Discussion in 'Middle East - General' started by Gunny, May 7, 2008.
more ... http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/05/07/gitmo.bomber/index.html
The stock response you will get now is either " he did it cause we drove him to it" or " So what?" Followed by what an innocent man he was and never should have been held to begin with.
I new the "we drove him to it" was coming when I posted the article.
Or maybe we just should have tried people and put them away.
Maybe. Maybe this is a new kind of war that doesn't work too well with the rules of conventional war and they're still working on something that does. Prisoners of War are held for the duration of the war then released and not cahrged with crimes unless specific allegations of crimes have been made against individuals.
From a military viewpoint, sending potential enemies back prior to the conclusion of a war so they can resume waging war against you is beyond dumb. Reinforcing the enemies ranks is NOT a sound tactic of warfare.
We couldnt do that because LAWYERS were too busy arguing whether or not he was an enemy combatant.
No. They couldn't do that because they were never charged with any crimes.
Yes they were. Its called being an enemy combatant.
Thats not a crime. They weren't charged with anything, they were accused of actions, but not charged. See charging actually requires something called evidence, or you get laughed out of court. Accusing requires pretty much nothing.
Again, prisoners of war aren't charged with crimes.
The fact is, not charging soldiers in a war with crimes for fighting in the war works to their advantage rather than harm them as has been continually pushed. Most will go free.
The alternative is to charge each with being a terrorist and/or aiding terrorists/terrorist organizations in which case you would have more people serving actual prison sentences/sitting on death row. The punishment for those crimes is far more severe than participating in a war.
Those charged with actual war crimes, unless they are our own, have not been tried until the conclusion of the war.
I don't know that there is an actual solution in dealing with this situation. Conventional rules don't apply. The war itself is not conventional. But to treat these people better than our own people, and allow them US Constitutional Rights is BS to me, and just allowing them to exploit yet another of out weaknesses against us.
Separate names with a comma.