Active Users:354 Time:18/06/2025 04:25:17 AM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
And I've responded to yours Libby Send a noteboard - 24/11/2009 04:57:58 AM
I am not defending the Bush Administration or its abysmal policies, which did lead us to the position we are in today.

However, there is no reason we should spend the money associated with a Federal trial if we can have a radically less expensive military tribunal pursue the matter.


I’ve already stated my reasons why a Militiary tribunal in Mohammed’s case would do more harm than good. The fact that it would be a PR boon for al Qeada is undeniable, I prefer not doing them that favor. Not only that, but as I stated and as the recent history shows the tribunals don’t even work that well.

The attorney general made a different call on Mohammed than the Bush administration did. The wisdom of that judgment will be determined by future events. But none of you are helping your case by understating the criminal justice system's capacities, overstating the military system's virtues and bumper-stickering a reasonable decision.
Reply to message
No need to interrogate Osama bin Laden? beckstcw - 20/11/2009 12:48:27 AM 1149 Views
oO uhm, what? LadyLorraine - 20/11/2009 12:54:13 AM 635 Views
If they're tried INSIDE the US, then yes, they are entitled to due process. Tom - 20/11/2009 01:44:08 AM 539 Views
Yeah, a lot of people were fuzzy on that till this started. The Name With No Man - 20/11/2009 09:30:39 AM 657 Views
on the other hand, we're more than willing to take them out back with a confession. LadyLorraine - 20/11/2009 06:34:12 PM 657 Views
As it seems we will. The Name With No Man - 24/11/2009 09:41:18 AM 633 Views
New York is now asking for $75 MILLION for the KSM trial Tom - 20/11/2009 01:43:26 AM 586 Views
Its to salve their conscinse Ryan - 20/11/2009 01:55:08 AM 595 Views
That's exactly the problem! beckstcw - 20/11/2009 01:58:37 AM 607 Views
If this trial were being held in any other country beckstcw - 20/11/2009 01:56:07 AM 603 Views
It's a terrible precedent no matter how you look at it. Tom - 20/11/2009 02:13:46 AM 630 Views
It IS a terrible precdent, hence you and others are citing it 65 years after WWII ended. Joel - 20/11/2009 09:23:45 AM 520 Views
Spare me the bullshit. Tom - 20/11/2009 01:57:16 PM 520 Views
I will if you will. Joel - 20/11/2009 02:55:30 PM 620 Views
No, you won't. You never will. Tom - 20/11/2009 06:14:30 PM 516 Views
You're putting your cart before your horse is the problem. Joel - 23/11/2009 05:40:46 AM 604 Views
No, that's not right. You don't read very closely. Tom - 23/11/2009 02:21:54 PM 527 Views
In this case my reading comprehension is more than adequate. Joel - 24/11/2009 09:16:39 AM 561 Views
You don't think this is a military struggle? Wow. beckstcw - 20/11/2009 02:52:26 PM 560 Views
Allow me to point out... Legolas - 20/11/2009 03:02:33 PM 550 Views
Well, Timothy McVeigh was in OUR Army. The Name With No Man - 20/11/2009 03:55:18 PM 669 Views
That's the thing, they aren't a terrorist group beckstcw - 20/11/2009 04:54:31 PM 589 Views
It would help if you would offer any argument in favour of your stance. Legolas - 20/11/2009 08:43:08 PM 532 Views
I only use the word army cause I can't think of a better one beckstcw - 21/11/2009 04:32:01 AM 553 Views
Yes. "Terrorist group". Legolas - 21/11/2009 12:02:04 PM 620 Views
Yeah I guess you're right beckstcw - 22/11/2009 01:34:34 AM 535 Views
Military struggles involve militaries. Joel - 20/11/2009 03:23:14 PM 707 Views
Once again, bullshit. Tom - 20/11/2009 06:09:31 PM 674 Views
Aaaah, I see; it's a question of who's the master, is it? Joel - 23/11/2009 07:47:43 AM 689 Views
You're wasting your time Tom - 23/11/2009 02:24:57 PM 565 Views
This is wrong Isaac - 20/11/2009 07:41:35 PM 569 Views
