Do you remember why we went there ?
I don’t consider what we did as an invasion .
They do. If it isn’t an invasion, why do we need tanks and helmets?
If we started to give a crap what the opposing force thought we would be brought to our knees .
That isn’t the point anyway. A man is free to shoot at anyone who invades his homeland in an effort to expel the invader. His patriotic duty is to wound and kill as many of the foreigners on his land as he can. I don’t hold anything against them for that.
The point is that the people in Guantanamo have been released on paper, but the marines won’t open the cages.
Ok ! I would like to read about that .
Was it a civil court or military court who proclaimed such?
Where is the credible source for this info ?
I don’t believe the civil has rights to the military system.
War is not a good thing but I do think all should treat each others prisoners properly band with dignity.
Unfortunately this does not always happen .Our family has been lucky we have not lost any sons son-in-laws or grand kids in the middle east .Not all have been so fortunate.
Some carry serious scars for the rest of their lives.
Too many do not look at war the way we do, both side’s solders have suffered badly.
The solders are not our enemy it is the leaders who are.
Good post Roy. Thankfully, most of the innocent at Guantanamo have already been released, but only after torturing them (Guantanamo is considered an “interrogation” camp) and keeping them captive for more years than any P.O.W. should be held. It is too late for many who lost their teenage years, died while being tortured, died in the hunger strike, or committed suicide. It’s also too late for their families who now have every right to retaliate. I know I would if some foreign country captured my son… and I’d do it in the most horrific manner I could concoct.
And what torture is that Nick?
Cutting off limbs? Burning? Flogging?
Or something else?
Define what you consider torture please.
Otherwise you are asking people to grab fog.
Me? I would define it as intentionally making a person or animal suffer.
You worry about the wrong “torturers”.
Any so called torture by the US is mental not physical. and guess what, they fully recover.
What about the suffering created by the prisoners?
They are not choirboys Nick.
They are people who have killed Americans on the battlefield.
Should they have been shot instead of being taken to GITMO?
Wrong. You might be able to recover from a physical injury, but not necessarily from a mental one.
But some where “boys” nonetheless, as young as age 13. Can you imagine how the marines who trained all those years, feel about guarding 13 year old boys ruled not guilty? Kind of makes all those pull-ups seem silly.
They are supposed to kill Americans on the battlefield! It’s their duty to. I’d kill the members of their military if they tried to set up a base in Boulder, Colorado. That is nothing to be ashamed of. They are their country’s patriots just like those who fight to defend the U.S. are our country’s patriots.
News alert for Michael Larson: On a battlefield, the other side can shoot back. That’s why it’s called a battlefield.
Am I supposed to care what age a murder is?
Nick, should they have been shot on the battlefield or not? Yes or no
Arms, legs and heads do not grow back. You have lost your mind on this one. :roll:
Assuming you meant “murderer”… they aren’t murderers. They are patriots (albeit for the country we invaded). It is not murder to kill American soldiers who have invaded your country,… it is war. That’s why our servicemen wear helmets when they invade a foreign country, they rightfully expect the other side to try to kill (not murder) them.
After being captured? No, of course not. Should our Vietnam Vets been killed instead of been taken prisoner when their bombers got shot down?
So Nick thinks it would have been ok to kill them instead of capturing them. Got it.
Nick, please explain in case you think I am wrong.
It is O.K. to kill an enemy combatant while he is fighting you. But if you fail to kill him, and instead capture him (because he was wounded or surrendered or whatever) it is not O.K. to keep him in perma-captivity or torture him. That is dishonorable. Ask any P.O.W.
I think some people have no idea of what war is about.
Looks like they have never been in the service or had a close family member in the service
There is Roy, full of crap yet again.
These are not enemy combatants, they are terrorist-murderers who indiscriminately target innocent civilians, including women and children. They are not deserving of the rights or privileges afforded to warriors that are battling against other warriors.
Prisoners of war are released as the war ends. They no longer pose a threat. Captured terrorist do not fall in the category of POW, as their “war” has no end and they will always remain a threat.
The US Bill of Rights is afforded to citizens and immigrants (legal and illegal) who reside in this country. The US Bill of Rights does not extend to prisoners of war or to captured terrorists.
Non citizens do not have a right to vote in a federal election. To do so (even to register to vote in a federal election) is a crime.
Nope. Even your own government disagrees with you and has released most of them. Most of the people at Guantanamo were deemed not guilty by the very government that took them there, and they’ve been released already. We’re now trying to get the last of them (about 56) out who have already been cleared for release by the U.S. I know it is a tough pill to swallow, but the U.S. kept innocent men and boys (some as young as age 13) in a concentration camp for many years.
What a sad thing to do locked up for many years and then showed out the door ,No money little knowledge of what has gone on in the world .
Little education on how things now work and some times no country to go too.
In as a child and out to what???