Related Information to Guantanamo Prisoners: Justice or Revenge

Guantanamo Prisoners: Justice or Revenge - Page 11

Well said!. I was NOT impressed reading what these people are "fed" once in blue moon, I guess that for some of the US military in Guantanamo, giving them some of these special meals may ease their guilt about the way they are treating these people. NO food in this world can pay for the illegality of the detention of these people.

Revenge Justice Prisoners Guantanamo

Actually, that was their DAILY diet.

The point was that they are treated far better than people in any prison, anywhere. Their religion is respected, in a way that is actually unlawful in the US. They are given all sorts of additional treatment.

What I see here is the assumption that the US is completely in the wrong, despite the fact that these people were captured as unlawful combatants, who should have been shot on sight. They were instead captured and taken to Guantanamo in order to attempt to extract intelligence information.

Intelligence service is just like a slaughterhouse. The same people who want the final product then complain incessantly about the smell.

Guantanamo Prisoners: Justice or Revenge History & Civil Business Politics

How was this menu independently verified? Is it another case of "US Administration/Military official said"?

In the world? No they are not, not even close. There is not one single prison in my country that strips suspected criminals of basic human rights. I'm certain most prisons in western democratic nations respect human rights. These people haven't been charged for ANYTHING. And they are still treated like hardened criminals, tortured, placed in isolation for days on end, are shown gross disrespect in their religious beliefs and stripped of their dignity. And all this for years.

I'm sure its not as bad as a concentration camp, or a lot of other prisons in oppressive countries. But yet again I ask why we should compare? Shouldn't the US be leading the world in human rights?

You are right about that. I can't imagine urinating on someone's holy book as lawful. Nor is wiping fake menstruate blood on inmates.

It is my opinion that the US government is wrong on this matter, however let us consider some facts. They weren't unlawful combatants. They weren't even all combatants. "Unlawful combatants" is the US and coalitions definition of Taliban forces, not Afghanistan's. Taliban forces were the army of the ruling government at the time US invaded Afghanistan. The US and coalition troops could be viewed as illegal combatants, they invaded a sovereign nation without any provocation.

Just because the US ot the coalition didn't accept the Taliban, even though the US armed them to the teeth, doesn't mean they weren't the ruling party of Afghanistan. This is common knowledge. How they got into power is irrelevant, our opinion on their power is also irrelevant. The CIA has engineered many coups around the world which the US has accepted for obvious reasons, Saddam's party was one of them.

I know some people find this hard to believe, but the US or any other country doesn't determine who is lawful or not in somebody else's country. If the "coalition" was serious about apprehending real terrorists, why don't they go after the Northern Alliance fighters, who are arguably worse than the Taliban. General Dozdum, Rummy's mate, is one of the most ruthless, bloodthirsty warlords in that region. But of course the US only chases "terrorists" who are against them, not those it can manipulate.

Nobody deserves to be shot on sight. Acting in such a disgusting, vile manner makes you as bad as these terrorists.

This is very, very true. Intelligence agencies have a notorious reputation for being some of the worst terrorists in the world.

Exactly, does it even matter what they are being fed?

Edited: arvhic on 15th Jun, 2005 - 11:08am

Page 11 Revenge Justice Prisoners Guantanamo

What the reports are now showing is that there is a disciplined, well established pattern of concern and care offered towards the prisoners in Guantanamo, unprecedented. So great is the established pattern that water balloons and inadvertant splashing of urine are the most extreme examples available of possible religious persecution!

I will end the discussion here. Two or three people have decided that the US is completely wrong in even attempting to fight terrorism, and any action we take is immoral, horrible, etc. Fake menstrual blood is such a horrible torture, as is making them listen to music or see women in uniform. Even if those same women take off their clothes and taunt the detainees, it still isn't torture.

You have declared that the US is illegal. What exactly are you doing to stop terrorist attacks on innocent civilians in the US, Indonesia, Spain, Israel, Britain, or anywhere else? At least the US has taken some initiative in the matter. The rest of the world is just sitting on its collective butts, complaining about the US activities, because they can't figure out what to do!

As I have said before, the detainees in Guantanamo, during ANY other war, would have been shot out of hand on the battlefield. They were non-uniformed combatants, wielding weapons.

BTW, you keep claiming that the US performed an "illegal" invasion of Afghanistan. Yet the UN fully supported it, didn't it? Oh, yes, the UN is only "good" when it is against the actions of the US. Anything else is evil.

I'm sick of this particular discussion. Much worse is happening around the world than is happening in Guantanamo, yet never a peep from certain sources about it. You want to discuss torture, look at ALL of the Muslim countries, Zimbabwe, South Africa, Algiers (under the French).

Some of you are so blinded by your absolute hatred of the US it is unbelievable. You won't even acknowledge when the US actions have helped someone else. Thanks for opening up my eyes.

Revenge Justice Prisoners Guantanamo

I think this is your interpretation of how some of us see things, personally (I cannot talk for the rest) it is not so. Just because I do not agree particularly with certain procedures that the US government takes in order to fight terrorism, it does not mean I believe that everything that the US does in order to fight terrorism is wrong. I thought you should have figure it out this by now. There are certain procedures that the US is taking in order to fight terrorism that I personally agree and even support. Guantanamo is definetly NOT one of them. I know it may be hard for US citizens to understand that just because someone does not agree with certain things that the country is doing, it does not make us anti-US government, or anti-America. I personally know how to separate both things, politics definetly do not mix with what the country really is in escence and the USA is a great country in my opinion in LOTS of different ways. I guess it is simply a matter of opinion, we are all entitle to that and since this is an International Forum, everyone sees things in their own perspective. I think what is going on in Guantanamo is wrong, you personally have acknowledge that some of the things going on there are not nice, yet you seem to want to cover it up a little bit by stating the "nice" things going on there. Now, don't take me wrong, I understand why you are doing it but it does not change the fact that what is going on in Guantanamo is wrong, now whether we may agree in the degree of abuse is another thing, nevertheless, it does not change the fact that the detainees in Guantanamo are withhold of basic rights. So personally, if I was you, I would not generalize opinions, simply because as I said before, just because someone thinks that some of the procedures the US takes are wrong, it does not mean that we believe that ALL the procedures the US takes are wrong.

With all the respect you deserve, just because it is not torture for you it does not mean it is not for someone who grow up in a total different culture and religion and believes that being exposed to such thing is a dishonor to their God. Therefore if someone has this knowledge of this belief and uses against the person in question knowing the effect that will have in the individual, is a form of torture to me...or at least, a form of abuse. Whether is torture or abuse, is plain wrong and totally unneccesary.

I will not be so sure if I was you. The fact that after ALL the pressure the US took from the world in general, they released dozens and dozens of detainees who were not involved in any way on the kind of activities you describe, it is then a fact that Guantanamo held innocent people and who knows still does. Now isn't the freedom of an innocent person important for the US?. I think it is. Therefore, let's put a lawyer to EACH one of these detainees, let's give them the right to phone their families and talk with judges, let's set a fair court for them and let's sentence them as many years as their crimes committed. I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT! I do have a problem of holding them for whatever time the US feels too. It is wrong in my eyes, isn't wrong in yours?.

Nighthawk, just because worst things are happening around the world it does not mean we should make a blind eye to what's going on in Guantanamo or is it what you are suggesting?.

With all respect again, some US citizens have a hard time to understand that some of us around the world do not hate the US (helloooo? I personally have no time for stupidness) Why should I hate the US? I have no reason to hate the US. Why is it so hard for Americans to accept that someone may not agree with what their country is doing? Why?. And I do acknowledge that LOTS of US actions have helped many, many people around the world and I think is great!, Guantanamo is definetly not one of them.

Guantanamo Prisoners: Justice or Revenge

Whose reports? Right-wing observers or the US administration? What about innocent detainees who have been released without charge? Do their reports count?

The US has done more to escalate terrorism in the past five years than it has to stop it. Doing nothing would have been more effective. The incidence of terrorism has grown dramatically since the coalition's response to September 11.

I agree that something needs to be done, that is not the issue. But this "might is right" strategy is clearly not working. The world doesn't havea problem with trying to prevent terrorism, it has a problem with the subjugative manner in which the coalition is trying to achieve this.

Why should I or my nation fight Bush's war of aggression? Terrorists don't come into my country and cause problems. They don't specifically target people from my country until we support your country. My government is supporting your government and I think it is wrong. I totally disagree with Howard's obedient support. It is unnecessarily placing Australia lives at risk.

You can not defeat terrorism by killing terrorists. Do you want to kill every Arab looking person in the Middle East until all the potential terrorists are dead? If the US was serious about terrorism they would change their foreign policy and get serious about preventing it. And they would sort out Palestine because that is fanning terrorism. Blindly supporting everything Israel does is stirring anti-American resentment. Gaoling people and abusing their human rights doesn't help.

I'm an advocate for peace, not murder. Terrorists are horrible people. The US is giving a lot of these groups the best propaganda possible. And they shouldn't waste any more lives to fuel these lunatics" agenda.

Would defecating statues of Jesus Christ be more to your liking? Just because you don't believe this is torture doesn't mean it's not offensive to somebody from a completely different culture. There are different cultures in the world apart from the American culture. They are all beautiful in their own way.

I don't hate the US. This is a ridiculous and offensive assumption just because I don't agree with your point of view. Why do Americans think that because somebody doesn't agree with what their government is doing that they hate them? There are a lot of other governments far worse than the Bush administration but this topic is about Guantanamo Bay. Those nations you mentioned deserve far more urgent intervention than the terrorists.

You're the one that said there was no such thing as international law so why would you care what the UN supports or not. Find me the UN resolution that states the Taliban are illegal combatants in Afghanistan? Furthermore the US and other western nations armed the Taliban to their teeth when they were fighting off the Russians. At what point were they legal combatants and when did they become illegal? Or maybe you should have shot them on the spot when they were trying to ward off the Red army. I don't agree with Taliban's ways or philosophy at all, I have no time for groups like that. My simple point is they are hardly illegal combatants trying to defend a country that they were ruling. September 11 had nothing to do with them, just like it had nothing to do with Saddam.

This crusade to "democratise" cultures that historically are tribal is wrong. It is not the US, Britain, Australia or any nation's right to tell other cultures how they should live.

Guantanamo Prisoners Justice Revenge - Page 11

I the best case these people are POW's, I do not think they are, by the rules of the Geneva Convention they are illegal combatants that in past wars were executed immediately by the Germans, Japanese, Italians, Russians and countless other nations. The U.S. has a history of not executing these people, in WWII the Germans spies that were captured in the U.S. were held in separate camps and returned to Germany at the end of the war.

If we were to give the terrorist POW status, and my definition of a terrorist is anyone who is not a member of a national military who helps a group perform attacks against civilian targets just to cause terror. Here is what they would get, three meals a day, shelter, religious services and interrogated. The U.S. has a position of not physically torturing POW's, but mental torture is authorized. Common practices include; depriving a person of the ability to know what time it is, altering the meal times, depriving sleep, making them stand on a box with the head cover and making them think something bad will happen if they fall off and the right to have the Red Cross or Red Crescent visit and the right to be returned to the native country at the end of hostilities or when found that the person is not a combatant.

According to the Geneva Convention Camp X-Ray is well within the rights of the United States and I have no problem with keeping it open and when people like Ayman al-Zawahiri ( Fox News Report )keep threatening the U.S. and our allies I have no problem supporting the policy of taking the fight to their country.

Guantanamo Prisoners Justice Revenge Politics Business Civil & History - Page 11

The US may have a position of not using physical torture but there is plenty of evidence that they have used this at Camp X-Ray. A number of innocent inmates who have been released have claimed physical torture. I've seen the marks of one inmate who definitely suffered physical torture. Furthermore, we all know when the US really wants to physically torture somebody they take them to Egypt for extreme physical torture. How do you excuse this, that is just as bad as the military committing torture itself.

Mental torture is just as bad and damaging to somebody as physical torture. How can you possibly justify the use of psychological torture for credible intelligence? There is no credibility in forcing somebody to say what you want them to.

Well it's not within the rights. You are asserting this on the belief that inmates are illegal combatants which they are not. And you can't prove to me that they are, nor can the US Government. Even if they were illegals, under the Geneva Convention they are still entitled to basic human rights once they have dropped their arms. Furthermore, Al-Zaqarwi is not at Camp X-Ray so why should other people suffer for his crimes? The problem is you can not hold someone in a prison without at least charging them. These people don't exist, they have no legal rights. Nobody knows how innocent or guilty they are until they are tried before a court. Torture aside, it is this breach of human rights that is the real problem.

Offtopic but, Ramer, I'm not sure how much you have read about Afghan history. In the 80s the CIA pumped up to US$700 million a year into a conflict to liberate Afghanistan from Russian rule. It was important to the US because Russia were the Red Army and Afghanistan is a gateway to considerable Gas reserves and heroin. It was one of the largest covert operations in history at that time. They eventually forced the Russians out after a long, bloody war. It caused millions of deaths and even more refugees, which left Afghanistan in ruin. Of course with a power vacuum this allowed muslim extremist groups to fight for control. The Taliban, who were a group of ethnic Pashtun fighters backed by Pakistan, seized control of Kabul in 1996. Whether we agree with it or not, they were the ruling "government" of large parts of Afghanistan at the time the coalition attacked following September 11. Therefore they can not possibly be illegal combatants because they were a legitimate force defending what they controlled. POWs would be a more accurate description but your government will never accept that because if they do they will be accused of considerable war crimes. (Explained below) This is a mere fact the US mainstream media ignores because a lot of western political leaders have never endorsed Taliban's repressive regime. And nor should they. The Taliban were terrible, I've met Afghan refugees who have fled and some of the stories are horrific. There were regional areas of Afghanistan, especially to the north, where terrorist groups, and not the Taliban, held control. With considerable US and coalition support the notorious Northern Alliance pushed the Taliban out of Kabul in 2001/02. The US was determined to get rid of the Taliban because of their association with Al-Qaeda. But they had nothing to do with September 11. Furthermore some of the terrorist groups, esp Northern Alliance, used in this invasion were just as bad as the Taliban. Like the Taliban, the Northern Alliance never wore uniforms and were a terrorist group by your definition. They were never arrested, shot or reprimanded by coalition forces for some of the murderous atrocities they inflicted on surrendering Taliban forces. This is a gross double-standard. Please read the below link for more information on this. US and Northern Alliance atrocities Now this link is on a left-wing website so ignore the rhetoric and consider the facts only. It is all true, I have seen many other reports that confirm this including a detailed documentary that interviewed the Northern Alliance and truck drivers involved in the incident. In Afghanistan today, it is really only Kabul that enjoys security.

Message Edited! JB@Trinidad: There is a huge amount of this post that should really be in the thread about Afghanistan. The author tried to tie it in, but without offtopic tags it sends the discussion into another realm.