Discuss...

[Oniw17]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3868-2005Mar26.html
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/01/04/INGPQ40MET1.DTL
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3034697.stm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murat_Kurnaz

These actins are against our Constitution and the Geneva Conventions. I believe that convicted terrorists should have no rights, and be forced by any means necessary, to reveal who is pulling the strings. However...none of these people were or re convicted of anything.

[silentsamurai]

I think they have to tread carefully because of all the Human right's activists around. They still have rights and until they are actually convicted of war crimes, then there isn't much that can be done i'm afraid...But i am completely with the idea of obtaining information by any means necessary....will save lives and possibly more conflict in the long run.

[Cliff Hargrave]

These actins are against our Constitution and the Geneva Conventions. I believe that convicted terrorists should have no rights, and be forced by any means necessary, to reveal who is pulling the strings. However...none of these people were or re convicted of anything.

The constitution does not apply to enemies. We have never tried people in times of war. After wars we have tried war criminals.

The Geneva convention applys only to soldiers, not to terrorists or non-uniformed irregular forces.

Really poor troll attempt considering this has been discussed at length already.

[Oniw17]

It seems like all the topics I bring up have been discussed in detail lately, can you point me in the right direction to participate in such a debate, or are all th threads closed now?

[TonyU]

It seems like all the topics I bring up have been discussed in detail lately, can you point me in the right direction to participate in such a debate, or are all th threads closed now?
Use the search function on top right corner. If it's being discussed add to it, if not then start a new thread.
Also keep in mind that a particular subject may be discussed within another subject thread.

[silentsamurai]

in all fairness..this forum is pretty huge... maybe the comments could be posted onto an existing thread?

[Ramirez]

Really poor troll attempt considering this has been discussed at length already.


That was a little harsh Cliff, Frank is new and he is only 15, I doubt he is as cynical as some of us older members.

Edit: actually he isn't that new, but I think he is sincere.

[Cliff Hargrave]

That was a little harsh Cliff, Frank is new and he is only 15, I doubt he is as cynical as some of us older members.

Edit: actually he isn't that new, but I think he is sincere.

My apologies for the perceived harshness, however I take a 15 year old making blanket statements on the Constitution of the United States a little harsh myself. Maybe if he would have asked the question "Is this against the Constitution?" or prefaced with "In my opinion this is against the Constitution" it would have been better received. I am 40 years old and have spent 21 1/2 years in public service and I take the Constitution very seriously. Every single law that comes into existance and I enforce is held to a Constitutional standard.

This topic on detaining enemy combatants has appeared on at least two or three other threads.

[Ramirez]

My apologies for the perceived harshness, however I take a 15 year old making blanket statements on the Constitution of the United States a little harsh myself. Maybe if he would have asked the question "Is this against the Constitution?" or prefaced with "In my opinion this is against the Constitution" it would have been better received. I am 40 years old and have spent 21 1/2 years in public service and I take the Constitution very seriously. Every single law that comes into existance and I enforce is held to a Constitutional standard.

This topic on detaining enemy combatants has appeared on at least two or three other threads.

At 15 I probably had more hubris than Frank and wasn't nearly as well informed or as articulate...Frank is bright but with age will come circumspection.

I am glad to see he is interested in something other than comic books and X-box myself.

[Oniw17]

My apologies for the perceived harshness, however I take a 15 year old making blanket statements on the Constitution of the United States a little harsh myself. Maybe if he would have asked the question "Is this against the Constitution?" or prefaced with "In my opinion this is against the Constitution" it would have been better received. I am 40 years old and have spent 21 1/2 years in public service and I take the Constitution very seriously. Every single law that comes into existance and I enforce is held to a Constitutional standard.

This topic on detaining enemy combatants has appeared on at least two or three other threads.
These examples aren't enemy combatants, one of them was a Canadian citizen(with a passport) on his way home when U.S. immigration took him into custody. I have already said that I don't believe enemy combatants, or KNOWN terrorists should have any rights.

Edit: If I go to another country, I am subject to their laws, the same way, a Canadian citizen with passport should be subject to our laws and customs(including the constitution), of course excluding diplomats.

[Cliff Hargrave]

These examples aren't enemy combatants,

Ok if you want to be that way. The topic of detaining enemy combatants, terrorists, suspected terrorists, and anyone else that Bush don't like, has been done to death on several threads.

[Ramirez]

Ok if you want to be that way. The topic of detaining enemy combatants, terrorists, suspected terrorists, and anyone else that Bush don't like, has been done to death on several threads.

Cliff is correct Frank, there are other threads if you want to discuss this.

[Oniw17]

I'm gonna let this thread die out before I get myself into trouble like last time.:o

[Cliff Hargrave]

Good choice. I will close it for you, so you do not succumb to temptation.