The adolescent enemy combatants at Gitmo

[John D Harris]

Well since we're throwing out statements here's some:

"If you can't do the time, don't do the crime"

"If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen"

"Life's hard, then you die"

"You made your bed, now lie in it"

"If you want to dance, you have to pay the fiddler"

"Nothing in life is free"

"You reap what you sow"

"You may not deserve what you get, but you always get what you deserve"

"Every action has a reaction"

[Stratos]

Originally posted by Cerek the Barbaric: quote: Originally posted by Chewbacca: When were these kids charged, tried, and convicted of terrorism? What terrorist acts have they committed or conspired to commit? Without an answer to either of these quesions how can these teenagers be labeled as "terrorists"?

You are correct, Chewbacca. They are considered "enemy combatants", but they have NOT been charged or convicted with terrorism.

I assume they were captured along with other Taliban soldiers during the fighting in Afghanistan, so it is reasonable to assume that they may have fired upon American soldiers. But that is an act of war, not terrorism, and I was wrong to classify their actions as such.

I stand corrected. [/QUOTE]I was just about to say the same thing. Unless they have a direct link to terrorism, they can't be considered terrorist, 'merely' enemy combatant. We shouldn't be so quick to throw around the word 'Terrorist'.

Originally posted by Donut: quote: Originally posted by MagiK: Hot food, plenty of it, indoor plumbing, personal hygene supplies, education, and recreation..

I hardly need to tell you that none of this is more important than freedom. [/QUOTE]
In my opinion a 15 year old terrorist (and most western world teens too) need a good deal less freedom and quite a bit more supervised time. All in all I have to say we disagree on this point.

When you start confusing the issue of freedom for adults and freedom for children and comparing them to Soviet Russia...you have made a serious error in judgment, in my opinion. Children are supposed to be un-free. They are supposed to be under the thumb of their parents and for their parents to dictate the actions of said child. I do not agree that children need freedom above all else...I think they need structure and supervision by adults.

I know that will probably sit badly with most of the children here on IW, but it is never the less a truth. I think the current state of todays youth in general speaks volumes to this. Yes the good kids still out number the bad, but as things have become more and more liberal, more and more permissive...more and more kids have had their lives ruined. Discipline, structure, stability (ie parents that are there for them) and safety. These kids in Gitmo get most of that. Too bad their parents didn't raise the better...or have a better philosophical outlook on the moral rights and wrongs of blowing other people the F**K Up.



[ 01-19-2004, 05:25 PM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

[Davros]

For those arguing guilt or innocence I say let's see the courts decide - the "sitting on hands" has gone on for long enough. There is evidence of guilt, or there is not. I agree that age does not define guilt or preclude the possibility of being a terrorist. Neither though, does the holding of these enemy combatants at Gitmo without any visible intent to prosecute confer any certainty that they are.

To those who are staying away from the guilt or innocence arguments, but are instead suggesting that a good roof or bed ranks above freedom, can I suggest a modification to that saying that goes along the lines of "The rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"? I personally don't agree, but you are suggesting that the middle term is a tad redundant nowadays, and could be substituted with the words "a good foam mattress".

Thought about that for a second Davros. First off, [img]smile.gif[/img] we differ on wether we agree that the US Constitutional rights apply to captured terrorists/combatants/whatever and secondly, adults and kids are two seperate issues in my world [img]smile.gif[/img] I know that is controvertial, but we will see how my kids turn out before I will know for sure wether I am right or wrong.

[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by Davros: For those arguing guilt or innocence I say let's see the courts decide - the "sitting on hands" has gone on for long enough. There is evidence of guilt, or there is not. I agree that age does not define guilt or preclude the possibility of being a terrorist. Neither though, does the holding of these enemy combatants at Gitmo without any visible intent to prosecute confer any certainty that they are. To those who are staying away from the guilt or innocence arguments, but are instead suggesting that a good roof or bed ranks above freedom, can I suggest a modification to that saying that goes along the lines of "The rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"? I personally don't agree, but you are suggesting that the middle term is a tad redundant nowadays, and could be substituted with the words "a good foam mattress".

I suppose that's one way to interpret it Davros. And I agree that liberty/freedom is one of the most important fundamental desires we have as human beings. And this may well be true for the teens being held at Gitmo. Maybe they would prefer to be back in their homeland, despite having to live and try to survive in far worse living conditions than they currently have.

But the point I've been arguing in this thread is that in this particular instance, the teenagers are living in MUCH BETTER conditions now than they were 18 months ago. I very seriously doubt there was much time for them to play volleyball or soccor during their daily routine in Afghanistan. All I'm saying is that - taking that into consideration, along with the fact that these are still kids - there is a possibility that they may not desire to return to their previous conditions as much as most of us might think. I gave an example of a certain sub-group here in America that actually prefer being "locked up" from time to time because of the amenities and security it provides for them...so such a thing is not unheard of.

"Give me liberty or give me death" is NOT a universal truth for every single human being.

[Chewbacca]

Originally posted by Cerek the Barbaric: quote: Originally posted by Chewbacca: Or how about "Give me liberty or give me death" --Patrick Henry

Spoken by Patrick Henry when he was given the option to renounce his ideals and pledge his loyalty to England in order to avoid being hanged.

I don't know if the teens at Gitmo would prefer execution to their current conditions of imprisonment, but we could certainly ask them. "Alright boys, what's it going to be - Death....or another game of soccor before your next math lesson?"

