2559 replies to this topic

[Signals.Cpl]

If I am not mistaken, all other Western foreign nationals held in Guantanamo (UK, France, Spain...) have been repatriated many years ago.

How many of them killed a western soldier?

[g_bambino]

10 yr olds cannot legally go off to Afghanistan and volunteer to go into combat training... this was his fathers doing.

Who cares? He was 15 when he volunteered to go by himself - as in, sans papa - to Afghanistan and be with Al-Qaeda affiliates.

[carepov]

Are we talking about International laws or American laws?

Mainly international laws.

How is the west no following the law? Elaborate on that, I consider the west following the law as much as possible considering that the enemy in this case intentionally uses child soldiers, does not wear a uniform or distinguishing symbols, hides within and fires from crowds of civilians using them as a shield.

1. Rendition
2. Torture
3. Lack of due process
4. Illegal detention - effectively holding someone outside the law

IMO it does not matter what the enemy is doing, we should always follow the law

Any suggestions how to do this? The laws that we adhere to are the same laws that are used against us by our enemy.
us

It seems easy to me: don't render, don't torture, and treat all captors as POWs. What do you mean when you say laws are used against us by our enemy?

[carepov]

He is not nor was he ever a PoW, and how was he tortured?

How many of them killed a western soldier?

I do not know enough of the details to answer your questions - but I know that the US Supreme Court ruled that many ongoings at Guantanamo Bay were illegal. That was the point - the West is breaking the Law.

Edited by carepov, 27 July 2012 - 09:30 PM.

[wyly]

Who cares? He was 15 when he volunteered to go by himself - as in, sans papa - to Afghanistan and be with Al-Qaeda affiliates.

now you're lying, he was living in Afghanistan since 1996, he was
10 years old Khadr was a child soldier and Canada is a signatory to that policy that recognizes that...the facts may be inconvenient for you but I'm not going to let you get away with perpetuating the lie just because it doesn't mesh with your political slant...


criminal record? no problem he can get a job in the PMOs office!

Edited by wyly, 27 July 2012 - 10:38 PM.

[Signals.Cpl]

Mainly international laws.

Which once?

1. Rendition

?

2. Torture

Once again where is the proof? His word? Was he sleep deprived? Because if thats the case I have been tortured as well, many times at work and even more while in school.

3. Lack of due process

What was denied to him? He was charged and plead guilty to murder, case closed right?

4. Illegal detention - effectively holding someone outside the law

I don't consider Guantanamo Bay "outside the law", if it was truly so the Marines would be using the detainees as moving targets, give them no access to food, medicine, lawyers etc...

IMO it does not matter what the enemy is doing, we should always follow the law

Change the law, add new once where if you do not abide by the laws you will be prosecuted and held accountable for you actions. When they don't abide by the laws of war, once captured put them on trial, if found guilty execute them, kind of like what we(the allies) did at Nuremberg.

It seems easy to me: don't render, don't torture, and treat all captors as POWs.

If they don't qualify for POW status they don't get POW status. You want to abide by the laws? No POW status for illegal combatants, you don't meet the criteria you don't get the protection.

What do you mean when you say laws are used against us by our enemy?

1)When a terrorist is captured and promptly cries torture knowing full well that some bleeding heart fool in the west, will pick up the cause to liberate them.
2)Using that fact that we have to abide by Laws of War while they don't, which means they hide in the civilian population and fire from civilian locations
There are more but I am tired and will continue this tomorrow.

[Signals.Cpl]

I do not know enough of the details to answer your questions - but I know that the US Supreme Court ruled that many ongoings at Guantanamo Bay were illegal. That was the point - the West is breaking the Law.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Supreme court deals with domestic laws right? And please provide proof.

[Army Guy]

RICK:

I believe you hit the nail on the head here wyly, those in the military do lead sheltered lives. They really do think they're somehow better or more deserving than others and the country in it's misguided views have enabled them by giving them 'hero' status.

I don't know where this Sheltered lives crap comes from but please feel free to explain in detail,

As for your thinking we are better or more deserving than others your wrong, in fact we don't enjoy all the rights you take advantage of on a daily basis. Nor do we enjoy all the benifits you recieve as a Canadian citizen. and yes we do enjoy a few benifits thats not available to you, but they are few.

As for the Hero status i think you'll find thats being driven by the general public and not the military it self. nobody has asked them to line the streets and wave welcome back banners, or shake our hands at the airport when we arrive, or buy us a few Pints of beer at the local tavern....sorry thats all on them, but i think your statement was made out of envy..

