Detainees legally held

[Gonz]

WE WILL NEVER FORGET!

 

[Shadowfax]

that's the whole bloody point here...at what point are the actions of the US still justified against the actions of the terrorists?
of course the US has the right to defend their own country, but the US can not just ignore personal freedom or the international laws on human rights, because it thinks it may benefit their national security.

if other countries are going to ignore those laws and those rules as well, because they might suspect that a person might be involved in terrorist activities (but they don't KNOW), then where will this end?

yes, the US is powerful, yes, the US has declared the war on terrorism, but NO the US can NOT ignore human rights.
the things that happened on sept. 11th 2001 were horrible, true. but they may not be used as an excuse to do whatever the US wants to do. even though a lot of people think it can.

 

[chcr]

the things that happened on sept. 11th 2001 were horrible, true. but they may not be used as an excuse to do whatever the US wants to do. even though a lot of people think it can.

That, my friend, is exactly the problem.

 

[chcr]

Why yes, I can. Thank you for asking I couldn't on 9/10/01. I could never have imagined a group of murderers would be able to steal 4 American airliners & fly the goddamned things into American buildings.
I would never have imagine that almost 4000 people would burn to death from jet fule, or worse, be willing to JUMP FROM A GODDAMED 110 STORY BUILDING TO ESCAPE THE PAIN & AGONAY>


NOWCAN YOU IMAGINE?

A September 1999 report, "The Sociology and Psychology of Terrorism: Who Becomes a Terrorist and Why?" written for the National Intelligence Council (CIA.gov/nic) by Library of Congress' Federal Research Division (FRD) analyst Rex A. Hudson, predicted that "suicide bomber(s) belonging to al-Qaida's Martyrdom Battalion could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives (C-4 and semtex) into the Pentagon, the headquarters of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or the White House," and pointed out that "Ramzi Yousef had planned to do this against the CIA headquarters."

1994: Tom Clancy, a favorite author of the CIA and the Pentagon, publishes "Debt of Honor", which describes a terrorist crashing a 747 with a full fuel load into the Capitol, killing the President and many of the House and Senate members.

Evidently, someone besides the terrorists could.

 

[Ms Ann Thrope]

We are at war. Once the war has ended, (as close as a war against terrorists can) then we can get back to normal. Right now we have men & women fighting for our protection. There are bad guys who wish to kill us. Until they are dead, shit happens.

Damn! I must have been asleep.... when did the USA make a formal declaration of war?

 

[Rose]

Didn't the declaration come approximately Sept. 11th, 2001 and hasn't been lifted yet ...

 

[PT]

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.


-Ben Franklin.

 

[Ms Ann Thrope]

Didn't the declaration come approximately Sept. 11th, 2001 and hasn't been lifted yet ...

There was no formal declaration of war after 9/11 as far as I know. Only an authorization of force. I've excerpted a letter to Bush you can see in its entirety at http://defazio.house.gov/121901DELetter.shtml

As you know, Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution grants Congress the exclusive authority to declare war. While, as commander-in-chief, we recognize that you conduct the day-to-day operations of the U.S. military, the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution of 1973 grant Congress the prerogative to decide whether to send U.S. troops into hostilities. The use of force resolution approved by Congress specifically safeguarded Congress’ war powers by noting that nothing in the resolution “supercedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution.”

We are writing to remind you that while Congress overwhelmingly authorized you to use military force to respond to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the congressional authorization was limited in scope.

 

[Rose]

If I remember correct - he declared it all right. He said "we are at war". Quite a declaration, and too the point.

If you wonder if it ever made it onto paper legitly as other wars are supposed to be done ... I don't believe he ever did that.

 

[Ms Ann Thrope]

Bush may have stated something to that effect, but only Congress has the authority to formally declare war. See Article 8 of the Constitution: http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html

 

[MrBishop]

I think that it goes beyond merely stating that "we're at war", in the same way that "I'm gonna kill you" isn't usually enough to get you arrested

There's paperwork involved and lots of signatures... There is no "War" without it, much like Vietnam was a "police action" and not a War, per se.

 

[MrBishop]

Bush may have stated something to that effect, but only Congress has the authority to formally declare war. See Article 8 of the Constitution: http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

 

[Ms Ann Thrope]

What Bush got was an "Authorization of Force" see link: http://usinfo.state.gov/regional/nea/iraq/text/1010res.htm

As for a "police action," I believe that was Korea, not Viet Nam. Pres. Johnson got Congress to approve the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution on August 7, 1964

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the Congress approves and supports the determination of the President, as Commander in Chief, to take all necessary measures to repel any armed attack against the forces of the United States and to prevent further aggression.

http://www.uiowa.edu/~c030162/Common/Handouts/War/Tonkin.htm

 

[chcr]

And people wonder why I think we should kill all the lawyers.

If someone shoots at me, I shoot back. Call it whatever you like.

 

[MrBishop]

And people wonder why I think we should kill all the lawyers.

If someone shoots at me, I shoot back. Call it whatever you like.

Problem is that (not in Afghanistan) sometimes you're the one doing the shooting first. Then what?

Iraq - is that a 'war'?

 

[Ms Ann Thrope]

Technically? I don't believe so, Bish. A 'conflict' or 'police action' perhaps. Congress never formally declared war, only the authorization of force.

 

[chcr]

Problem is that (not in Afghanistan) sometimes you're the one doing the shooting first. Then what?

Not me, Bish. Everyone else can have one shot. I don't promise not to duck or hide, and I shoot back really well. You know how I feel about Iraq.

Iraq - is that a 'war'?

Not since the "hostilities ended."

 

[MrBishop]

and so we fall back to the original idea. This isn't a war, these people are not prisoners of war or illegal combattants. They may not even be terrorists or Taliban members... they may just be Mr and Mrs Joe Blow and they're sitting in Guantanamo Bay until further notice...if that ever comes.

How long should they stay there before they get out?

lets see...Rape'll get you 3 years in jail, Murder 5-10 .. they've been in there for 2-3 years now... that'd leave

(crime committed) - 2years = X solve for X

Toughie...because we don't know what crime they committed innit?

 

[Rose]

You know, call it what you want, but we're at war. Or at least were. Even if it wasn't "war on paper" or "approved by congress".

When our service men and women are out there risking their lives, fighting because we told them to fight - they are fighting a war.

 

[Squiggy]

But they're suspected associates of 'evil doers'. There must be a law somewhere....