MMMMMMM and others US foreign policy defenders - ethics? - Page 4

[censored] · #31 10-28-2005, 02:44 AM

[ QUOTE ]
That doesn't mean we need to nuke Tehran

[/ QUOTE ]

whoah whoah whoah, why so hasty? I think a few nukes shoved up Tehran's ass could do some good.

ACPlayer · #32 10-28-2005, 03:47 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I think you are reading too much into those poll questions and answers. But no point arguing about it I guess.

[/ QUOTE ]

Better to read polls than your (or someone else's opinion). Still waiting for the polls you cited -- but, as usual, not holding my breath.

Arnfinn Madsen · #33 10-28-2005, 09:38 AM

[ QUOTE ]
As far as I know, none of the detainees at Gitmo are innocent. They may be of little intelligence value because they are low-level fighters, but they took up arms against American troops.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, posting pretending to be knowingly about this without even knowing about the basic facts. A lot of the detainees were never fighting against American troops, many were handed over from allies. One link (from a official US government site):

[ QUOTE ]
Q Mr. Secretary, can you tell us is there a temporary restraining order still in place preventing the military from transferring any detainees outside of Guantanamo, and does that only affect the 38 non-enemy combatants?

SEC. ENGLAND: Well, I know that -- I'm not sure there's a restraining order, but, of course, I think it has been reported we have Uighurs from China that we have not returned to China, even though, you know, some of those have been deemed, even before these hearings, to be non-enemy combatants because of concerns and issues about returning them to their country. And I understand the State Department has been working with other countries to see if we can have them go to another country, and my understanding is that's still -- they're still in Guantanamo, so that issue is unresolved. So I – at a minimum I know the Uighurs are there and have not been returned to China.

[/ QUOTE ]
Link

MMMMMM · #34 10-28-2005, 11:50 AM

ACPlayer, even the poll you cited does not inelecutably support all of your stated conclusions about what the Iraqis want. Try reading the poll questions and answers more narrowly.

Also, there is nothing in your poll to contravert my point that many Iraqis BOTH want the occupation to be over AND are afraid of being left alone to face the insurgents before they are ready to do so effectively.

#35 10-28-2005, 01:49 PM

From your own seven month old link

[ QUOTE ]
Q When they get released, are they free, or are they released to the government for further prosecution or whatever?

SEC. ENGLAND: No, they're free. I mean, they're released. They're free. We just move them to a different area on Guantanamo. Arrangements are made to send them home.

Q Do they get any special privileges once they have been designated not an enemy combatant? Better quarters or better food?

SEC. ENGLAND: It's a better environment, I believe, it is a different area than they've been in, while waiting to be transferred. And we do that as quickly as we can. State has to do it. They have to make arrangements, transportation. So there's some finite time involved to do all that.

Q And how much time have they been there? A month? Weeks?

SEC ENGLAND: Different times. I think some maybe have been there as much as two months. You know, again, it's up to State along with the country. Sometimes it's just difficult to arrange transportation. The delay is not necessarily on us, it's really on the country they're being returned to. But we try to move them out as quickly as we can.

[/ QUOTE ]

38 out of 578 is not "a lot." Your posts indicate you live in some kind of a fantasy land where you expect everything the US does to be perfect. I can't take your posts seriously anymore so feel free to keep spewing the hate.

Arnfinn Madsen · #36 10-28-2005, 02:32 PM

[ QUOTE ]
From your own seven month old link

[ QUOTE ]
Q When they get released, are they free, or are they released to the government for further prosecution or whatever?

SEC. ENGLAND: No, they're free. I mean, they're released. They're free. We just move them to a different area on Guantanamo. Arrangements are made to send them home.

Q Do they get any special privileges once they have been designated not an enemy combatant? Better quarters or better food?

SEC. ENGLAND: It's a better environment, I believe, it is a different area than they've been in, while waiting to be transferred. And we do that as quickly as we can. State has to do it. They have to make arrangements, transportation. So there's some finite time involved to do all that.

