As usual you have twisted reality to suit your flimsy position. These detainees are not POWs. The US government does not give them POW status or rights. The 'historical moral imperative practice' you speak of has not been implemented by the US in Gitmo. Instead they stripped them of their legal right to habeas corpus with the Detainee Treatment Act, against a Supreme court ruling I might add, and detain them as something sub-human -a combatant/non-POW. So, as required under the Geneva Conventions, unless they are charged with criminal offenses or could face serious human rights abuses, non-POWs are to be returned to their home countries.rogerstaubach said:Typical self-serving response as usual *d*. But we have come to expect this sort of "foolishness" and obsfucation of reality.
I note that you are unable to answer my question as to 'criminal charges', charges', 'disposition of charges', 'criminal courts' etc. Why?.....
.......because the vast majority of these detainees are enemy combatants captured on the battelfield and have been detained to PREVENT them from returning to the battlefield and engaging in hostile actions against coalition/ Afghani security forces, and ordinary civilians. This a historical moral imperative practiced throughtout centuries of warfare.
Now wait a minute. They are not POWs, but you say they have the status review rights of POWs. Nonsense, they are classified by the US government as enemy combatants with no rights. But a status review tribunal was created as a farce. And it is under these ambiguous conditions that puts the military review tribunal and commission under question by the US courts as being legit. So I ask again, there must be war crime charges against these detainees to have held them this long? Where are they? If there are none, and they're not POWs, than they are INNOCENT and free to go.These detainees regularly have their detention and threat level reviewed and if they are deemed not to be a threat they have been and will be released. This is what is happening. Nothing and I mean NOTHING that you deludedly croon about regarding "innocent" is valid and factual. No charges, just enemy combatants detained to prevent them from killing and if their threat is now deemed low they are released. These are the facts.
By whom? Who determines when non-POWs/non-civilians/sub-humans are free to go? A US military tribunal that is under question by US courts as being legitimate for such proceedings?Detainees do not have to charged with any crimes buddyboy. Those captured on the battlefield and whose actions do not amount to crimes can be detained till their threat level is deemed to be minimal or until the cessation of hostilities. You don't like it......to friggin bad.
That's for a judge and jury to decide. No one cares about your prejudice opinions.And those who have been captured and detained and whose actions rise to the level of crimes are being charged accordingly.
These 'innocent, and at the wrong place and wrong time detainees' do not meet the requirements of the Geneva Convention regarding POWs. These dickheads do not meet the requirements of 'civilians' and thus should not require the protection of the full scope of American jursiprudence. Why should they be afforded the mountains and mountains of civilian protection when they have engaged actions hostile to the system they seek to destroy?
Last edited: