My DD214

Veterans should be a thing of the past.

The Gitmo inmates.

I think that the men that hung themselves in their cells the other day is a horrible atrocity. The commander of U.S. Forces there called it "an act of War" on the U.S. 

 I'm physically tired from this. I just can't take this bullshit anymore. We've locked them away without a voice, without a trial and without their dignity. I just can't even believe anyone could think it was an act of war. This is such bullshit I don't even know what to say.

Advertisements

11 June, 2006 1:12 PM - Posted by | Just a thought..

11 Comments »

  1. Ah, but it is quite a paradox. Release them, and those that hate us may end up fighting against us. Keep them there, and we become inhumane. It should be noted that the three who killed themselves were already proven to be terrorists against the US (one had killed a CIA officer in Africa); perhaps the administration it torn between keeping the people there in hopes to gather intelligence; lose them and face them on the battlefield (if right about their crimes but unable to prove it in court); or be wrong about their crimes and face what we are now facing. A state of war can be a bitch, but in the end it should always come down to saving American lives……

    Comment by Jason | 11 June, 2006 10:16 PM | Reply

  2. If it’s always about saving human lives then why are we endangering Americans further by sending them to fight hostile Arabs in the desert? Why are we endangering the lives of American citizens abroad by occupying territory in which we’re unwelcome? When does it become O.K. to endanger the life of another, in order to “save” someone else? When does it become O.K. to imprison someone for fear of them turning against you? By this reasoning, we should never release a drug dealer, or arsonist, lest they do wrong again. The American system relies on evidence, not speculation. And even if it’s true that they’d attack Americans again, it is THEIR decision, not ours. Maybe they have a good reason. Maybe we killed an uncle or father of theirs. Is it not just to seek vengence?

    My point is that by the Bush administration holding prisoners for over 36 hours without any evidence to warrant imprisonment is unjust and just plan wrong. We cannot expect to see positive results from negative actions.

    Comment by willcharlton | 12 June, 2006 3:18 AM | Reply

  3. You pose some good questions. Here is a question: You wake up in the middle of the night and find someone killing your family, one by one. Is it OK to do everything in your power to stop the killer, to include killing him? If you kill him, his family now hates you and may or may not come after you personally, for defending your own family. If you do nothing against them, they may decide to attack again, and you have more dead family members. When does it become ok to stop the violence before it occurs? The same question to should be applied to any presidency, but in a larger scale.

    My beef is how war has become political. In the Korean war, MacArthur was fired. And for what? MacArther saved hundreds of lives by sending planes into China to cut off supplies after the Chinese got involved. The Marines pushed to the China border, the Chinese came across, and MacArthur decided to cut the Chinese off before they could kill American soldiers. Truman ordered him to stop on many occasions because he didn’t want to offend the Chinese! After a failed impeachment campaign against Truman, Truman fired MacArthur, and then we all know what happened: the Chinese slaughtered many Americans and we got pushed all the way back where we are now.

    Comment by Jason | 12 June, 2006 9:49 AM | Reply

  4. Here’s a better question, I think: No one wants another 9/11 incident. It was found out after the fact that the Clinton administration was offered bin Laden; we declined and he was set free because Clinton later said we had nothing tangible on him. You’re president and you are holding a terrorist in prison. You have only circumstantial evidence against him that he was planning to nuke New York City. No tangible proof. By your argument, it’s his decision to attack us, not ours. You let him go and take the chance you were wrong about him. He comes back and nukes us. Now people are asking you why you let him go. How do you answer?

    The administration is posed with the same scenerio, I think, and you either risk not holding up the American standards of justice and trials and such, or you risk the lives of many Americans on our own soil.

    Comment by Jason | 12 June, 2006 10:36 AM | Reply

  5. Well then, if we know that these people all hate us, they’re going to kill us if given the opportunity, and there is no feasible way for anyone to right any of the wrongs that they percieve they endured, why not just kill them all? Why bother wasting time with due process, rights of the accused and natural law? Why spend all this money on War efforts? Since it’s only Americans who matter in the sense of having and exercising rights, why then don’t we just eliminate them all?

    Comment by willcharlton | 12 June, 2006 12:58 PM | Reply

  6. That’s the route Europe is beginning to take. They have the capacity and the will to close their borders to all immigrants because they fear the Arabs. 48% of Italians are for closing the borders, the Spaniards were dealt a blow when they outlawed the women wearing the head scarfs and then the muslim men cut the women’s faces in retaliation, the French Jews are being tormented by the Arabs because the Arabs hate Jews, Switzerland has a growing rape increase with a growing Arab population, Germany is facing Arab hate crimes, the Arabs hate the Dutch for the cartoon fiasco, and a bombing by an Arab occurs in Europe on average of once every two months. And don’t forget Canada who caught the Queda muslims recently. We can’t close our borders so we have to fight them on their ground; Europe can because of different values and thus can fight them on their own turf. The Arabs want their own way everwhere in the world; they just hate us the most. Look what the Turks did to the Armenians–it was the first recorded genocide of the 20th century (before the Nazi’s), all because the Armenians were happily living next to Turkey as the worlds first Christian state in 301AD (yes, many years before Rome officially became Christian). How does one deal with such an area of people who are raised and have been bred with such hatred against all who are not muslim?–You pose an excellent question with many moral dilemas. If this were the 50’s and we treated it like Communism, we would have nuked them all.

    Comment by Sergean---loook | 12 June, 2006 1:42 PM | Reply

  7. I, unfortunately, agree with both sides of the argument. On the one hand, there is little doubt in my mind that the culture (not the people, mind you, the culture) that has been cultivated in the middle east for many years is heavily biased against the rest of the world. The violence and evil perpetrated by some members of the Muslim faith is well documented. On the other hand, the violence and evil perpetrated by some members of the Christian faith is well documented also, and the crimes of those Christians over the years have been no less horrible than those of their counterparts. I think the real question here is not why we (the rest of the world) should take action against these so-called believers, but how it should be done.
    The holding of prisoners without giving them their rights (rights that we helped to establish) is wrong. End of story. As a reasonable and somewhat law-abiding citizen, I hate the fact that some of those prisoners might be guilty, and that some might be released due to lack of evidence. I don’t like it when the “bad guy” gets away. However, if evidence supporting the government’s claim is not present or falls short of “beyond a reasonable doubt,” then the prisoner must be set free. There is no doubt that those who are guilty should be punished, but only within the scope of the law.
    Here is my proposal on peace in the shithole called the Middle East. The rest of the world, first of all, must stop depending on Persian Gulf oil resources. Electric vehicles are the future, baby, and they are the best way to defeat the schoolyard bully that we are facing. Let’s see how tolerant Saudi Arabia is of terrorism when none of the 4,000 Saudi princes can afford to have that solid gold Ferrari. I imagine that going from that obscene level of income to “poorhouse” will do a lot to increase tolerance in the Middle East. More later…

    Comment by Clay | 12 June, 2006 5:14 PM | Reply

  8. By the way, it’s nice to see you again Jason, even if it is only on the interweb. http://www.myspace.com/willcharlton. Who is Sergean—loook?

    Comment by willcharlton | 12 June, 2006 5:31 PM | Reply

  9. Holy Shit Clay. That was beautiful. I really couldn’t have said it better. You took the words right out of my fingers.

    Comment by willcharlton | 12 June, 2006 5:34 PM | Reply

  10. Sergean–loook…I forgot his name. He was that Sgt. in ISC/TDS. Always said “look” as though he were a teenage girl saying ‘like.’

    It should be noted about Gitmo: 1) I don’t believe we should shut it down. 2) The prisoners there are classified as “Enemy Combatants.” I did a little research during my lunch break, and this EC class has been around since the 1940s. 3) Congress passed some laws stating that these ECs are now POWs and that they must under-go some sort of military trial. How long they have to put them to trial is not stated in my research.

    I think this a giant blunder of classification. We call them ECs, so the world expects a trial. There is none, or its delayed, and thus we look like human rights violators. We should have classified them originally as POWs, and then no one can say anything.

    Also, does anyone know how many POWs and how many ECs we actually have? I mean, is it overblown that only a handful are ECs, and most are POWs? Maybe that should be looked into…..

    And great to see you, too. I’m on myspace somewhere, I forget where.

    Death to Microsoft!

    Comment by Jason | 12 June, 2006 6:27 PM | Reply

  11. And by the way…

    I really enjoy these debates. So intellectually refreshing! I feel like I’m on the O’Rielly Factor or someother show…. Maybe we should try to get on… But I do dislike US media….such a dilemna….

    Comment by Jason | 12 June, 2006 6:30 PM | Reply


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: