Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (122877)	7/1/2005 1:17:43 PM
From: aladin	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793838

CB, I would suggest an international conference of experts on terrorism and possibly an international treaty on the treatment of captured terrorists, if that could be worked out. Perhaps an internationally run prison? Or at least an understanding among the more significant nations as to what constituted humane confinement. Great idea - but why hasn't any of the administrations critics proposed this? Why must it always be a US administration responsibility? Given the inability of past international organizations to do similar work - the administrations proposal has been Gitmo. To date the only counter-proposal is the failed law enforcement model. The first step is talking about it, not sweeping it under the rug. And the Bush administration does a terrible job of presenting its case when it comes to tough choices. "My way or the highway" doesn't work when it comes to world opinion. Particularly when it falls on deaf ears. If the Bush Administration makes a case or a statement and its not covered by the MSM or in particular the Foreign Press, what are they to do? Anti-Americanism did not start with George Bush or the Republican party. It was always there. John

To: Ilaine who wrote (122877)	7/1/2005 1:43:35 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793838

But 3 1/2 years later, the time has come to go to Plan B, whatever Plan B is. Okey-dokey, let's try to map out what Plan B could be, shall we? 1.- Let 'em loose, hope they don't end up in Iraq setting off IEDs. That doesn't sound like a very good plan to me. 2.- Swallow the indigestible fiction that they are not combatants and try them as criminals under our laws. But what would the charges be? Assuming some sort of criminal prosecution is possible, they would be entitled to counsel, subpoena power, bail, a jury, etc. If convicted, they go to jail for x amount of years with repatriation possible only after they serve their sentences. If not guilty, they get sent back to blow up GIs in Iraq and to preach about the bizarre nature of the surreal US justice system which allows for sworn enemies who happen to also be combatants to be freed. A bad, almost laughable, option, IMO. 3.- Send them to Afghanistan for trial under Afghani law and hope the Afghanis do not release them or they do not escape. Not a very palatable option to me. 4.- Let them stay in Gitmo until they shave and eat pork or get too old to be a problem. Not a bad option, particularly since these guys knew the risk they assumed when they signed up for AQ. If they are not combatants, something they are allowed to show, they are released. Seems like the only decent alternative. Of course, you may wish to indulge in the fiction that they are not combatants who have sworn blood oaths to destroy us and are therefore dangerous as hell but that's your option. Why don't you adopt a few of them, demand that they be tried as Americans? Edit: Just saw your notion of an international conference, tribunal, and a prison. Oh, brother. Put them in the hands of the UN or some UN surrogate or proxy. Good grief--the poor, poor slobs would be dead of old age before the ground rules for such a boondoggle would be approved. And guess who would be asked to pay for the bulk of the costs?

To: Ilaine who wrote (122877)	7/1/2005 2:38:36 PM
From: KLP	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793838

You mentioned a couple of things.... First: One might think that we are dealing with something that nobody in the world has dealt with before, but that's not exactly true. The Russians deal with Muslim terrorists in Chechenya, the Indians vis-a-vis Kashmir, the Chinese vis-a-vis Uighur separatists, etc., etc., etc. Muslim terrorists create conflict all over the world. and Second: I would suggest an international conference of experts on terrorism and possibly an international treaty on the treatment of captured terrorists, if that could be worked out. Perhaps an internationally run prison? Or at least an understanding among the more significant nations as to what constituted humane confinement. Re your first .... Yes. We all agree. Re your second..... Yes. Good idea. First, we should have 20 world press go with the rep chosen from each country that is to be talking on your proposal, and they are to visit 5 random prisons from each of those countries. Just to see the lay of the land, so to speak. Let's say there are 20 countries represented, and one rep each country. Plus 20 press. Prisons not selected ahead of time....just random choice any given day. 40 people visit, TV cameras running with live broadcasting, so the rest of the world can see what the actual situations are. Then, the 20 reps from the countries, sit down and discuss the situation....make some guidelines and present them. (btw, this is to be paid for by EACH country participating, not just the US) The UN as a group is NOT to participate in this, for just the reasons that have been noted in discussions noted earlier downstream. The UN is not capable of policing anything right now, let alone themselves. It would be most interesting to see just what these countries would come up with. The BIGGEST problem right away, as we will see, is that NONE of them can even agree on the definition of terrorism. Check it out yourself if you can't/don't/won't agree with me. Insert in a search engine.....definition - terrorism -- international --....