BrainKing - Discussion boards (Politics)

Moderator: Vikings

Politics

Forum for discussing local and world politics and issues. All views are welcomed. Let your opinions be heard on current news and politics.

All standard guidelines apply to this board, No Flaming, No Taunting, No Foul Language,No sexual innuendos,etc..

As politics can be a volatile subject, please consider how you would feel if your comment were directed toward yourself.

Any post deemed to be in violation of guidelines will be deleted or edited without warning or notification. Any continued misbehavior will result in a ban or hidden status, so please play nice!!!

*"Moderators are here for a reason. If a moderator (or Global Moderator or Fencer) requests that a discussion on a certain subject to cease - for whatever reason - please respect these wishes. Failure to do so may result in being hidden, or banned."

List of discussion boards

Mode: Everyone can post

Show oldest messages first

26. January 2009, 02:31:58

Czuch

show this user posts | show thread | link

Pedro Martínez:

I have just sort of read 85 new posts, and i want to give a quick point of view...

First, there is a middle ground between a POW and an American civilian criminal destined for a normal trial afforded to American citizens.

Also, given the battle field circumstances, there is hardly the time and resources to give a thorough criminal investigation for every person detained on the battlefield.

It makes no sense to believe that in a traditional court of law you could actually convict anyone held in GTMO based on current rules of law in the US.

But they are also not traditional POWs, since they are not fighting under any countries army.... these are individual terrorists, placing themselves on a battlefield in a conflict they have no interest in, except in their terrorists activities.

Is your world really so static that you dont think it is okay to ever have anyone who doesnt fit into the traditional categories or either POW or normal civilian trial material???