Visit the Ironworks Gaming Website Email the Webmaster Graphics Library Rules and Regulations Help Support Ironworks Forum with a Donation to Keep us Online - We rely totally on Donations from members Donation goal Meter

Ironworks Gaming Radio

Ironworks Gaming Forum

Go Back   Ironworks Gaming Forum > Ironworks Gaming Forums > General Discussion > General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005)

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-24-2002, 07:56 AM   #1
Barry the Sprout
White Dragon
 

Join Date: October 19, 2001
Location: York, UK.
Age: 41
Posts: 1,815
Right, it had to happen sooner or later. I would just like to know what people think on this matter. It would be nice if we can discuss this without flaming so I will say this now in the hope that it sticks:

I am not trying to "be soft" on terrorism, or "give in" to terrorism, and I do not support most of Bin Ladens cause.

With that out of the way it should be said that the pictures I have seen of camp X-ray really worried me. I do not see how the US can hope to maintain a moral highground on this issue if it treats its prisoners as less than people. It does not even acknowledge them as soldiers. The US may not agree with their cause but I still think it is a legitimate one and one that cannot be easily dismissed. Basically my logic on this issue goes as follows:

1. If the Al-Quada (still haven't decided on sp for this one have we...) group started the war on sept 11th then the US can claim that the war was self defence on their part.

2. But if so then the members of Al-Quada, by declaring war, automatically become soldiers. This does slightly destroy the legal credibility of the "unlawful combatants" argument that is heard a lot these days.

3. So if they did not declare war i.e. they are not soldiers, then either no war happened or the coalition of countries declared war on them. This is something I have seen denied quite strongly in the war forum with the repeated phrase to the effect of "They started it!".

4. But if they started it then we are back to square one.

Basically what I am trying to say is that the Geneva convention applies here, or it was an illegal occupation by the coalition against terrorism.

The prisoners may have done some bad stuff, but so have probably any soldiers in wars. They are fighting for a cause that they sincerely beleive to be right. I find it difficult to entirely dismiss them as people because their ideas conflict with ours. And to do so in the name of liberal democracy is a rather obvious irony. If this happens when the war against terrorism spreads to other countries then I think the US may find itself standing alone, as there are a lot more people than me who are pissed off.
Barry the Sprout is offline  
Old 01-24-2002, 08:11 AM   #2
KHaN
Drow Warrior
 

Join Date: June 21, 2001
Location: the not to distant future,
Posts: 250
Well as the old saying goes..."to the victor goes the spoils of war".

As long as no one has the fire power to question our (US) authority we will continue to deny these people POW status. The reason they are in Cuba is so they can't appeal for US judical help. I'm also a bit confused about the 'unlawful combatant' stuff. Is it because the Taliban wasn't viewed as a lawful governing body?

I still can't remember, did Congress OFFICALLY declare this one a war?
__________________
KHaN is offline  
Old 01-24-2002, 08:16 AM   #3
norompanlasolas
Avatar
 

Join Date: November 13, 2001
Location: madrid, spain... made in argentina
Age: 47
Posts: 569
its very simple.

it was a "war" when it suited the us government needs (i.e. bombing the hell out of afghanistan).

its not a "war" when it comes to judging prisoners of said bombing(they are unlawful combatants)... i can just laugh thinking of the brainiacs in washington coming up with that one. reminds me of wag the dog somehow.

so they will probably be trialed in a military court (reserved mainly for war prisoners) BUT without the benefits of the geneva convention (because they are not war prisoners). funny isnt it?
__________________
no
norompanlasolas is offline  
Old 01-24-2002, 08:28 AM   #4
Barry the Sprout
White Dragon
 

Join Date: October 19, 2001
Location: York, UK.
Age: 41
Posts: 1,815
quote:
Originally posted by KHaN:
I still can't remember, did Congress OFFICALLY declare this one a war?


I think it did but I am not sure. Vietnam was never a war, that aways makes me think.

Basically, if they did then they probably did so against the Taliban as they wouldn't "hand over" Bin Laden. But Al-Quada members are not considered Taliban fighters, so that is why they can be treated this way. I think if you take the "Might is Right" view then you abandon all claim to moral high ground. I definately don't think that is the way to proceed in this situation. There are a lot more Al-Quada members and sypmathisers (how many more Richard Reeds are there in South London?) out there who aren't going to like this one bit. Whatever placating movements the US tries now (palestinian state etc) are going to seem a little hollow.

Norom - I absolutely love the film Wag the Dog. It is so deadpan yet continually sharp. Amazing. And I agree with you about the the trials of these people. Lets hope there is enough international pressure to make the US set up a court in the same manner as the Lockerbie trials (although even in that instance there were some dodgy elements).