We're a long way from the shore of Tripoli. Joel - 23/11/2009 05:59:19 AM 624 Views
Nevertheless, uniforms or a nation is not a requirement Isaac - 23/11/2009 03:09:22 PM 584 Views
Rightly or wrongly, I disagree. Joel - 24/11/2009 08:48:25 AM 628 Views
That is bad AgentOrange - 21/11/2009 12:31:04 AM 563 Views
You're not going far enough, man. Joel - 20/11/2009 11:03:08 AM 601 Views
Blah blah blah blah blah *NM* Tom - 20/11/2009 01:57:39 PM 256 Views
I just can't imagine how they expect to get a fair trial. Gher - 20/11/2009 03:17:28 AM 532 Views
The Code of Conduct Isaac - 20/11/2009 07:23:02 PM 643 Views
The mention of God is interesting. *NM* Ghavrel - 21/11/2009 05:24:14 AM 365 Views
Your little diatribe in the beginning only makes me glad... Libby - 22/11/2009 05:32:57 AM 683 Views
I understand your "jihadist narrative" beckstcw - 22/11/2009 06:36:41 PM 676 Views
No you don't Libby - 22/11/2009 11:16:18 PM 608 Views
Oh, so you know better than Army attorneys about Miranda rights? Tom - 22/11/2009 11:52:00 PM 647 Views
I find no mention of Miranda in that article. Joel - 23/11/2009 08:13:05 AM 650 Views
I can explain it to you right now if you want? Libby - 23/11/2009 08:21:48 AM 566 Views
Credible legal and moral justifications for not trying terrorists in civilian court: Tom - 23/11/2009 02:56:19 PM 620 Views
Re: Credible legal and moral justifications for not trying terrorists in civilian court: Libby - 24/11/2009 04:55:12 AM 760 Views
I'm glad that you will never be in a position where a decision you make can affect my life. beckstcw - 23/11/2009 12:27:35 AM 511 Views
Actually people of my thinking are already making decisions that affect your life. Libby - 23/11/2009 08:29:24 AM 645 Views
Please explain to me how military tribunals compromise my principles? beckstcw - 24/11/2009 02:54:18 AM 515 Views
And your little hyperbolic rant would make more sense if it were grounded in reality. Tom - 22/11/2009 11:47:17 PM 537 Views
Looks like we'll get a Not Guilty plea, and a defense focusing on condeming US foreign policy beckstcw - 23/11/2009 12:36:47 AM 765 Views
They'll publicly accuse us of tyranny and brutality in front of a jury and without our censorship. Joel - 23/11/2009 08:27:13 AM 662 Views
My main objection is the awful precedent set by trying prisoners of war here in America. beckstcw - 24/11/2009 02:57:13 AM 582 Views
"My main objection is the awful precedent set by trying prisoners of war here in America. " Joel - 24/11/2009 06:57:34 AM 592 Views
We've had Mohammed in custody for over 6 years... Libby - 23/11/2009 07:56:49 AM 610 Views
I've already responded to your absurd statements, but let me reiterate a few here Tom - 23/11/2009 02:59:09 PM 506 Views
And I've responded to yours Libby - 24/11/2009 04:57:58 AM 587 Views
It's not, at least for me, that we feel the civilian courts are inadequate beckstcw - 24/11/2009 05:28:51 AM 573 Views
Good analysis of the situation. Joel - 23/11/2009 08:17:01 AM 677 Views
It isn't about sending a message. It's about horrible war fighting strategy. beckstcw - 24/11/2009 02:59:31 AM 632 Views
No. It's about not using a horribly ineffective strategy just to send a message to terrorists. Joel - 24/11/2009 09:29:06 AM 548 Views
enemy combatants and terrorists imlad - 23/11/2009 08:03:25 PM 640 Views
They're not different because from the Third World, but because terrorists. Joel - 24/11/2009 08:09:13 AM 765 Views
not every soldier in history has worn a uniform imlad - 24/11/2009 11:00:34 PM 437 Views
One example would be Ethan Allen and his Green Mountain Boys imlad - 25/11/2009 06:23:08 PM 611 Views
Just for fun, let's call them fundamentalist vigilantes. *NM* Vodalus - 24/11/2009 11:12:09 PM 229 Views
Works for me. Joel - 01/12/2009 09:12:29 AM 601 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes