Post Reply
Page 3 of 3  •  Prev 1 2 3
2 years ago  ::  Jun 04, 2012 - 9:31AM #21
Fodaoson
Posts: 11,158

Jun 4, 2012 -- 8:54AM, Unworthyone wrote:


Jun 4, 2012 -- 3:06AM, Fodaoson wrote:


 The Present detention camps and only persons detained in the battle area are held.



And where exactly is the "battle area" in the War on Terrorism?  As I understand it, the U.S. now has laws that say all that is required to detain a person, including a U.S. citizen, is the accusation of being a terrorist.  No charges, no right to counsel, no habeas corpus, is required.  In fact, if I'm not mistaken, the government is not even required to acknowledge that a given person is even being held.  And this if for "indefinite detention."


Of course, even though we have these laws, this is the U.S.A., and no one would ever abuse such laws.




The battlefield of the War on terror the AO where American Military personnel are deployed, engaged in battle with another party . It is where American soldiers are dying and being wounded by gunfire IEDs, etc.


The military is not required to charge someone detained in a fire fight(combat) , Detained in a sweep of an AO . They can be detained until the end of hostilities or until acts of repatriation. The resonfo having the site off of American soil is to maintain military control. Evidence in the chaos of combat is is often outside the parameters of the court definitions. Soldiers in combat are thinking about survival and mission accomplishment not police work.


The laws you refer to are not intended to apply to opposing combatants. The US Constitution does not apply to areas outside of American or American States civil Jurisdiction.


Do you think tath Mexican Federal police in a gun battle with Drug cartel should have to say” before you shoot read him his Miranda rights, he might be and American drug smuggler.



Like it or not the War in Afghanistan is part of the war on terror, as was the insurgency portion of the Iraq war. It is an Congressional approved war and it is war. And even though Sherman said it 150 years ago it still applies “War is hell.

“I seldom make the mistake of arguing with people for whose opinions I have no respect.” Edward Gibbon
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 04, 2012 - 6:16PM #22
Unworthyone
Posts: 2,964

Jun 4, 2012 -- 9:31AM, Fodaoson wrote:



The battlefield of the War on terror the AO where American Military personnel are deployed, engaged in battle with another party . It is where American soldiers are dying and being wounded by gunfire IEDs, etc.


The military is not required to charge someone detained in a fire fight(combat) , Detained in a sweep of an AO . They can be detained until the end of hostilities or until acts of repatriation. The resonfo having the site off of American soil is to maintain military control. Evidence in the chaos of combat is is often outside the parameters of the court definitions. Soldiers in combat are thinking about survival and mission accomplishment not police work.


The laws you refer to are not intended to apply to opposing combatants. The US Constitution does not apply to areas outside of American or American States civil Jurisdiction.


Do you think tath Mexican Federal police in a gun battle with Drug cartel should have to say” before you shoot read him his Miranda rights, he might be and American drug smuggler.



Like it or not the War in Afghanistan is part of the war on terror, as was the insurgency portion of the Iraq war. It is an Congressional approved war and it is war. And even though Sherman said it 150 years ago it still applies “War is hell.




So tell me, when will there be "an end to hostilities"?


The War on Terrorism will never end.  There will never be an end to hostilities.  If some poor schmuck, like you or me, happens to get caught up in this mess,  he has no hope.  He has no chance to clear his name, no opportunity to confront his accusers, no opportunity to present a defense or see the evidence against him..  He will be shipped off to Gitmo, and that is the end of it.  And we know no one is ever falsely accused of being a terrorist ... except maybe this guy.  Or this one.  Or this one.


You say the War only exists where American soldiers are deployed.  That is nonsense.  Suspected terrorists are picked up and/or killed all around the world and in our own backyards every day.

I never consider a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend.  Thomas Jefferson

Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.
Albert Einstein

You can get anything you want out of life if you will just help enough other people get what they want. Zig Ziglar

http://www.nytimes.com/1991/03/29/opinion/why-i-m-for-the-brady-bill.html
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 04, 2012 - 9:03PM #23
Fodaoson
Posts: 11,158

Jun 4, 2012 -- 6:16PM, Unworthyone wrote:


Jun 4, 2012 -- 9:31AM, Fodaoson wrote:



The battlefield of the War on terror the AO where American Military personnel are deployed, engaged in battle with another party . It is where American soldiers are dying and being wounded by gunfire IEDs, etc.


