Re: OT - Coulter

Page 7 of 8  


How is that an American problem? Are we supposed to provide hostile combatants with uniforms now?

It has always been the case that combatants not in uniform could be treated as spies and executed summarily. It was a common practice. Nathan Hale, for one famous example, was hanged as a spy by the British who caught him carrying incriminating papers while in civilian clothes. There was no trial, and he was hanged the morning after he was captured.
Neil
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

to the current war... so the detentions will be indefinite, by your logic.<
Good, let's hope the terrorist bastards rot!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Oh, but Tom, don't you see, if only the leftists could just sit down with the terrorists, hold hands and sing a few bars of Cumbaya, all will be fine.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You guys have been hanging up all the right straw men in this thread, haven't you? Just don't forget rapists of virtuous white women. You'll enlarge your numbers when people begin to fear the virtues of white women.
GlennGlenn
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Indeed.
Guess I shouldn't have made it so hard to miss my point. To clarify: a popular propaganda tactic among rabid hawks has historically been to sow fear in the hearts of good Americans that the enemies of American virtue (be they criminally-minded blacks, pagan Japanese warriors, Commies, what have you) want to rape our white women. I was suggesting that such a tactic is still available to you and your co-ideologues who want to strip away any desire for just treatment of the detainees who, as you allege, are all committed to killing us.

Non sequitur. I will *keep* doing that once I begin to actually do that. As I haven't done so, there's nothing to keep doing.
Of course you *wish* that I was. Folks like you like trotting out straw men to whack with your impotent little sticks.

Well, isn't he? And don't you *support* that position?

I don't know what Dean would do. Our current resident-in-chief himself said that he wasn't interested in nation-building during his campaign. Being placed in power clearly changes one's perspective...
GlennGlenn
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
deja.com says... ... snip

... of course you realize that during the campaign, the nation building being discussed was such as being done in Kosovo and Haiti as well as other places in which our national interest was not at stake. ... and of course you realize that our country had not been directly attacked in an act of war by terrorists who were being harbored and encouraged by (and by extension, acting in proxy for) several nation-states.
Of course you realize those facts, to not do so would be disengenous, and you wouldn't be that.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 02 Dec 2003 02:52:10 GMT, Mark & Juanita

No less disengenous than your sly suggestion that somehow the invasion of Iraq had any real connection to the so-called "war on terrorism."
Can't catch Osama? Fuck it, let's show Saddam some shock-and-awe.
Funny thing is, we can't seem to catch Saddam either, much less those pesky WMDs.
rafe b. http://www.terrapinphoto.com
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mark & Juanita wrote:

What part of a lack of WMDs and various other sundry lies about Iraq was in our national interest?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

that they were not afforded access to counsel, eh? Or do you imagine that the Allies held several million teeny little individual trials for each enemy captured between 1939 and 1945?>
Don't waste your breath on this lefty, Giftz, he looks upon these vermin as comrades fighting the evil Bush and his rich usurpers of human rights, etc. Add to this all the other leftist idiocy and you'll realize he won't be happy until they were all set free and returned to the terror camps first class by United Airlines. Hey, even better, maybe in the process these scum bags could hijack the planes and kill 10,000 more people, all of which the left would laud as part of a plan to create their own "world order" of Socialist brotherhood....that is until these vermin start killing THEM! Then it will be another story.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! That's too funny. A man is either an angel or a demon in your eyes, it appears. Have fun with that.

Oh, yeah, that's exactly what I want. *snicker*
Talk about a waste of breath.

Someone should go into making War on Terror propaganda films. Don't forget images of "lefties," "Arab terrorists," and "Commies" raping virtuous white women. Straw men may be straw men, but people react emotionally when exposed to them nonetheless when the rape of white women is added to the mix.
GlennGlenn
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yep.
Oh, I know what YOU think, it is just that I see no problem whatsoever.

BWaHAhahahah! Now THAT is funny!
In any other circumstances, involving almost any country other than the US, they would have been shot out of hand... no second thoughts about it. In fact, that is what they THEMSELVES would (and have) done.
Since the word "fair" means the equitable balance of disparate interests, why, we were morally OBLIGATED to shoot the bastards on sight... just to be "fair". Good for the goose is good for the gander, right?
But no, we keep them in better conditions than those in which we found them. And even cater to their whimsical "religious" desires by providing the sorry lot with whatever they want except the ability to do us harm again.

"Due process"? You are kidding, right?
Tom
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

And that is the total intellectual depth of your reply? Cool!
BWAHAHAHAhahha!
Tom
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
says...

*sigh* See below.

So, you want to make this comparison?
How long will the "War on terrorism" last, exactly, so that those detained can actually face the charges that might someday be made against them? At what point will they hear what they're being accused of having done?
Heck, considering the number that have been or are soon to be released and/or transfered, I should think that those ordering their detainment are not as certain of you that those people are to a person "sworn to kill us."

Under what circumstances where they apprehended? How long did they have to wait before hearing charges? Were they POW's, protected as such?

First, did we keep these "several million" prison for life? Furthermore, are we talking about POW's here? No official I've ever heard has referred to the Guantanamo detainees as POW's. Correct me if I'm wrong about that, and then if I am wrong, give me a hint as to how to determine when the "War on terrorism" will end, such that they can face charges and/or be released.
GlennGlenn
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

How long is the War On (some) Drugs going to last?
The so-called "War on Terrorism" would seem to have just as definite a terminus.

The enemy--and the goal-- was clear in WWII.

Sounds like someone asking for unchecked license to detain without review.

Why are you asking *me* this? Under what circumstances where they caught and detained?

Just who is "we"? You? Clearly *your* statement that the detainees are sworn to kill us. Now, apparently, it has been determined by some body or other that such is *not* the case with regard to a significant number of them.

The problem is the lack of external review and what appears to be the use of technicalities to avoid the constraints of U.S.-backed (sorta) international (and U.S. Constitutional) law.

Of course the current detainees are different, right?

Of course.

No: they are "Persons of Interest." Such a term almost sounds like a PC term, except in reverse.

Ah, yes... and for now we'll keep that as vague as possible to keep from having to cut 'em loose before we're happy. Meanwhile, we can move the goalposts anywhere we want to by noting that terrorism, like drug trafficking, has a complex set of "masters."

How about Persons of Interest? Were those who were released *terrorists* that, um, became non-terrorists due to some sort of rehab in Gitmo? Or are those detained not all terrorists after all?

You too. Either they are soldiers in a potentially unending war ('Yay, we can keep 'em forever!'), or they are "Persons of Interest" who may deserve a bit more consideration for their situation ('Aw, let 'em suffer in silence; they just *might* have done something *awful*, and "lawyer" is French for "Commie terrorist" anyway').
--
--GlennGlenn--aa#825--
-- snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.yahoo.com.com--
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Just to put all this in some sort of perspective:
Eisenhower kept German POWs imprisoned under incredibly inhumane conditions for many months after WWII ended. Tens of thousands of them died of exposure (some of the camps in which they were kept had no shelter of any kind for the prisoners) or starved to death (relief trains bringing desperately needed food and supplies from Switzerland were actually turned back). They were denied mail, which could also have brought them food and clothing. Their conditions were worse than in the Nazi concentration camps.
What Eisenhower did was of course absolutely against the rules of the Geneva Convention for the treatment of POWs. So Eisenhower simply made up a new term for them, DEFs (disarmed enemy forces). His position was basically that as DEFs the rules of the Geneva Convention did not apply to them, and they had no rights at all.
Neil
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

them all. Your double standard is a mile wide.>
Ok, name one "illegal activity" of either Cheney or Bush, name ONE that's actually indictable and not just something that's been concocted by leftist crybabies.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jerry McG wrote:

Wasn't "Why isn't Ken Lay in prison?" good enough? Both of their heads should roll for that reason alone.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

balls to actually have a foreign policy. Clinton got the job done.
WHAT!!!!???? The North Koreams are still laughing their asses off at Clinton, they broke that agreement the minute they signed it, knowing fully well that spineliess bastard wouldn't lift a finger to stop them.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jerry McG wrote:

Oh, my mistake, I should've known that some anonymous guy on Usenet would have the definitive look into the N. Korean mindset.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

well that spineliess bastard wouldn't lift a finger to stop them.>>

And WE all know that trotsky, when confronted by the incontrovertible facts, will always deflect and not answer the obvious: CLINTON WAS AN IDIOT with foriegn policy and created the mess we're in now.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.