You ever had DND move you when you were transferred?

I know for a fact that up until 2 years ago none of those movers had a background check done.

There's at least one major van lines who does the bulk of all dnd moves who only started insisting on background checks for all labour this year and that's been spotty at best because they can't find enough manpower to keep up with the work.

Yes i have been moved alot, and while they are hired by DND there is nothing stopping me from asking the moving company the same questions as i would to any contractor, and have not had one refuse yet. You are aware that crinmal back ground checks can be done on line with any computer access.

[Army Guy]

WYLY:

many sign up after high school other than mowing lawns working at timmies they've never had to really make a go of it in the real world, they don't get laid off, they don't have to compete for jobs, they don't worry about where their next cheque is coming from, they don't worry about medical/dental attention, everything is looked after by the state, it's the ultimate welfare job...

Your joking me right, perhaps you can show we a source on this new found knowledge of yours, in my case i was working on a farm during the summer when i was 14, cutting pulp during the summer and fall at 15. but your right they are not real jobs,most Military members do not make this a carear, and instead use this as a jumping off piont for their future. Again the leadership, ethics, job knowledge the military provides are what civilian companies are looking for.

As for competing lets see military has over 14,000 applicants a year and only take on 5000 no competing there, and with 64,000 members we compete for jobs internally every year... we can't get laid off perhaps you should check your facts again, members have been told they are no longer required, it was a huge issue during the 80 and 90's. not having to worry were your next pay check is coming from, ask some of those soldiers that were wounded in combat, dismebered or disfigured, ask they if they are still employed, no work mans comp for military members, and the pension they recieve i guess is ok if you like kraft dinner or hotdogs.....

Yes we get free medical treatment then again so do you under our great health care system... dental for members are covered as it is part of employing healthy members we still pay for family members and if you ever visted a military dentist you would not complain...

But your right it is a welfare job, one that we've signed on for unlimited liabilty, meaning i can be sentenced in a court of law for refusing to serve or charge that machine gun postion as order. your only worry is what exactly....I'm not saying my job is tougher than yours, but i refuse to say you got it tough and i should feel sorry for you and your circumstaces...after all we live in a country where the chioces you make you live with , you had the same oportunities as i had and could have choose the same path if you wanted...or for that matter been a doctor or lawyer, etc...

so someone right out of high school joining the military has little understanding of the real world, they continue to live in an entitled protected shell like they did when they lived with mom and dad...then they come on this forum and try lecture adults who have been finding their own way in life for decades on what the world is really like...

little understanding of the real world, i use to think that about civilians then i grew up, see i've serve with over 9 different tours of shit holes around the globe, i think i have a pretty goof perspective on what is going on and what man is capable of and as the average Canadian you sir live a shelter life, on made posiable by largely military pers. to say you have a better grip on reality is well BULLSHIT.

and ya there's that rambo "I'm a hero" fantasy...sorry no, doing a job they signed up to do and getting paid to do it doesn't make them a heroes, if they don't want the risk don't sign up...they're no more heroes than the fishermen who go out in their boats everyday risking their lives bringing in the fish we eat...

I'M going to chalk this one up to you don't like Military guys , maybe one of them pumped your wife or girlfriend not sure , but i do senase alot of envy on your part, but you do know the military does hire up until age 50 so perhaps there still is hope for you and your ego....As for the Rambo or calling us heros....you can call us what ever you want and it would not bother me one bit....but if you think that putting your life in danger when you don't have to is not a sign of couage then maybe you need to take a look at you standards again. they do it not for you they do these acts for comrads, or defenceless people....and its not for praise, or recongnition it's because they wanted to....And your right heros come in all forms any one imply so is full of shit.

One members comments or acts does not paint us all with the same brush, maybe take some time and readjust your comments or opinions.

[Argus]

Here is my source:
http://www.pch.gc.ca/cs-kc/arar/Arar_e.pdf

Again - this commission established that:
1.He was and still is an innocent man
2.He was tortured

What do you have to dispute these facts?

These are not established facts as no evidence has been presented to support them, including at the commission. The commission evidently made little effort to determine the validity of Arar's claims.

Where was Arar during the disputed time if not in Afghanistan? Pretty damned easy question to answer. So why hasn't he? And why didn't the commission even bother to ask?

Edited by Argus, 28 July 2012 - 08:17 AM.

[Argus]

10 yr olds cannot legally go off to Afghanistan and volunteer to go into combat training... this was his fathers doing.

Perhaps our manifestly incompetent immigration system should be altered to be more careful about the type of people it lets into Canada in future, hmm?

