Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

Guantanamo Bay detention camp

192 posts in this topic

 

You *really* need to see the Road to Guantanamo JW

I think I'll pass, thanks anyway. Seeing some one-sided film by a director who's main qualification is having brought hardcore sex into mainstream cinema is a waste of time, IMHO. I'll stick to Michael Moore movies if I really have to.

 

actually the only country that does that as far as I know is the US.

That is not true. All countries order, or at least advise their nationals as to whether they should be in a place or not.

 

Most other countries recognise that wars cause humanitarian crises that *need* humanitarian input.

Bla bla bla... Empty anti-American rhetoric. Substitute America with convenient bogey man (Nazi Germany, Spanish Conquistadores) and use at will.

 

I understand there were European charities and MiddleEastern charities operating inside Afghanistan before, during and after the conflict.

Hmmm... Which means that the percentage of Guantanamo inmates who are actually humanitarian workers must be quite high! ;)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even this is fine, but mix it up a little. Maybe talk about U.S. domestic policy once in a while. How about forestry projects in Oregon? Let the pundits show off.

 

A broken record is only that - it's not action, it's not a call to arms, it's just desensitizing important issues by continual opinion parrotting of the SZ, Guardian, Beeb, FA, etc.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It might not be new, but it is abhorrent and should not be allowed to continue, especially by the 'Land of the Free'.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

thank you hams. I was sure what DW was posting was drivvel but I couldn't be arsed doingzthe spadework to prove him wrong.

&

 

 

I think you'll find Protocol I, Article 85, Section 4e states:

Al-Qaida is not a signatory to the Geneva Convention. Period. The law is lacking with respect to al Qaida and other combatant groups who don't represent a nation. I think they should be given POW status anyway (as I stated above) because that's the right thing to do but the Convention would still have to be changed even further regarding release as they don't represent a country that can sign an armistice.

 

Taliban regulars and irregulars are entitled to POW protection under the Geneva Convention as Afghanistan is a signatory and it should be afforded to them unconditionally.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It might not be new, but it is abhorrent and should not be allowed to continue, especially by the 'Land of the Free'.

what should we do with them? like we do to young offenders here and pack them of on a holiday in the sun?

Some of these criminals are better off than people with jobs.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A broken record is only that - it's not action, it's not a call to arms, it's just desensitizing important issues by continual opinion parrotting of the SZ, Guardian, Beeb, FA, etc.

So Randy, what more should one do at ground level?

Join Amnesty International - check.

Write letters to one's Member of Parliament - check.

Display antipathy of breaches of international/humanitarian law - not just from the US, on expat forum - check.

 

What am I missing?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

these so-called criminals haven't actually been convicted of anything, bbulldog, but you'd like to shoot them anyway.

 

you really *do* get your opinions from the Sun, don't you?

 

*worries that words in the posts might be a bit too long for bbulldog to grasp*

*decides to let them stand anyway*

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

was it 4 'brits' that were sent back to the UK last year? what were they doing over there? on holiday with an AK47?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

these so-called criminals haven't actually been convicted of anything, bbulldog, but you'd like to shoot them anyway.

 

you really *do* get your opinions from the Sun, don't you?

 

*worries that words in the posts might be a bit too long for bbulldog to grasp*

*decides to let them stand anyway*

no i get first hand info thanks

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, now, Topsy, I know that being a leftist (European style that is, none of that American "Democrat" nonsense) make one intellectually and morally superior to anyone to the right of Trotsky, but the man is entitled to an opinion.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@JW - sure he's entitled to an opinion... and I can honestly say that I have never posted anything along those lines before (e.g. to you and DW, with whom I seem to often disagree ;))

 

But this bloke wants them all shot, without any charges being brought.

Really, patronising derision is being charitable.

 

Of course I don't think that being a leftie makes me intellectually superior to you lot on the right (morally, maybe, though :P)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hams: Be still, stay quiet and wait for the outpouring of accolades, gratitude and acknowledgments of enlightment from the less-informed populace?

 

Or do whatever turns you on. Activism rules.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DW - How would one differentiate between the Taliban and al-Qaeda?

 

 

The origins of al-Qaeda can be traced to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, when a cadre of non-Afghani, Arab Muslim fighters joined the largely United States funded Afghan mujāhidīn anti-Russian resistance movement.

[Wiki]

 

And the mujahidin as we all know were the precursor to the Taliban. So we have evolution from Mujahidin to Taliban to al-Qaeda. Confusing as to whom the Convention applies and to whom it doesn't.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldnt the American membership of the geneva convention be relevant in the al quaida case, seeing as al-quaida was originally a cia funded militia that went renegade? Can the US declare armistace with itself? Hmm maybe this really is an internal matter.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

hams: Be still, stay quiet and wait for the outpouring of accolades, gratitude and acknowledgments of enlightment from the less-informed populace?

 

Or do whatever turns you on.

None of the above thanks very much.

Just interested in how you define 'activism'?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Confusing as to whom the Convention applies and to whom it doesn't.

Which is why I advocate changing it.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Taliban fighters, as the military of Afghanistan would fall under the GC. Al Qaeda are a police matter. Easy.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0