The military is not required to charge someone detained in a fire fight(combat) , Detained in a sweep of an AO . They can be detained until the end of hostilities or until acts of repatriation. The resonfo having the site off of American soil is to maintain military control. Evidence in the chaos of combat is is often outside the parameters of the court definitions. Soldiers in combat are thinking about survival and mission accomplishment not police work.


The laws you refer to are not intended to apply to opposing combatants. The US Constitution does not apply to areas outside of American or American States civil Jurisdiction.


Do you think tath Mexican Federal police in a gun battle with Drug cartel should have to say” before you shoot read him his Miranda rights, he might be and American drug smuggler.



Like it or not the War in Afghanistan is part of the war on terror, as was the insurgency portion of the Iraq war. It is an Congressional approved war and it is war. And even though Sherman said it 150 years ago it still applies “War is hell.




So tell me, when will there be "an end to hostilities"?


The War on Terrorism will never end.  There will never be an end to hostilities.  If some poor schmuck, like you or me, happens to get caught up in this mess,  he has no hope.  He has no chance to clear his name, no opportunity to confront his accusers, no opportunity to present a defense or see the evidence against him..  He will be shipped off to Gitmo, and that is the end of it.  And we know no one is ever falsely accused of being a terrorist ... except maybe this guy.  Or this one.  Or this one.


You say the War only exists where American soldiers are deployed.  That is nonsense.  Suspected terrorists are picked up and/or killed all around the world and in our own backyards every day.



 You changed your questions. In a previous posts you asked

And where exactly is the "battle area" in the War on Terrorism? 



So tell me, when will there be "an end to hostilities"?


The War on Terrorism will never end.  There will never be an end to hostilities.  If some poor schmuck, like you or me, happens to get caught up in this mess,  he has no hope.  He has no chance to clear his name, no opportunity to confront his accusers, no opportunity to present a defense or see the evidence against him..  He will be shipped off to Gitmo, and that is the end of it.  And we know no one is ever falsely accused of being a terrorist ... except maybe this guy.  Or this one.  Or this one.


You say the War only exists where American soldiers are deployed.  That is nonsense.  Suspected terrorists are picked up and/or killed all around the world and in our own backyards every day.



 You changed your questions. In a previous posts you asked

And where exactly is the "battle area" in the War on Terrorism? 

I told you where the battle area is; it is where solders are deployed and combat occurs.


War is not just the military arm of country ; War involves the diplomatic(state Department) corps, the Intelligence sector(CIA,DIA,NSC), the Law Enforcement Agencies(FBI, ICE, Local, State police,) , . When the military takes prisoners or detains persons, how they are detained and treated is ruled by where they are captured, what the detainees status is; When LEA detains a person, the area is a crime scene, and the US constitution and State of Jurisdiction Laws determine the detained s rights, treatment and status .


In the WOT each segment will be ended by differing circumstance. Status of forces agreements, treaties, congressional and Executive action will determine the after actions.


The “war on terror” will evolve into domestic police concerns . WWII ended military hostilities with treaties. The diplomatic and criminal acts of war continues even today. Ex Nazis are prosecuted for war crimes, Japanese American citizens and families of those held in detention camps are receiving compensation on case by case basis.


The American Vietnam war ended in 1973 and The Vietnam war ended in 1975, This week the US Sec of Def is seeking to open negotiations to use Cam Ranh Bay as a port of call for US Navy warships. Vietnam is open to such an arrangement in order to have a friendly US counter the historicaly hostile China.



You are trying to get a simple solution based on your political opinions rather than seeing the whole I complex situation.

“I seldom make the mistake of arguing with people for whose opinions I have no respect.” Edward Gibbon
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 04, 2012 - 9:18PM #24
Roodog
Posts: 10,168

Jun 4, 2012 -- 3:06AM, Fodaoson wrote:


I could not remember any of the names of Japanese internment camps, Manzanar, being the most infamous and one movies were made about.   Concentration Camps were forced labor camps and Death camps.  None of the internee were forced to work ; Some did work  and earned wages. No internees were sent to gas chambers or firing squads in masse.  Innocent Japanese citizens were deprived of possessions, property and civil rights and interned and never compensated.  It was bad policy, wronged US citizens but they were not concentration camps.  The Present detention camps and only persons detained in the battle area are held.


The feeling about theWWII Japenes  is  nearly being somewhat repeated against  contemporary American Muslims  dn citizens of Middle Eastern descent    The people of  Murfreesboro  Tennessee do not want a Mosque built an Some Church leaders have  said that Islam should not have first amendment rights.


The  Republican in CONGRESS do not want the Guantanamo detainees moved to the US because the detainees would have constitutional rights 





When the term Concentration Camp was coined, it referred to the detention centers set up by the British during the Boer War in which they detained Afrikaner civilians to isolate the Boers from their support base. While it was not meant by the British to be harsh to the civilians, they ended up with horrible conditions to the detainees.


While the Amercan camps for Japanese American civilians did not have the ghastly features of the Nazi camps, they did represent a deprivation of liberties which was contrary to our laws, it was a mass incarceration of citizens, not for what they did but who they were, without any due process of law. These people were uprooted from their homes, and was forced to relinquish their homes, possessions and businesses and forced to abide under prison conditions.


 

For those who have faith, no explanation is neccessary.
For those who have no faith, no explanation is possible.

St. Thomas Aquinas

If one turns his ear from hearing the Law, even his prayer is an abomination. Proverbs 28:9
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 04, 2012 - 10:56PM #25
Fodaoson
Posts: 11,158

Jun 4, 2012 -- 9:18PM, Roodog wrote:


Jun 4, 2012 -- 3:06AM, Fodaoson wrote:


I could not remember any of the names of Japanese internment camps, Manzanar, being the most infamous and one movies were made about.   Concentration Camps were forced labor camps and Death camps.  None of the internee were forced to work ; Some did work  and earned wages. No internees were sent to gas chambers or firing squads in masse.  Innocent Japanese citizens were deprived of possessions, property and civil rights and interned and never compensated.  It was bad policy, wronged US citizens but they were not concentration camps.  The Present detention camps and only persons detained in the battle area are held.


The feeling about theWWII Japenes  is  nearly being somewhat repeated against  contemporary American Muslims  dn citizens of Middle Eastern descent    The people of  Murfreesboro  Tennessee do not want a Mosque built an Some Church leaders have  said that Islam should not have first amendment rights.


The  Republican in CONGRESS do not want the Guantanamo detainees moved to the US because the detainees would have constitutional rights 





When the term Concentration Camp was coined, it referred to the detention centers set up by the British during the Boer War in which they detained Afrikaner civilians to isolate the Boers from their support base. While it was not meant by the British to be harsh to the civilians, they ended up with horrible conditions to the detainees.


While the Amercan camps for Japanese American civilians did not have the ghastly features of the Nazi camps, they did represent a deprivation of liberties which was contrary to our laws, it was a mass incarceration of citizens, not for what they did but who they were, without any due process of law. These people were uprooted from their homes, and was forced to relinquish their homes, possessions and businesses and forced to abide under prison conditions.


 




I agree with your post and have mentioned or alluded to the Japanese American situation as not morally or constitutionally acceptable . I knew of the Boer origin of the term. Few Americans know much about that war. Since Naziism and WWII, concentration camp as taken on the meaning of the Nazi Death camps. I THINK some use “concentration camp” in and inflammatory manner,


The detention camps for illegal aliens near the Texas/Mexican border are nothing close to concentration camps . There are crime problems as in any facilities that house Criminals . Some illegal immigrants are criminals and are detained for immigration related activities. They are in the centers awaiting deportation and commit crimes against other deportees.


I n know you have not mentioned the ICE centers but in the detainment posts some have lumped all confinement issues in the same barrel.


I also believe that a noticeable number of Americans would favor internment for Muslims. That would be as wrong and as unconstitutional as was the Japanese American issue.