[ 01-24-2002: Message edited by: Barry the Sprout ]

__________________
[img]\"http://img1.ranchoweb.com/images/sproutman/certwist.gif\" alt=\" - \" /><br /><br /><i>\"And the angels all pallid and wan,<br />Uprising, unveiling, affirm,<br />That the play is the tragedy, man,<br />And its hero the Conquerer Worm.\"</i><br /> - Edgar Allan Poe
Barry the Sprout is offline  
Old 01-24-2002, 08:56 AM   #5
Galadria1
Zhentarim Guard
 

Join Date: January 11, 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 369
Sorry, Barry, I don't buy the idea that these guys are subject to the Geneva convention. Not only did they start the 'war'(note: Congress did NOT declare war on Afganistan or with anybody else. The last time that Congress declared war on aybody was in 1941) with an attack on innocent civilians, they are not the armed soldiers of a government recognized by us or any government except Pakistan. In fact, the Taliban was an outlaw state that openly sanctioned terrorism. These guys have already provoked a prison riot in which CIA agent Johhny Spann, as well as many Afghan soldiers were killed. They have several times attacked their guards, American soldiers, one with a knife made from a comb. These are mad animals, IMHO, who would kill you, me, or all the Marines in Guantanamo Bay, without the blink of an eye. Let the Marines handle them, and let military tribuals judge them.

[ 01-24-2002: Message edited by: Galadria1 ]

Galadria1 is offline  
Old 01-24-2002, 09:14 AM   #6
Gray Mage
Banned User
 

Join Date: March 1, 2001
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 999
I have to say that, unfortunately, these prisoners are subject to the Geneva convention. And the policy was formed for the right reasons, Being a Veteran, I know what the rules are, as do the men and women over there now. Being that this is a war and they are considered the enemy, however The prisoners are getting 3 meals a day, and medical treatment.

We also have to realize that any oppurtunity a prisoner has to harm there captures will be taken advantage of. It was proven that these people will die for there cause, so an attempt to take out one of there gaurds(our Marines) that may result in their own death is not a problem for them. These prisoners are dangerous.

The next thing I ask, do you think that any soldier on our side, would be treated in accordance with the Geneva convention, or get 3 meals, and medical treatment.

There are other things that the ACLU needs to be worrying about besides the prisoners of war that we have in Cuba.
Gray Mage is offline  
Old 01-24-2002, 10:06 AM   #7
Barry the Sprout
White Dragon
 

Join Date: October 19, 2001
Location: York, UK.
Age: 41
Posts: 1,815
quote:
Originally posted by Galadria1:
These are mad animals, IMHO, who would kill you, me, or all the Marines in Guantanamo Bay, without the blink of an eye. Let the Marines handle them, and let military tribuals judge them.
[ 01-24-2002: Message edited by: Galadria1 ]



I am assuming you speak from a position of absolute authority after having met each and everyone one of the prisoners and analysed their personalities. No one would possibly make a sweeping statement like that if they hadn't would they...

My point goes to you and Gray Mage. We cannot hope to handle this situation in this manner and still maintain friendly relations with other muslim nations. The point about the Geneva convention is that it applies to everyone regardless of whether or not they are animals in your opinion. As you say Gray Mage, you would hope that it would be done for you. I quite agree that Al-Quada would have treated US prisoners badly but that is not my point. My point is that you cannot sign something like the Geneva convention then declare that you will only follow it when it suits you. This is giving a twisted kind of justification to the enemies of America as they see that it is acceptable to treat prisoners as animals. America often champions itself as the leader of the free world, and this is the example it sets to other nations. This'll mend some fences...
__________________
[img]\"http://img1.ranchoweb.com/images/sproutman/certwist.gif\" alt=\" - \" /><br /><br /><i>\"And the angels all pallid and wan,<br />Uprising, unveiling, affirm,<br />That the play is the tragedy, man,<br />And its hero the Conquerer Worm.\"</i><br /> - Edgar Allan Poe
Barry the Sprout is offline  
Old 01-24-2002, 10:34 AM   #8
fable
Quintesson
 

Join Date: March 17, 2001
Location: Where I am.
Posts: 1,089
Unfortunately, this short-sighted policy has overlooked three probable and very dangerous results that are likely to occur from such a treatment of the Al-Qu'ida prisoners:

a) There's more concern than ever in European quarters about the American tendency to overlook global agreements unless they are within the personal interests of the US individual and party in power. This has been forcibly conveyed by Dubbyah's reneging on environmental arrangements that were signed into law with the tacit approval of previous American administrations, and by the sudden (and some say, catastrophic) termination of previous nuclear arms treaties with Russia. Now we have legal tautology being used to escape something as simple to implement as the Geneva convention of prisoners of war. Not good.

b) When Dubbyah declared his non-war "War on Terrorism" and managed to extend it to the Taliban, other powerful governments whose people were not under attack, gleefully embraced the cause in the name of subjucation. Russia has declared its own War on Terrorism in Chechniya, and I've heard one Chinese official refer to the Falon Gong as "terrorists." India regards Kashmiri separtists, still seeking either separation or the Pakistani stewardship they were promised under the UN mandate of 1948, as terrorists.

I feel a vague foreboding when I think about how such treatment of prisoners will further blur the lines between governments seeking justice and those that merely seek control.

c) The Big One: how the Islamic (and generally mid-Eastern, though not exclusively) governments will see the US in the future. I predict that those images from the camp will fuel terrorism against the US like nothing else has, because of their visual impact. They will become a rallying cry for every angry, disadvantaged Muslim who feels that the Americans are all hypocrites seeking to destroy those who worship Allah instead of Christ--just as the American's ancestors in Western Europe did, during the Crusades. (Don't laugh. Here in the US we may have no sense of history, for better and worse, but in less technologically advanced cultures oral tradition carries the weight of cultural memory better than any series of sitcoms. Turkish friends of mine still glower when we pass Greek restaurants. They relive the hatred of the Byzantine-Ottoman Wars, many hundreds of years ago. And they lack the finely honed hatred of the descendants of those who suffered through the European invasions of the Crusades.)

I'm not going to offer a suggestion as to how we should deal with Al-Qu'ada and Taliban fighters. But treating those prisoners as outside the reach of the Geneva conventions, and allowing those images to be circulated abroad w4ere IMO the biggest misstep we've made since Georgie Sr. allowed a certain Iraqi ruler to live.
fable is offline  
Old 01-24-2002, 10:35 AM   #9
Cerek the Barbaric
Ma'at - Goddess of Truth & Justice
 

Join Date: October 29, 2001
Location: North Carolina
Age: 61
Posts: 3,257
Another point to keep in mind is that Sept 11 was NOT the first attack on Americans by this same organization. The USS Cole, the various bomb attacks on Embassies and Marine barracks date all the way back to the early 1990's and are all attributed to Osama Bin Laden and his followers.

As Galadriel pointed out, these prisoners have already caused the death of more Americans AFTER being taken prisoner. They are EXTREMELY dangerous to their captors and must be treated as such.

America did NOT officially declare war on Osama, the Taliban, or El-Quada...President Bush declared a generic "war on terrorism". This allows them to circumvent the Geneva Convention, and keeping them in Cuba prevents them from seeking legal recourse in our own Judicial System (not for lack of trying on the parts of several human-rights groups).

When you become concerned about the rights and treatment of these prisoners, take a moment to consider the rights of the 5000 people laying buried underneath the rubble of the World Trade Center. Think about the 500+ children whose parents never showed up to take them home from day care that day. Think of the spouses who kissed their loved ones goodbye that morning...not knowing that would be the last kiss they ever gave them. Think of the jackets that hang in silent tribute to the firefighters who will never wear them again in stations throughout the city. Think of the passengers on the planes,especially Flight 93. They were the only ones who knew what was really going on...and they made a decision to die fighting. There is no way to measure the lives saved by their sacrifice.

My point is this, the prisoners in Cuba are NOT the victims in this case...they are the instigators...and deserved to be treated as such.
__________________
[img]\"http://img.ranchoweb.com/images/cerek/cerektsrsig.jpg\" alt=\" - \" /><br />Cerek the Calmth
Cerek the Barbaric is offline  
Old 01-24-2002, 11:34 AM   #10
Barry the Sprout
White Dragon
 

Join Date: October 19, 2001
Location: York, UK.
Age: 41
Posts: 1,815
quote:
Originally posted by Cerek the Barbaric:
My point is this, the prisoners in Cuba are NOT the victims in this case...they are the instigators...and deserved to be treated as such.


Well my point is that it is the trials job to decide how to treat them. We can't espouse freedom and democracy and then proclaim that they are both concepts that only work for people we like. It completely negates the entire concept of human rights to say that they don't apply to some people. The argument that they deserve it is one that I was expecting to be honest and it is not one I swallow that easily. Those people may have done some terrible things, but I personally think revenge is a little barbaric for "civilisation" to condone.

Fable - Agree 100% BTW. Pretty much everything I was trying to say, but you put it so much better.
__________________
[img]\"http://img1.ranchoweb.com/images/sproutman/certwist.gif\" alt=\" - \" /><br /><br /><i>\"And the angels all pallid and wan,<br />Uprising, unveiling, affirm,<br />That the play is the tragedy, man,<br />And its hero the Conquerer Worm.\"</i><br /> - Edgar Allan Poe
Barry the Sprout is offline  
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Okaaaay... Bible, Shakespeare get Japanese manga treatment Dreamer128 General Discussion 2 03-28-2007 08:24 AM
Ethical treatment, what's your opinion? PurpleXVI General Discussion 16 02-01-2007 07:47 PM
US treatment of prisoners (actual video footage) shamrock_uk General Discussion 118 05-23-2004 11:47 AM
Cancer treatment Donut General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) 43 12-03-2002 07:30 PM
anthrax treatment, your thots, anyone care, tell me J.J. General Discussion 8 10-18-2001 01:25 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:29 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
©2024 Ironworks Gaming & ©2024 The Great Escape Studios TM - All Rights Reserved