Originally posted by Chewbacca: Or "Live free or Die" -- John Stark

Can't recall the exact circumstances of this statement, but the above response applies here as well.

Originally posted by Chewbacca: or "All the great things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word: freedom; justice; honor; duty; mercy; hope." --Sir Winston Churchill

Freedom - Lost by the teens and other "enemy combatants" upon being captured by American soldiers after they had engaged in open combat with these same soldiers.

Justice - I suppose it depends on your definition of justice. They haven't recieved legal representation, but they also weren't arbitrarily executed upon being captured - and their is still a chance they WILL receive legal counsel, even though the U.S. Constitution does not apply to "enemy combatants".

Honor - I think it can be argued that soldiers on both sides acted with honor...or at least their definition of it.

Duty - Same as honor. While I am not familiar with the particulars of the Taliban's "Code of Honor", I think it can safely be said that all the Taliban soldiers fulfulled their duty to thier cause.

Mercy - Shown by the American soldiers who chose not to shoot their prisoners, even though these same men had been trying to kill them just moments before. And arrangements have been made to allow ALL of the "enemy combatants" at Gitmo to observe their religious practices in as accomodating a setting as possible. As for the teens (which this thread is actually about), they are being tutored in their own language. They are being taught reading, mathematics, and other skills they did not possess. They are kept separate from the older prisoneers in better housing and allowed to play soccor, volleyball, and other recreational activities. I would say a good deal of mercy has been extended to these young men...even though it is quite likely they fired upon American troops.

Hope - How much hope did these teens have in Afghanistan before being captured? Did they face a bright future where they could provide adequate housing, food, and education to their families...or did they face the possibility of being killed in service to the Taliban before ever having a chance to have a family of their own?

Originally posted by Chewbacca: or "Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right." --Mahatma Gandhi

If by "freedom to err", Mahatma was suggesting never having to face the consequences of your actions...then I would have to disagree with him. Yes, humans should have "freedom to err", but if you use that "freedom" to break a law, you may still have to go to jail. If you use this "freedom" to fire upon enemy soldiers, you face the possibility of being captured or killed by those same soldiers. In either case, they should not be "free" from the consequences of their chosen actions.

Originally posted by Chewbacca: or "There can be no friendship when there is no freedom; Friendship loves the free air, and will not be fenced up in straight and narrow enclosures." --William Penn

I don't know if friendship is possible between the Taliban and the United States. Since they consider us "The Great Satan" and have hated us for years...but I'll agree that it is an admirable goal. [/QUOTE]While I can appreciate your perspectives offered in the disection of these quotes, trying to frame them in the context of when or why they are spoken cannot overshadow the over-all theme presented:

The ideals of Freedom crosses time, culture, and ideaology. No amount of excuses, justifications, rationales, or good intentions can explain away the disinctly human drive, want, and perhaps inherent right for freedom.

[Skunk]

Originally posted by Johnny: And a terrorist is a terrorist, no matter how old he is. 15 year old boys are potentially a bigger threat than their adult brothers in arms, because people might not regard them dangerous. I mean, who suspects a kid ?

And a terrorist is a terrorist **ONLY** when a civil court of law says so. Until then the concept, innocent until proven guilty applies.

Originally posted by Cerek the Barbaric: As for the concept that freedom is better than prison, no matter what conditions the person's freedom brings...our own justice system sees exceptions to this theory every day. I have a friend that works for the Police Department in Charlotte, NC and she has confirmed that they do have a certain group of people that are habitual offenders solely for the purpose of being caught and put in jail.

There is a world of difference between **choosing** to break the law in order to gain food and picking up a gun to defend your country from invasion. In the former, you exercise choice, in the latter you are a prisoner of circumstance.

Originally posted by Cerek the Barbaric: Also, the threat of imprisonment under Communist Russia was just a bit more frightening than at Gitmo. Since the gov't could grab anyone at anytime for any reason and kill them without any repurcussions. I realize the detainees at Guantanamo have also been held without any reason being given - and I oppose that. HOWEVER, NONE of the detainees have been subjected to physical torture or the threat of immediate execution for failure to cooperate. They also were not "grabbed for no reason" in the first place. They were CAPTURED during military combat and have received the treatment owed them by that status.

But they **ARE** being subjected to torture:
http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2003/s962052.htm
and it is every bit as barbaric as anything that the old communist state could come up with - unless of course, being tied to a post and having rubber bullets fired at you counts as dignified and humane treatment

[Donut]

Originally posted by John D Harris: Well since we're throwing out statements here's some: "If you can't do the time, don't do the crime" "If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen" "Life's hard, then you die" "You made your bed, now lie in it" "If you want to dance, you have to pay the fiddler" "Nothing in life is free" "You reap what you sow" "You may not deserve what you get, but you always get what you deserve" "Every action has a reaction"

That's a completely different argument. cerek claims that they are better off in Guantanomo Bay than if they were in Afghanistan. Without freedom they can't be.

BTW- "
"If you can't do the time, don't do the crime"" We don't know what crimes they committed (Issa secret! Shhhhhh!)

[Donut]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: Donut, I don't know that freedom is really that important for a 15 year old. I think the world is harmed by the fact that most 15 yr old brats I see around these days could do with a good bit of discipline along with some impingement on their freedom.

Well I can certainly agree with you up to a point TL, however in this context freedom is a relative term.

Keeping a child indoors for two weeks isn't quite the same as locking them up without charging them or allowing access to a lawyer.

To be perfectly blunt - what is happening in camp X-ray is "un-American".