Looks like we need to keep our camps in Guantanamo Bay open indefinitely

[iambecomelife]

BTW, there are no professional anti-americans here, and I still don't get wha critizizing American foreign policy in the press implies an inferiority complex. If we had one we'd be brownosing the States all the time.

But I DON'T think criticizing America in the press NECESSARILY implies an inferiority complex. It's all about tone and context. Some writers criticize specific aspects of foreign policy, propose plausible alternatives, and refrain from drawing conclusions about the population as a whole. Others - well, let's just say they take a different approach.

[trekchu]

Originally Posted by iambecomelife

BTW, there are no professional anti-americans here, and I still don't get wha critizizing American foreign policy in the press implies an inferiority complex. If we had one we'd be brownosing the States all the time.

But I DON'T think criticizing America in the press NECESSARILY implies an inferiority complex. It's all about tone and context. Some writers criticize specific aspects of foreign policy, propose plausible alternatives, and refrain from drawing conclusions about the population as a whole. Others - well, let's just say they take a different approach.

*nods* I have to admit that you do have a point there. Several of my Friends are from the States ( including my best mate ) and they are pretty normal. ( As normal as an American can be seen in Europe. )

However: The same goes for the American press, and as long as they keep doing that ours will do so aswell. While this may seem childish in a way its just fair IMVHO.

[PeriscopeDepth]

Originally Posted by iambecomelife

Um, did you read my earlier post? I acknowledged the people abroad who ARE fighting with the US.

Yes, but regardless of that you seem to generalize Euros as anti-American. Which certainly can't be the case if their elected governments deem sending their citizens to die for our cause as appropriate.

PD

[Happy Times]

Originally Posted by trekchu

BTW, there are no professional anti-americans here, and I still don't get wha critizizing American foreign policy in the press implies an inferiority complex. If we had one we'd be brownosing the States all the time.

Im critical of some things in America, but i dont see its fair to not talk about the lots of positives that i feel are greater than the negatives.
To be honest, there are lots of professional anti-americans in Europe. All socialists i know despise their politics, no matter who is in power, but also the whole American way of life. The ideals of capitalism and minimal state control over individual scares them.
Some others might embrase all the comforts and entertainment originating from America but stilll are very critical and like to look down on Americans.
I would say there is lots of envy in Europe towards America that explains this,
I dont know about the German psyche too much, but looking from outside they seem to have a collective trauma going on.
France can openly say they want protect their culture from "Americanization" and project their power in many ways.
Britain is both laughed at and envyed, because of if its special realationship, in the mainland Europe.
Off course the are many that only oppose the current goverment in the US because off their policies and dont mix anything else with it, nothing wrong with that.

[Happy Times]

Originally Posted by Mikhayl

Just in case you didn't notice, France government changed last year, and the new president is wetting himself for GWB. He was for the Irak war despite saying the opposite later when he saw that most people are against. He can't do anything about it now because there would be riots, but he's gonna send more troops to Afghanistan to please Rice and GWB, plus the carrier which is currently in dry dock for refit. And as said thousands of times, being anti Irak war is hardly anti american, calling GWB a moron isn't either. Anti americanism is an urban legend for me, you'll find tons of not much educated people in france who don't like americans. Right, but they don't like britishs either, they're also anti arabs, anti blacks, you get the picture. Now tell me that sort of people doesn't exist in every country in the world ?
France protecting its culture, seriously, what culture are we talking about here ?
Edit : for guantanamo as for any jail for that matter, locking people without charges is just like starting a time bomb, try to imagine yourself in that situation.

I ment, France wants to be an independent player in the world politics and it promotes its culture and language openly. He is going to send troops to Afganistan because thats in the interest of France, he also wants to increase Frances influence in the middle east, rivaling with US and UK. Anti Americanism isnt a myth, im not sayin its the majority either. Majority of socialists are against anything American, il stand by that claim, do you no many that arent?

[iambecomelife]

Originally Posted by PeriscopeDepth

Yes, but regardless of that you seem to generalize Euros as anti-American. Which certainly can't be the case if their elected governments deem sending their citizens to die for our cause as appropriate.

PD

Not sure how you can "generalize" someone like Margaret Drabble as anti-American. She and those who share her policies ARE anti-American (although I don't really know your politics - perhaps you consider her article to be rational criticism). Don't equate criticizing her ilk with generalizing about Europe as a whole.

[Ishmael]

To me the solution is quite simple. Military commissions have no basis or validity under law and any "Trials" would be seen as the kangaroo courts they are by the Muslim world. So the question becomes, how do you try these guys in such a way as to show legitimacy in the Muslim world?

The solution? Try them in Islamic courts under the most stringent Taliban application of Sharia by our own hand-picked Islamic judges under the full glare of publicity. Then, when they're convicted, take them out into intenational waters, hoist the Jolly Roger, cut off their right hands and make them walk the plank in shark-infested waters as an example of Islamic "mercy". That way we can say we didn't kill them, the sharks did. I would also videotape them being eaten and send copies to the families.

[Schroeder]

Well, the point that bothers me most is that everyone seems to believe that every guy in Guantanamo is guilty. We had a case recently when a German citizen had to be released from Guantanamo because he was innocent.

How do you know that all of them are guilty? Almost no one has been tried. You can throw everyone in there as "a matter of national security" and don't have to proof a thing. They don't have a chance to defend themselves. That's what is unjust. That are basic rules of every country that considers it self a state under the rule of law.

As I already said, if they are guilty let them rot in hell, but you have to proof it. Otherwise you are acting like China or North Korea.
I really don't like the Islam at all. (some remember my position on Christianity from the thread about the “disturbing Christian website"? I think the Islam is much worse.) And therefore we shouldn't lower ourselves to their level.

By the way, there is a saying that goes:
One who is fighting a monster must be very careful not to become a monster himself.
(I forgot where I have it from and from what nation it was, but I think it is true.)

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Ishmael

To me the solution is quite simple. Military commissions have no basis or validity under law and any "Trials" would be seen as the kangaroo courts they are by the Muslim world. So the question becomes, how do you try these guys in such a way as to show legitimacy in the Muslim world?

The solution? Try them in Islamic courts under the most stringent Taliban application of Sharia by our own hand-picked Islamic judges under the full glare of publicity. Then, when they're convicted, take them out into intenational waters, hoist the Jolly Roger, cut off their right hands and make them walk the plank in shark-infested waters as an example of Islamic "mercy". That way we can say we didn't kill them, the sharks did. I would also videotape them being eaten and send copies to the families.

Don't lower yourself to such levels, not you! I usually have a high opinion of you.

It's also a bit illogical to assume that Sharia could work in defence of Western values , views and civilisation. So, "handpicked Islamic judges" would be the reason why all this would not do well at all in showing legitimacy to the Muslim world.

[iambecomelife]

Originally Posted by Schroeder

Well, the point that bothers me most is that everyone seems to believe that every guy in Guantanamo is guilty. We had a case recently when a German citizen had to be released from Guantanamo because he was innocent.

How do you know that all of them are guilty? Almost no one has been tried. You can throw everyone in there as "a matter of national security" and don't have to proof a thing. They don't have a chance to defend themselves. That's what is unjust. That are basic rules of every country that considers it self a state under the rule of law.

As I already said, if they are guilty let them rot in hell, but you have to proof it. Otherwise you are acting like China or North Korea.
I really don't like the Islam at all. (some remember my position on Christianity from the thread about the “disturbing Christian website"? I think the Islam is much worse.) And therefore we shouldn't lower ourselves to their level.

By the way, there is a saying that goes:
One who is fighting a monster must be very careful not to become a monster himself.
(I forgot where I have it from and from what nation it was, but I think it is true.)

Much of this stems from the extremists' tactics of blending in with civilians and not fighting in uniform. Now that it's been proven how advantageous it is to violate traditional rules of war, we can expect more of this in future conflicts. How many WWII POW's benefited from having legal counsel, or were the subject of demonstrations by citizens afraid that their "rights" were being violated? I suppose some people prefer to fight AQ, while others prefer mainly to question the motives of the people who captured the detainees.

[Schroeder]

Originally Posted by iambecomelife

Much of this stems from the extremists' tactics of blending in with civilians and not fighting in uniform. Now that it's been proven how advantageous it is to violate traditional rules of war, we can expect more of this in future conflicts. How many WWII POW's benefited from having legal counsel, or were the subject of demonstrations by citizens afraid that their "rights" were being violated? I suppose some people prefer to fight AQ, while others prefer mainly to question the motives of the people who captured the detainees.

POWs of WWII had uniforms and so it was clear that they were enemies of the side that captured them. So why should they have been tried?
In the case of Guantanamo we have no clue how it was determined that these people are really terrorists. Theoretically any person could be arrested and claimed to be a terrorist (that could even cause blackmailing: Give me 5000$ or I'll arrest you as a terrorist and there is nothing you could do about it. You will neither be tried nor allowed to defend yourself in any other way....)
I don't know whether anything like that has happened yet but it could go that way couldn't it?

By the way, who can accuse people of being terrorist? Every soldier of the US? Do they have to proof it when they accuse someone?

What makes you so sure that every guy in there has deserved that fate?

Not every Muslim is a terrorist and as long as those people aren't tried fairly there is no telling how many of those might just have been at the wrong place at the wrong time.
"Everyone is innocent until guilt has been proven." is a sentence that can be found in pretty much all states under the rule of law.
Ignoring that puts America on the same level as countries like North Korea.

I think it is quite odd to claim to fight for human rights, democracy etc. while not even sticking to basic rules of humanity.

(Yes I know the terrorists don't stick to humanity too but that's just one more reason to do it.)

Just my very humble opinion.

[iambecomelife]

Originally Posted by Schroeder

POWs of WWII had uniforms and so it was clear that they were enemies of the side that captured them. So why should they have been tried?
In the case of Guantanamo we have no clue how it was determined that these people are really terrorists. Theoretically any person could be arrested and claimed to be a terrorist (that could even cause blackmailing: Give me 5000$ or I'll arrest you as a terrorist and there is nothing you could do about it. You will neither be tried nor allowed to defend yourself in any other way....)
I don't know whether anything like that has happened yet but it could go that way couldn't it?

By the way, who can accuse people of being terrorist? Every soldier of the US? Do they have to proof it when they accuse someone?

What makes you so sure that every guy in there has deserved that fate?


Not every Muslim is a terrorist and as long as those people aren't tried fairly there is no telling how many of those might just have been at the wrong place at the wrong time.
"Everyone is innocent until guilt has been proven." is a sentence that can be found in pretty much all states under the rule of law.
Ignoring that puts America on the same level as countries like North Korea.

I think it is quite odd to claim to fight for human rights, democracy etc. while not even sticking to basic rules of humanity.

(Yes I know the terrorists don't stick to humanity too but that's just one more reason to do it.)

Just my very humble opinion.

So now America = North Korea, eh? Anti-US sentiment: the biggest Urban Legend of all time.

Did I say that everyone accused of terrorism is a terrorist? Did I say that every Muslim is a terrorist? Step back for a second, take a little time to read the other posts, and stop putting words in my mouth.

No telling how many are innocent? OTOH, there's no telling how many are guilty. In law enforcement & war it is inevitable that some innocent people will be punished. The devil's in the details - is the system MOSTLY punishing the innocent or is it accurate the vast majority of the time? When they are released, sometimes the world ends up paying a price.

And you're talking RIGHT past me. My point is that from now on, assuming nothing changes it will be considered highly advantageous to fight out of uniform. Because it will be easier to profess innocence non-uniformed combatants will claim the right to counsel, immediate repatriation, and other privileges not normally accorded uniformed combatants. I know it's what I'd do if I were an opponent of the US. This is nothing but militant radicals using their opponents' comparative humanity against them.

[Schroeder]

After reading my last post again I have to confess that it sounds as if I accused you of thinking that all Muslims are terrorists. Sorry for that, I didn't intend to do that.
I wanted to point out that I fear that some people were arrested arbitrarily.

I chose the America=North Korea comparison because NK is one of the worst examples for abandoning basic human rights. I know that the US is still far away from that but there is a tendency in that direction and that should be stopped.

But how about you answer some of the questions I asked in my last post.

1. How was determined that those people are terrorists?
2. Who is allowed to accuse people of terrorism and arrest them?
3. How is ensured that those people can't abuse their power if no one is ever asking questions (the police has to collect evidence to convince a judge of the guilt of someone)
4. Can fundamental laws be cast aside if they become inconvenient?

You are right that it is difficult to stick to common laws if the enemy doesn't. But what separates us from them if we lower ourselves to their level? We just create more people that hate us.

By the way I'm not anti American, I'm just anti "some sh*t happening in the US right now". That doesn't make me hate the entire US.

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by Schroeder

....In the case of Guantanamo we have no clue how it was determined that these people are really terrorists. Theoretically any person could be arrested and claimed to be a terrorist (that could even cause blackmailing: Give me 5000$ or I'll arrest you as a terrorist and there is nothing you could do about it. You will neither be tried nor allowed to defend yourself in any other way....)

Were we not paying bounty hunters cash for every "terrorist" that they brought in? Talk about conflict of interest! For the right bounty I am sure everyone looked like a terrorist to a hungry bounty hunter.

I wonder how much we paid for each of these "terrorists"?

[iambecomelife]

Originally Posted by Schroeder

After reading my last post again I have to confess that it sounds as if I accused you of thinking that all Muslims are terrorists. Sorry for that, I didn't intend to do that.
I wanted to point out that I fear that some people were arrested arbitrarily.

I chose the America=North Korea comparison because NK is one of the worst examples for abandoning basic human rights. I know that the US is still far away from that but there is a tendency in that direction and that should be stopped.

But how about you answer some of the questions I asked in my last post.

1. How was determined that those people are terrorists?
2. Who is allowed to accuse people of terrorism and arrest them?
3. How is ensured that those people can't abuse their power if no one is ever asking questions (the police has to collect evidence to convince a judge of the guilt of someone)
4. Can fundamental laws be cast aside if they become inconvenient?

You are right that it is difficult to stick to common laws if the enemy doesn't. But what separates us from them if we lower ourselves to their level? We just create more people that hate us.

By the way I'm not anti American, I'm just anti "some sh*t happening in the US right now". That doesn't make me hate the entire US.

Fair enough. I suppose it's all a balancing act in which you try to protect your country without violating people's civil rights. As much as I dislike some of the people on the opposite end of the political spectrum, without their dissenting opinions I think America WOULD end up becoming the police state that they fear.

I wish there was some effective way to hold these people accountable for fighting outside of uniform without resorting to collective reprisals, or capturing people just based on the word of the tribesmen in the Northern Alliance.