Indefinite detentions under Obama???

[CRedskinsRule]

Obama mulls 'indefinite detention' of terror suspects

Yeah, I am antagonizing here, but some interesting notes going on this week as Obama learns that being President means protecting the country, not attacking the other party.

Also, interesting that this article says White House, not Obama.

Finally, yes there are abuses, but maybe once in a blue moon defending our country means more then acting like there aren't "thugs" out there who will stop at nothing to see us harmed.

[dmek25]

you can say what you want, but whom ever is running this country will try to do the right thing. Bush just made alot of bad decisions while in office. i really believe he thought he was doing the right thing. at the end of 4 years history will judge Obama's decisions

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by dmek25

you can say what you want, but whom ever is running this country will try to do the right thing. Bush just made alot of bad decisions while in office. i really believe he thought he was doing the right thing. at the end of 4 years history will judge Obama's decisions

I suspect that history will not judge him in merely 4 years, I think it will take longer than that.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I suspect that history will not judge him in merely 4 years, I think it will take longer than that.

That's the issue with people today; and we say that Skins fans are impatient!

We're already hearing how Obama is the worst president ever. I was definitely not a fan of Baby Bush but it will still take awhile to see his true effect on our nation, just like it took awhile to see Reagan's. I'm not insinuating that they'll be equally viewed, just an example.

[Daseal]

I hate this regardless of who holds prisoners without being able to charge them with a crime. If this same stuff was happening to American's over seas people would be screaming bloody murder. Just like people complain and act like it's a terrible act when American's get tortured, but are fine with it when we do it to our enemies. You're either for something or against it -- you can't have a one way argument.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Daseal

I hate this regardless of who holds prisoners without being able to charge them with a crime. If this same stuff was happening to American's over seas people would be screaming bloody murder. Just like people complain and act like it's a terrible act when American's get tortured, but are fine with it when we do it to our enemies. You're either for something or against it -- you can't have a one way argument.

Have you ever looked at the MIA and POW stats?
Also as every American soldier knows, they fall under the country's laws that they serve in. Yes some may scream bloody murder, but if an American commits a crime on foreign soil, they are going to face the justice of that country, sometimes regardless of American pressure.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Daseal

I hate this regardless of who holds prisoners without being able to charge them with a crime. If this same stuff was happening to American's over seas people would be screaming bloody murder. Just like people complain and act like it's a terrible act when American's get tortured, but are fine with it when we do it to our enemies. You're either for something or against it -- you can't have a one way argument.

Well if we had Americans flying into buildings and doing terrorist stuff I would not give a rats ass what happened to them.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by Daseal

Just like people complain and act like it's a terrible act when American's get tortured, but are fine with it when we do it to our enemies. You're either for something or against it -- you can't have a one way argument.

You're looking at this as if it's a country vs. country conflict. In which case you would be 100% correct. This is not the same situation. We're not dealing with soldiers from another country. We're dealing with animals who murder innocents purposely, behead innocents on video, and kill civilians to make it look like we did it. The sole purpose of these morons is to impose their ideology on the world through terror. If waterboarding 3 of the high-level operatives to save innocent lives (American or otherwise) needs to be done, then let's save lives. Last I checked American civilians weren't running around in foreign countries trying to kill Iraqis, or Afghans, or any other country's civilian population.

Keep in mind the "torture" (I'm assuming waterboarding) you're referring to was no worse than what our own special operations forces undergo during training. Although we try to hold ourselves to a higher standard, we know that other countries or terrorist organizations won't hesitate to torture our folks if they're captured.

[BleedBurgundy]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

You're looking at this as if it's a country vs. country conflict. In which case you would be 100% correct. This is not the same situation. We're not dealing with soldiers from another country. We're dealing with animals who murder innocents purposely, behead innocents on video, and kill civilians to make it look like we did it. The sole purpose of these morons is to impose their ideology on the world through terror. If waterboarding 3 of the high-level operatives to save innocent lives (American or otherwise) needs to be done, then let's save lives. Last I checked American civilians weren't running around in foreign countries trying to kill Iraqis, or Afghans, or any other country's civilian population.

Keep in mind the "torture" (I'm assuming waterboarding) you're referring to was no worse than what our own special operations forces undergo during training. Although we try to hold ourselves to a higher standard, we know that other countries or terrorist organizations won't hesitate to torture our folks if they're captured.

"animals" rarely do the kind of deeds you describe. That level of cruelty is solely the domain of humans. I'm not a peta clown, just saying... We do these things because we misapply the limited reasoning skills we have and carry out actions in the name of country, religion and ideology that we would never do otherwise.

Also, because i'm in the mood to play devil's advocate, what makes one form of killing superior to another? "Terrorists" strap on explosives and blow themselves up in a market killing hundreds of civilians. The "Good Guys" use cluster bombs and other conventional weapons that eliminate people on a much larger scale, killing countless civilians regardless of our best intentions. I really don't get the whole "these people are monsters" arguments unless we as Americans just need to feel morally superior to those we destroy. In my opinion, that's simply a weakness of intellect.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by BleedBurgundy

"animals" rarely do the kind of deeds you describe. That level of cruelty is solely the domain of humans. I'm not a peta clown, just saying... We do these things because we misapply the limited reasoning skills we have and carry out actions in the name of country, religion and ideology that we would never do otherwise.

Also, because i'm in the mood to play devil's advocate, what makes one form of killing superior to another? "Terrorists" strap on explosives and blow themselves up in a market killing hundreds of civilians. The "Good Guys" use cluster bombs and other conventional weapons that eliminate people on a much larger scale, killing countless civilians regardless of our best intentions. I really don't get the whole "these people are monsters" arguments unless we as Americans just need to feel morally superior to those we destroy. In my opinion, that's simply a weakness of intellect.

Your kidding right? There is a hudge difference. Yes in war civilians are going to died but they are not the target when we strike at a target. The bad guys your talking about target civilians.

[Daseal]

Firstdown, don't act ignorant. Every country targets civilians first. It has to do with destroying infrastructure. Often children are involved. Israel has been said to purposely bomb schools, during school hours. Same with hospitals.

Unfortunately, when you invade, civilians will feel the brunt of the attack. We've been very lucky as Americans to not see wars on our own soil (besides the ones we conduct on ourselves, and Pearl Harbor.) I couldn't imagine the constant state of fear many countries, especially in the instable middle east go through every day. 9/11 was terrible, but it pales in comparison to what most countries see regularly.

Yes, we're not striking the target 'to kill civilians', but we are targeting important structures that we know will lead to civilian death. It's an unfortunate side effect of war.

[BleedBurgundy]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Your kidding right? There is a hudge difference. Yes in war civilians are going to died but they are not the target when we strike at a target. The bad guys your talking about target civilians.

I'm absolutely not kidding. Civilians are just as dead in either scenario, whether they had been specifically targeted or not.

[budw38]

Originally Posted by Daseal

I hate this regardless of who holds prisoners without being able to charge them with a crime. If this same stuff was happening to American's over seas people would be screaming bloody murder. Just like people complain and act like it's a terrible act when American's get tortured, but are fine with it when we do it to our enemies. You're either for something or against it -- you can't have a one way argument.

Who have we tortured ? Waterboarding is NOT torture . Waterboarding causes ,,,, ZERO injuries ,,, no muscle or ligament damage , no respitory illness , no lung desease , no eye , ear or throat damage . We are not waterboaring service men / women ,,, these people are terrorists targeting civilians . Show me how what we are doing today is equal to what the Germans/ Japanese or VC did to our SOLDIERS ? I understand your point , but comparing WB'ing with Breaking Bones and starving people to death is like apples and oranges , IMO . And they are not criminals they are terrorists .

[dmek25]

the voice of reason. coming from a puppy kicker

[BleedBurgundy]

Daseal is right, of course. But i think that in matters like these, it's not so much a detached discussion about right and wrong as it is about choosing a side. We're americans, so we need to look out for our own interests, not those of the rest of the world when the circumstances dictate that they are mutually exclusive. No one else is going to do us any favors in that regard and we really need to stop acting as if it is our moral duty to hold ourselves to a higher standard. Also... it's "indefinite" not indefinate.