Q And how much time have they been there? A month? Weeks?

SEC ENGLAND: Different times. I think some maybe have been there as much as two months. You know, again, it's up to State along with the country. Sometimes it's just difficult to arrange transportation. The delay is not necessarily on us, it's really on the country they're being returned to. But we try to move them out as quickly as we can.

[/ QUOTE ]

38 out of 578 is not "a lot." Your posts indicate you live in some kind of a fantasy land where you expect everything the US does to be perfect. I can't take your posts seriously anymore so feel free to keep spewing the hate.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even if the link is old, it shows the errors of your argument that those who are detained have necessarily fought with US soldiers. Some are i.e. Taleban soldiers who fought against Northern Alliance soldiers. Not saying that those should not be detained, but your whole 1st post showed that you have next to no knowledge about the situation and before making opinions a minimum amount of knowledge should be aquired.

In addition it shows that there are innocent prisoners there, not being released. This has been confirmed by US authorities by several occasion. I.e., they contacted Norwegian authorities (my home country), and specifically asked if Norway would accept Guantanamo detainees to be released and granted asylum in Norway. In communication with the Norwegian authorities they stated that these prisoners did not constitute any danger to US or allies. Still they are kept in a prison.

I can discuss with Gamblor, MMMMMM, Vulturesrow or others with whom I disagree very much because it is interesting to see how they interpret the facts in a different context due to difference in values, perspectives or which sources they trust. Then I listen to what they say (accepting it or not)and they hopefully listen to what I say (accepting it or not) You make arguments that are not backed up by facts or experiences interpreted one way or other, they are just based on your guessing of what is going on; and you basically close your ears when your opponents are talking.

#37 10-28-2005, 03:32 PM

In a previous post I stated what I thought to be true and asked if anyone could provide a link showing otherwise. You did provide a link showing I was incorrect. The link you provided was old, but it showed the US trying to rectify the situation. Compare that with what you wrote the US should be doing...

[ QUOTE ]
-Release those who are proven innocent. There have been prisoners there which is proven innocent but which have not been released since the US does not know where to send them. They did not dare to release them at Guantanamo since they were considered to have become a security risk due to the treatment they received. I think they deserve compensation and US citizenship if US cannot find any other place for them.

[/ QUOTE ]

The very link provided by you shows what you originally wrote is completely wrong. The reason I wrote that I couldn't take you seriously anymore is because you knowingly provided a link showing the opposite of what you wrote the US is doing. The quote of yours above reeks of anti-American hatred if you knew the situation was different than you stated.

I don't read the politics forum because I want to see a bunch of people agreeing with each other. I want to see different points of view on all the issues. But if at first you indicate the US is not releasing people from Guantanamo Bay and then you provide a link showing the exact opposite, how can I take what you say as anything but a total bias against the US regardless of the truth?

ACPlayer · #38 10-28-2005, 11:06 PM

Still waiting for the polls you read.

Arnfinn Madsen · #39 10-28-2005, 11:12 PM

[ QUOTE ]
In a previous post I stated what I thought to be true and asked if anyone could provide a link showing otherwise. You did provide a link showing I was incorrect. The link you provided was old, but it showed the US trying to rectify the situation. Compare that with what you wrote the US should be doing...

[ QUOTE ]
-Release those who are proven innocent. There have been prisoners there which is proven innocent but which have not been released since the US does not know where to send them. They did not dare to release them at Guantanamo since they were considered to have become a security risk due to the treatment they received. I think they deserve compensation and US citizenship if US cannot find any other place for them.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you trying to ignore what the link and other media reports says? They have found them innocent, but they are still not releasing them. My claim stands valid. Your post is among the silliest I have read in this forum.

#40 10-28-2005, 11:21 PM

Your link is seven months old. The link says it may take up to two months to return the people to their countries. It is fair to assume from your link they have now been released. Your posts appear to say that the US is intentionally trying not to release these people and then you provide evidence that the US is doing the exact opposite. This is why it looks as if your contradicting yourself. If you have more current info please post it.