“I seldom make the mistake of arguing with people for whose opinions I have no respect.” Edward Gibbon
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 05, 2012 - 11:04AM #26
Roodog
Posts: 10,168

Jun 4, 2012 -- 10:56PM, Fodaoson wrote:


Jun 4, 2012 -- 9:18PM, Roodog wrote:


Jun 4, 2012 -- 3:06AM, Fodaoson wrote:


I could not remember any of the names of Japanese internment camps, Manzanar, being the most infamous and one movies were made about.   Concentration Camps were forced labor camps and Death camps.  None of the internee were forced to work ; Some did work  and earned wages. No internees were sent to gas chambers or firing squads in masse.  Innocent Japanese citizens were deprived of possessions, property and civil rights and interned and never compensated.  It was bad policy, wronged US citizens but they were not concentration camps.  The Present detention camps and only persons detained in the battle area are held.


The feeling about theWWII Japenes  is  nearly being somewhat repeated against  contemporary American Muslims  dn citizens of Middle Eastern descent    The people of  Murfreesboro  Tennessee do not want a Mosque built an Some Church leaders have  said that Islam should not have first amendment rights.


The  Republican in CONGRESS do not want the Guantanamo detainees moved to the US because the detainees would have constitutional rights 





When the term Concentration Camp was coined, it referred to the detention centers set up by the British during the Boer War in which they detained Afrikaner civilians to isolate the Boers from their support base. While it was not meant by the British to be harsh to the civilians, they ended up with horrible conditions to the detainees.


While the Amercan camps for Japanese American civilians did not have the ghastly features of the Nazi camps, they did represent a deprivation of liberties which was contrary to our laws, it was a mass incarceration of citizens, not for what they did but who they were, without any due process of law. These people were uprooted from their homes, and was forced to relinquish their homes, possessions and businesses and forced to abide under prison conditions.


 




I agree with your post and have mentioned or alluded to the Japanese American situation as not morally or constitutionally acceptable . I knew of the Boer origin of the term. Few Americans know much about that war. Since Naziism and WWII, concentration camp as taken on the meaning of the Nazi Death camps. I THINK some use “concentration camp” in and inflammatory manner,


The detention camps for illegal aliens near the Texas/Mexican border are nothing close to concentration camps . There are crime problems as in any facilities that house Criminals . Some illegal immigrants are criminals and are detained for immigration related activities. They are in the centers awaiting deportation and commit crimes against other deportees.


I n know you have not mentioned the ICE centers but in the detainment posts some have lumped all confinement issues in the same barrel.


I also believe that a noticeable number of Americans would favor internment for Muslims. That would be as wrong and as unconstitutional as was the Japanese American issue.





My concern Fodaoson, is that the facilities in question will be expanded in number and scope. Dachau, Belsen Bergen and Buchenwald were set up as penitentaries in 1930's Germany for all manner of offenders against Germany's laws. These camps were expanded and more camps were built during the course of the war.


Many of the American camps are built and operated by private contractors(like Haliburton)  who stand to gain if more people are detained and for longer periods of time. Furthermore private contractors are not as bound under Constitutional restraints as the Military and Law Enforcement communities.


 

For those who have faith, no explanation is neccessary.
For those who have no faith, no explanation is possible.

St. Thomas Aquinas

If one turns his ear from hearing the Law, even his prayer is an abomination. Proverbs 28:9
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 05, 2012 - 1:00PM #27
Fodaoson
Posts: 11,158

I understand that concern. I, for the most part, am not in favor Governmental privatization for s similar reason. Government is constrained by our constitution and electorate and Corporations are not. Some want privatize everything possible but privatization removes restraints from Government a lets corporations have power. The Use of for profit private armed contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan caused a lot of problems , the CIA uses contracts and can then keep it quite. Instead of decreasing government privatization increases power by reducing the constraints . It increases the cost of government in long run because profit is the added on top. Private enterprise “waste” is not much less than government wast. It is just less scrutinized and hidden.

“I seldom make the mistake of arguing with people for whose opinions I have no respect.” Edward Gibbon
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 3 of 3  •  Prev 1 2 3
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook