''These guys are terrorists who would sooner cut your head off than follow Geneva! They don't deserve a trial!'' Does this sound like a likely conservative answer to complaints about abuse of prisoners in American custody?
In some cases this is absolutely true, some of the people we have in custody ARE terrorists. The question is, which of the people we are holding ARE terrorists; which are even insurgents at all? Without using any of the accepted processes such as hearings, legal framework or due process, the determination of who is a ''terrorist'' is just a government employee applying a LABEL.
Most people don't trust government employees to reliably write out traffic tickets without being able to appeal and argue them. Why on earth would a real American think we can throw away our American values based on a LABEL applied by some poor soldier in the middle of a war?
''Trust, but verify'' was a saying by someone sometimes considered a conservative: Ronald Reagan. What about a new saying for conservatives, ''Mistrust, but verify''? It's the process of actually making people prove the LABELS applied to people are accurate that separates a prison run by a proud democratic country and a gulag or hell hole prison run by Saddam and Sons.
If we don't make the vital distinction between right and wrong, between justice and terrorism, then we are just fighting for territory, not for ideals. We can't put people away forever just before because George Bush tells us these people are bad. We don't need to trust these prisoners, but we do need to get to the truth of whether they really ARE guilty or dangerous.
Mistrust, but verify...
Article comments
1 - Tan The Man
War and fear can lead to very irrational and blurry decision-making.
2 - SFC SKI
"Why on earth would a real American think we can throw away our American values based on a LABEL applied by some poor soldier in the middle of a war?"
The terrorists are the ones who are shooting at the Soldiers, carrying RPG's on their shoulders, setting up mortars in a vacant lot between houses, have explosive residue on their hands, have weapons caches hidden in or around their houses, are positively identified by other known terrorsits, it's not really that hard.
3 - Big Time Patriot
"The terrorists are the ones who are shooting at the Soldiers, carrying RPG's on their shoulders, setting up mortars in a vacant lot between houses, have explosive residue on their hands, have weapons caches hidden in or around their houses, are positively identified by other known terrorsits, it's not really that hard."
I agree, it's really not that hard, with all this proof there should be no problem convicting these people you describe in courts. Now if you have a guy sitting in a prison that you just SUSPECT of fitting into one of those categories, that is the problem. Do we bother to try and VERIFY that the people we have captured actually fit ANY of the categories you mention? Or does repeating the list of accusations and labels replace a justice system?
4 - Big Time Patriot
"positively identified by other known terrorists" I have to mention this particular argument is a bit weak, hasn't Saddam accused Bush of war crimes? Sounds like Bush should be IN Guatanemo, not shaming America with it.
5 - SFC SKI
No, I am talking about the ones caught shooting at us who revealed locations and identities of other terrorists within their group. But what do I know, I am just a poor soldier.
6 - Yensid
If we lower our cherished standards for these so called terrorists we have become nothing less than one of them.
Conservatives... chew on that.
7 - Dave Nalle
>>If we lower our cherished standards for these so called terrorists we have become nothing less than one of them.<<
Do let me know when we start suicide bombing civilian gatherings and chopping off the heads of hostages. Until then I'm not going to worry too much about us being confused with the terrorists.
On the general topic, I believe one of the main reasons for holding these folks at GITMO is that they are believed to have information which could be used to track down other terrorists. At some point the administration needs to decide whether that information will ever be forthcoming and either try and imprison the detainees or let them go. At this point whatever information they do have is getting more and more out of date, so there may be little point in keeping them. Of course, good luck finding a country that will take them if we release them.
Dave
8 - Big Time Patriot
"Do let me know when we start suicide bombing civilian gatherings and chopping off the heads of hostages."
More than 30 prisoners have died in American captivity, at least one is known to have been beaten to death. But if they were beaten to death instead of beheaded, well, we are clearly the worlds leaders in moral values. Clearly.
And if we started this wars based on lies (WMDs, Iraqi ties to 9-11 and Al-Qaeda) then weren't all the civilians who died from our bombing in Iraq our responsibility? I believe the civilian death toll is estimated at 100,000 (not that the administration can even be bothered to estimate, after all, we are liberating their dead bodies aren't we?). Even if HALF of them were really our enemies that would leave a lot more innocent Iraqi's dead from bombing than all the suicide bombs since the war.
It's good to be righteous and on the moral high ground. The trick is that you have to earn that position by not letting your country slide into a morality quagmire. We've got to pull America's mucky boots out of the swamp and climb back up to the moral high ground.
Somehow I think George, Dick and Rumsfeld are just wallowing in the mire and have no desire to lead us out.
9 - SFC SKI
"More than 30 prisoners have died in American captivity, at least one is known to have been beaten to death."
How do we know this? Because the US military investigated it, as they have many other incidents, and prosecuted offenders where necessary, with other investigations continuing.
Compare and contrast that with acts of beheading not being condemned by more than a few, and very few on this board.
Moral equivalence is not going to reduce the threat we face, and should you ever be within range of terrorists such as these, your politcal affiliation won't matter, you are an infidel and a target.
I don't write any of this to excuse the abuses that have occurred, I'd just like to see you get a little perspective.
10 - Big Time Patriot
"I'd just like to see you get a little perspective."
Let me see if I've got this perspective right. One perspective is that we are scared of bad guys and will go to any length (or any depths) to fight them. Anything is okay if we are afraid of bad guys. No limits, no rules, no standards.
You say that you think people don't condemn the terrorists who behead people sufficiently. They are dispicable. You know who should be most responsible for stopping those people? Their fellow country men, I would think?
Well, as a fellow citizen of people who are arresting people on suspicion without having to produce the slightest bit of proof, it is YOUR reponsibility to make your own countrymen behave.
The way to fight morally irresponsible and evil behavior by other countries is NOT by allowing your own country to be morally irresponsible. With these standards the excuse for fighting Saddam gets even weaker. Did he kill a lot of people and abuse others? Sure he did, but you know, he applied labels to them, he called them bad names, and if calling someone a "terrorist" is good enough for America how can we hold Saddam to blame for having his own label system?
It's like being a little bit pregnant, if you are a little bit pregnant you are no longer a virgin.
If you "dissapear" just a few people, you are no longer the good guys. The good guys don't "dissappear" anybody, not one. The good guys don't send people out of the country for torture.
11 - Temple Stark
SFc, I have to politely object slightly. There have been hundreds of "detainees" that have just simply been released. No charges. Freedom. Citizens of other countries like Australia and England.
There were repeated and admitted reports that there were simply entire areas rounded up - though those people ended up at Abu Ghraib to the best of my recollection