[rlpw]

Originally Posted by Giligan

Don't blame me. 99.9 % of all Americans are firmly against Guantanamo, as far as I can tell.

Hmmmm, am I against detaining people whose sole purpose in life is to see me dead? Guess I'm that .1%

[RLacey]

Gah. I've just realised that a book I got out of the local library was due back yesterday. So I now have my first ever library fine .

As for Guantanamo bay, I'm kind of sad that you hold that position rlpw. I don't think that many people are against detaining criminals, but the conditions at Guantanamo appear to be pretty shocking. And that I do have a problem with, no matter who is stuck there.

[rlpw]

Originally Posted by RLacey

Gah. I've just realised that a book I got out of the local library was due back yesterday. So I now have my first ever library fine .

As for Guantanamo bay, I'm kind of sad that you hold that position rlpw. I don't think that many people are against detaining criminals, but the conditions at Guantanamo appear to be pretty shocking. And that I do have a problem with, no matter who is stuck there.

You know the funny thing is that if they were detained in there own country.... wait, if they were in there own country they would be dead by now. Nevermind

[RLacey]

And your point is? Just because something is - arguably - a lesser evil, doesn't stop it from being evil. Me punching you in the face wouldn't be as bad as me hacking you to death with a machete, but I'm fairly sure that you wouldn't want either to happen .

Equally, keeping people in inhumane conditions doesn't suddenly become more acceptable just because those conditions are better than they'd get back home.

Note that the whole punching/killing is just an example, and isn't meant as a threat. Honest!

[rlpw]

I understand your position but I have to put it in a different light. If you were to punch me in the face would you expect me to lock you in a little room and throw away the key or put you up in the Ritz? I actually know fellows who served in Guantanamo and the prisoners there are treated as well or better than prisoners in our own prisons (who have it WAY to well if you ask me).

And as for punching me I guess I'll have to go UN and call a conference to tell you to stop or we will tell you to stop again louder.

[Giligan]

What saddens me is that there are innocents being held, and even torturted, there. To think that an innocent civilian is whisked off the street one day, hauled to a prison, interrogated about crimes they never commited, and being treated as less than human is quite unthinkable, especially considering that the US in the past has been firmly against those things.

We invaded, and destroyed a country without provokation. For what? To instate democracy? If I were to hire a few goons, barge into someone's home, and declare war because I didn't think that these strangers were keeping their house as spotless as I think it should be, I would be doing the same thing as America. Perhaps it was because of oil, considering the current state of OPEC and the volatile Iran situation. In the days following 9/11, the people of the world, even in Tehran, in Caracas, marched in torchlight ceremonies to honor the dead in the Trade Towers, and to protest terrorism. Now, 5 years later, Americans are hated by those same persons. The US gov't certainly did something wrong, and that can't be denied.

But I lament the hateful state of feelings towards the US, because for any nation to hate another because of borders, or color of skin, or dialect, or to take pride in their own with the belief they are a better race of human, is the ultimate act of small-minded foolishness. I say this without fear of being called "Dumb Yank" because I have already stated my feeling on the war and the American government.


But enough of my long-windedness. On with the Thread!

[Jelena]

Originally Posted by rlpw

You know the funny thing is that if they were detained in there own country.... wait, if they were in there own country they would be dead by now. Nevermind

I don't think you have the slightest idea from which countries these people are. There was a Swedish citizen Mehdi Ghezali in there as well who actually got out after a lot of negotiation with the US governement. I could link to an article where he explains the torture he went through. But there's really no point since you can't read Swedish. He went through moderns methods of torture that don't cause marks or visible wounds. Interrupted sleep, hours of being chained in awkward positions, hours of meaningless interogation, extremly bright lights, extremely loud music etc. I think it's called stress and duress.

[RLacey]

There were also a whole load of British people there. In fact, I'm not sure that there aren't still some there that could legitimately claim British citizenship.

[SSH]

14 people there are held there for wearing a certain brand of digital watch. And another 14 people were held there as minors

[AFGNCAAP]

Honestly, I don't think nationalities of the Guantanamo prisoners, or even whether or not they are guilty of anything, should be an argument here. The way they are treated would be is a disgrace to any administration, let alone to one that self-proclaimedly represents the democracy and freedom in the war of the ideologies. Everything else is just a consequence of that.

[Jelena]

Originally Posted by AFGNCAAP

Honestly, I don't think nationalities of the Guantanamo prisoners, or even whether or not they are guilty of anything should be an argument here.

It was a reply to rlpw's statement that he though he knew what would happen to these prisoners if they were detained in their home countries. I don't think Americans in general even know where these prisoners come from.
I do agree that the main issue to discuss is the way the US governement are treating prisoners.

[UPtimist]

Originally Posted by Jelena

Please give us a hint now, I'm going to have trouble falling asleep if I'm going to rack my brain over it all night.

You know, I seriously doubt it has ever been run in Sweden...

Anyways, I'll say that as it proceeded a bit later into the seasons, an actor (or actress) that is in Desperate Housewives nowadays (at least at the point where it is in Finland) became a staple character.

I doubt even almost anyone in USA would know this...

So that's why only those who know it are worhy of being called adversaries. Of course now that I've given a hint, the rating is lower...

[Jatsie]

Melrose Place!

[stepurhan]

I'm intrigued by both rlpw's stance and the arguments against it.

If someone is intending to blow up civilians then I think it is better that they are prevented from doing that. Whether the conditions are good or bad inside the prison is an entirely separate point (and since no-one here is claiming to have personally seen inside, a difficult one to argue) If you can prevent the deaths of many by the incarceration of one then that must be a good thing.

The problem I have with Guantanamo Bay (and my own government's push for 90-day detention orders) is these are both intended, not for terrorists but for terror suspects. This is where I find rlpw's staunch defence so odd. We only know the people incarcerated in Guantanamo Bay are terrorists because governments tell us they are. They haven't actually been convicted of anything (yet). This is the same government that rlpw wishes to carry arms to defend himself against. It's this demand by governments that we trust them not to lock up innocent people (by accident or design) that I object to.

I guess I'd always rather see a guilty person walk free than have an innocent person suffer.

[Jelena]

Originally Posted by UPtimist

You know, I seriously doubt it has ever been run in Sweden...

Anyways, I'll say that as it proceeded a bit later into the seasons, an actor (or actress) that is in Desperate Housewives nowadays (at least at the point where it is in Finland) became a staple character.

It's funny. I have this notion that I've recently seen (on TV) a man sitting on his heels, looking slighly up into the camera saying: I decide who lives and dies.
Could it be an episode of Wire in the blood with Tony Hill



I don't watch Desperate Housewives so that clue didn't help me much.

[Jatsie]

Originally Posted by Jelena

I don't watch Desperate Housewives.

Heathen!

[Jelena]

Originally Posted by Jat316sob

Heathen!

Not my style! At all!

[AFGNCAAP]

For the record, by "the way they are treated", I did refer also to the fact of being kept there for months/years without trial. That's why I said everything else is the consequence of that. If you imprison people for suspected, unspecified crimes it's no wonder many of them turn out to be innocent, for example.

The tortures* only add an injury to an insult, so to speak.

*Or "alleged" tortures, if you will - as stepurhan noted, I haven't been inside. But after the case of Abu Ghraib photos, I see no reason to doubt the accounts of people like the Swedish citizen Jelena mentioned. I mean, what he's been through seems tame in comparison.

[stepurhan]

Originally Posted by AFGNCAAP

For the record, by "the way they are treated", I did refer also to the fact of being kept there for months/years without trial.

Apologies for not taking that on board.

*Or "alleged" tortures, if you will - as stepurhan noted, I haven't been inside. But after the case of Abu Ghraib photos, I see no reason to doubt the accounts of people like the Swedish citizen Jelena mentioned. I mean, what he's been through seems tame in comparison.

My intention was to separate the arguments. Whether it is reasonable to lock up people who it has been proved (as opposed to alleged) were planning terrorist attacks is a different issue to how such people are subsequently treated. I also think that there is too much evidence from different sources to say that abuse hasn't happened (though I'm not in a position to say exactly how much or of what kind)

If we're prepared to inflict suffering on them in the same way they want to inflict suffering on us, how can we say we're better?

[stepurhan]

Time to break up all this serious talk with a gentle interlude, courtesy of the Darwin Awards.

THE ARMY'S A BLAST
Confirmed True by Darwin

(6 May 2004, Ukraine) Piling up live artillery is grueling work, so it
makes perfect sense that a group of soldiers would take a cigarette break
at lunchtime. The warehouse was filled with 92,000 tons of ammunition --
until the soldiers lit up their ciggies and inhaled deeply, ignoring
warnings that smoking can cause cancer. They flicked the butts away and
went back to work. The glowing embers of the tobacco butts acted like slow
fuses, which started a small fire that nobody noticed until it ignited a
chain reaction of massive explosions.

The explosions lasted for a week, tossing debris as far as 25 miles away,
destroying buildings in a two-mile radius, and forcing the evacuation of
thousands of nearby residents. Red-hot shrapnel set off additional fires in
nearby towns and ruptured a minor gas pipeline. Total damage from the smoke
break was estimated at $750 million.

Miraculously, only one of the soldiers at the arsenal died in the
disaster. Six soldiers were charged with "grossly neglecting the fire
safety rules and smoking on the ammunition site."

http://darwinawards.com/darwin/darwin2004-08.html