[eyeball]

So do we forgive all terrorists? I think it safe to assume the majority had a similar experience, after all.
Do we let all child abusers go because they were made that way by abuses in their youth?

Absolutely if they're still kids when they're taken into custody, and probably more often than you could possibly stomach even when they're adults.

[wyly]

Absolutely if they're still kids when they're taken into custody, and probably more often than you could possibly stomach even when they're adults.

it's all a political game, define your opponent as illegitimate and demonize them...one sides terrorist is the other sides freedom fighter...

the nazi's thought the resistance units of ww2 as terrorists,the west considered them brave heroes, Israel defines Palestinian resistance to occupation as terrorists, how is it any different?...Ghadaffi consider the irregular forces facing him illegal terrorists, the west defined them as freedom fighters, and supported them...I knew a former hitler youth member who the allies considered child soldiers as brainwashed victims, now because it' politically convenient to promote their own agenda child soldiers who engaged with western forces are identified as "terrorists" while others in africa who are not engaged in conflicts with western forces are defined as "child soldiers" and treated as such and rehabilitated...the hypocrisy is incredible and blatant but the public buys into the propaganda game and fall into line like obedient sheep buying into the government BS never questioning the inconsistencies...

it's hypocritical contradictions like that cause problems with the third world, our western governments claim moral superiority but do exactly opposite when it suits their own political interest....

[carepov]

These are not established facts as no evidence has been presented to support them, including at the commission. The commission evidently made little effort to determine the validity of Arar's claims.

Where was Arar during the disputed time if not in Afghanistan? Pretty damned easy question to answer. So why hasn't he? And why didn't the commission even bother to ask?

Yes they are established facts. There is no evidence that he is guilty or poses any threat.

Don't you believe in the concept innocent until proven guilty?

[carepov]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Supreme court deals with domestic laws right? And please provide proof.

Which once?

Once again where is the proof? His word? Was he sleep deprived? Because if thats the case I have been tortured as well, many times at work and even more while in school.

What was denied to him? He was charged and plead guilty to murder, case closed right?

I don't consider Guantanamo Bay "outside the law", if it was truly so the Marines would be using the detainees as moving targets, give them no access to food, medicine, lawyers etc...

Change the law, add new once where if you do not abide by the laws you will be prosecuted and held accountable for you actions. When they don't abide by the laws of war, once captured put them on trial, if found guilty execute them, kind of like what we(the allies) did at Nuremberg.

If they don't qualify for POW status they don't get POW status. You want to abide by the laws? No POW status for illegal combatants, you don't meet the criteria you don't get the protection.

I do not have the knowledge to provide proof that laws were broken, including torture, in Guantanamo and specifically in the case of Khadr. I trust my sources and think that detainees were processed illegally. You have your opinion and that's fine but let me ask you this: given that Guantanamo stinks of injustice was it a strategic blunder for the US to handle detainees the way they did?
Consider:
-Many credible sources are calling the processes illegal: Romeo Dallaire, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch... from wiki:
"The International Committee of the Red Cross has stated that, "Every person in enemy hands must have some status under international law: he is either a prisoner of war and, as such, covered by the Third Convention, a civilian covered by the Fourth Convention, [or] a member of the medical personnel of the armed forces who is covered by the First Convention. There is no intermediate status; nobody in enemy hands can fall outside the law.""
-Consider also the US admin led by Rumsfeld and Cheney were saying that water-boarding was not torture, and other "torture is OK" memos
-Consider that, from wiki:
“Red Cross inspectors accused the U.S. military of using "humiliating acts, solitary confinement, temperature extremes, use of forced positions" against prisoners. The inspectors concluded that "the construction of such a system, whose stated purpose is the production of intelligence, cannot be considered other than an intentional system of cruel, unusual and degrading treatment and a form of torture.””
-Consider Abu Ghraib
-Consider that Khadr was under the age of 16
-Consider that it has been over 10 years...

At best, the US handling of detainees is as innocent as OJ Simpson!

Regardless of the legalities, it stinks of injustice, has divided Western opinions and I suspect it has fuelled Taliban hatred of the West and helped in their recruitment. I can imagine jihadi’s saying: "The West has a double-standard fro Muslims and non-Muslims, due process for them and torture for us". It does not matter if it is true, the perception is their and the US Military created that perception. Why did they not just do like everyone suggested: classify detainees as POWs or non-POWs. Handle POWs as per Geneva, and try non-POWs in the US courts? Perhaps all detainees could have been classified as POWs.