absolutely have to take one prisoner. Get all the info you can and then exectute them all. The dirtbags would kill you, your family anyone they could and not bat an eye while doing it my friends. They would show you not one iota of mercy.

Wow you must have a line DIRECTELY to GOD!!!! You are a self rightious fucking FOOL!!! How do you KNOW any given individual IS a terrorist!!!??? Oh I guess if it's just one of those a a a a ARABS then EXECUTING an INNOCENT man is no big deal right? Maybe you should go on your OWN crusade to Iraq and go kill some I bet that would give you a thrill better than sex.