BF2S Forums Will the millions Guantanamo inmates win be used for terrorism?

Crimson, you know how it works...  We look the other way when Saudis do shit, because the people in power here have so many corporate connections to Saudi Arabia.  We'd rather attack an easy target like Iraq or Iran.  They're not "business-friendly" enough for us.

GATOR591957 wrote:

I know for a fact your statistic on attempted suicide is grossly understated.  I have a niece that was stationed at Gitmo as a nurse.  What is reported, and actual numbers are far from the truth.

I'm sure a lot of those numbers were understated.  I only did a cursory search for lists, and the complete information is incredibly hard to come by.  I just provided what I found as a sort of eye-opener to people who continuously claim "high profile terrorists are held there" and "all of them are terrorists" and "they have been charged and go to trial" and "there is no abuse there" and "no one is detained despite being exonerated" and "everyone there deserves to be there".

Last edited by KEN-JENNINGS (2007-06-30 10:06:13)

come on... you know, that you can´t define it just by its name. a concentration camp is too, only a camp, where some kind of people are concentrated... but in reality it is something far away from just the name.

there are innocent in guantanamo - otherwise no one would have been released from there. and kidnapping people to keep them on a remote island, far away from their homes - even when it is not sure, that they are terrorists - is illegal!

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

[pt] KEIOS wrote:

come on... you know, that you can´t define it just by its name. a concentration camp is too, only a camp, where some kind of people are concentrated... but in reality it is something far away from just the name.

there are innocent in guantanamo - otherwise no one would have been released from there. and kidnapping people to keep them on a remote island, far away from their homes - even when it is not sure, that they are terrorists - is illegal!

Im not defending gitmo, but, there are innocents in every single jail in the world.  why dont we just abolish prisons?

My main beef with Gitmo is that there is a lack of oversight and information coming from the Pentagon about the place.  Not to mention the image of our country it sends to the rest of the world (both Western and economically developing).

Last edited by KEN-JENNINGS (2007-06-30 10:39:39)

Wait a cotton-picking minute here, wouldn't they need to be released before they could sue for millions?

CameronPoe wrote:

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

Im not defending gitmo, but, there are innocents in every single jail in the world.  why dont we just abolish prisons?

At least the innocents in ordinary jails a) got charged with something, b) can appeal and c) didn't get tortured.

Normally if this was say Iraqi troops from the Iraqi war we would have given them back to their country...but these are people who have been caught, as far as I know, on the battlefield attacking or killing our soldiers in Afganistan and Iraq.


Now I think they are all given the basic right of a military tribunal, but not the rights that normal citizens are afforded in civilian courts.


What I'm afraid of is if we release them they go back and start killing us.  I already sited an article above that had one of the Gitmoese released to only kill 2 more people. 



Benjamin Franklin, Scientist (1706-1790)
    "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."


How much are we willing to give up so we won't be killed?

[pt] KEIOS wrote:

come on... you know, that you can´t define it just by its name. a concentration camp is too, only a camp, where some kind of people are concentrated... but in reality it is something far away from just the name.

there are innocent in guantanamo - otherwise no one would have been released from there. and kidnapping people to keep them on a remote island, far away from their homes - even when it is not sure, that they are terrorists - is illegal!

remember though, the Geneva convention doesn't apply to America

M.O.A.B wrote:

Correction the Geneva convention is only supposed to apply to uniformed soldiers. The Taliban/Al Qaeda are not uniformed forces.

That seems to be the one thing about the Geneva Convention that the US government clings to like a starving cop to a Krispy Kreme. "It doesn't apply to anyone fighting without a uniform.", which applies to the Taliban, Al Qaeda...   ...and anyone else who happens to pick up a gun against the Coalition. Since the Coalition controls the "legitimate" Iraqi military, anyone else fighting the Coalition is by default a non-uniformed combatant and therefore happily unentitled to the protections of the Geneva Convention. This means that any Iraqi fighting simply because they want foreign soldiers out of their country share the same status as any of the medieval-minded morons who want to turn Iraq into a fundamentalist theocracy. Even better, as we've seen here in this thread, any Iraqi fighting simply because they want foreign soldiers out of their country are now lumped directly in with said medieval-minded morons and are assumed to be nothing more than bearded head-cutters who hate teh freedomz, creating this fantasy-world version of Gitmo that's full of "the worst of the worst" like it's The Vault from a Marvel comic (geek karma awarded to anyone who gets the reference).

SgtHeihn wrote:

Harmor wrote:

Will the millions Guantanamo inmates are probably going to win in their successful wrongful detainment civil suits against the government be used to fund terrorism?

Umm, don't think there are millions

Not a million Guantanamo inmates, the millions of dollars they might win.

DeathBecomesYu wrote:

And in my post I clearly stated that all is not good and that there is and will be mistakes. Bottom line is that there is much more in this world much worse than Gitmo but we rarely hear or do anything about it. I'm saying that people need to quit focusing on this story because there are tons of innocent people that have no voice at all, all over the world. Cuba and its political prisoners, China , Concentration camps in North Korea, hangings of men and women just because they may be gay or they cheated on their husband, stonings of people because they dated outside of their religion and we could go on and on and on....but of course if it doenst involve American it wont be front news and people here wouldnt have anything to whine about.

So as long as it's better than China, Cuba, or North Korea it's ok, gee what a high standard of human rights you hold up America to. We know that these countries have appalling human rights so it's not really news if they have a legal system which is seen to be poor or harsh, it is expected.

The US on the other hand is ment to be the beaming light of human rights and freedom so when it starts kidnapping people and sending them to a internationally illegal prison outside even the US legal system for up to five and an half years without charge it is news. Then holds military tribunals where the "defendant" is not allowed to find independant council of even see all the charges against him it is news.

If the US starts to act like this what hope is there that these other countries will feel any pressure to change their ways?

Harmor wrote:

Balok77 wrote:

[pt] KEIOS wrote:

come on... you know, that you can´t define it just by its name. a concentration camp is too, only a camp, where some kind of people are concentrated... but in reality it is something far away from just the name.

there are innocent in guantanamo - otherwise no one would have been released from there. and kidnapping people to keep them on a remote island, far away from their homes - even when it is not sure, that they are terrorists - is illegal!

remember though, the Geneva convention doesn't apply to America

These terrorists do not follow the Geneva convention.  They are not uniformed soldiers.  They are not fighting for a country.  They are criminals that should have their case brought before a military tribunal.

QFT

m3thod wrote:

Proberbly. 

Payback's a bitch

How could it be payback if they're not terrorists?