History is written by the victors of war, so obviously the leaders of the most powerful nation on the planet will be telling us "how it is". With America deporting over 100 000 muslim men with no reason, detaining and interrogating "suspected terrorists" without charging them you are allowing your own government to go against the very ideals it says it's protecting. Every day you and I slowly lose freedoms so that we can find the ones "attacking our freedom", yet I don't feel any more or any less safer than before. There will always be people out there wanting to harm others for their cause, and we should be able to deal with it without sacrificing the ideals we live by. If the government can't find a way to fight this battle within the guidlines of their own laws and constitution then are they really fit to lead the country that was born out of this constitution?
2006-08-31 12:53:40 · 15 answers · asked by stopthefear 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Civic Participation
History will always repeat itself. Yesterday was Hitler. Today is America. Tomorrow could be someone else.
2006-08-31 12:55:27 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 6⤋
There was a time when many of us believed we had the moral high ground. Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo have lost us much credibility.
We need to abide by the UN Declaration of Human Rights, rediscover our humanism, hold to it, so that enemies fighting against us don't have to fear that we'll humiliate them or torture them if they surrender. Strength does not come from sadism. To have lowered our standards has hurt us immeasurably in the eyes of the world. There is no longer any incentive for an enemy combatant to surrender. They might as well fight to the death and continue to hide from us, hoping they can win their "just" cause. What do we have to offer them? Our so called democracy is a sham if we fail to even uphold it here in our own country.
Neocons don't like to read the truth, do they? They are so bent on their global oligarchy and Chrisitan fundamentalist theocracy that they will drag America and the rest of the world through this world war, playing right into the hands of madmen like Osama bin Laden, the Iranian ruling council, and the Taliban.
2006-09-04 04:26:01 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I know the value of a public school education isn't what it should be but even you must see that this is a load of hogwash. Guantanamo Bay is not even close to being a concentration camp . We have not deported 100,000 Muslim men for to reason. Do you read or just listen to liberal talk radio? Next time you post a question try to do little actual research first.
2006-08-31 12:58:33 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 1⤋
Muffewiler: talking about the pot calling the kettle black
if America doesnt abide by the Geneva convention, the middle east doesnt even know it exists.
1. The beheadings (AND taping) of noncombatants and combatants alike.
2. The use of women and children as shields.
3. engaging forces in combat (taking potshots at them from rooftops) then when fired back, crying wolf passing off as civilians.
And as far as human right violations, the middle east certainly tops the list with the harasment and mass killings of minority groups
like the kurds, the few christian and jewish communities and even the shiites at some point.
Who needs to WAAAKE UPPPPP NOW?
2006-08-31 17:28:20 · answer #4 · answered by TranquilStar 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
The 1934 treaty with Cuba gave the U.S. an enduring hire to the backside for "$2,000 in U.S. gold money" (or equivalent) consistent with twelve months. After the Cuban Revolution of 1959, the U.S. persevered to deliver charge, and thanks to a few confusion in Castro's new government, they cashed the 1st verify. The U.S. claims that it is their attractiveness of the 1934 treaty, and that they proceed to deliver charge each and each twelve months, regardless of the reality that Cuba has not cashed to any extent further tests. The penal complex camp is contained on the backside the U.S. has there, and the Cuban government has no jurisdiction over the project.
2016-10-01 03:49:18 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
1. Guantanamo Bay is not a 'concentration camp'. It closer to a resort.
2. The number of detainees has never exceeded 1,000.
3. The Geneva Convention PROHIBITS charging prisoners of war.
4. The detainees would be considered 'illegal combatants' under the Geneva Convention. As such they are entitled to be shot on sight.
5. The constitution does not recognize or protect any rights for enemies.
2006-08-31 13:54:15 · answer #6 · answered by STEVEN F 7 · 3⤊ 3⤋
It's evident that you have not read one iota about WW II.
You would then know what a "concentration camp" is.
Hitler was the only one ever built concentration camps "in the true sense" of the word.
Go back to your comic books. It's all that you will ever be able to absorb and understand.
2006-08-31 12:59:07 · answer #7 · answered by ed 7 · 5⤊ 2⤋
Concentration camps exist to imprison unwanted people to roam around and terrorize other people. Unlike, in the past, concentration camps are for everybody considered as enemy of the state like Germany.
2006-08-31 14:53:48 · answer #8 · answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7 · 0⤊ 3⤋
America DOES NOT ABIDE BY THE GENEVA CONVENTION ANYMORE!!! HELLO! AMERICA! WAAAAAAAAKE UUUUUUUPPP!!! Didn't you know that? All those pictures of muslim men piled up naked, with soldiers humiliating them, very conventional indeed!!! If it was americans it would be different.
2006-08-31 15:03:46 · answer #9 · answered by ? 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Concentration camps??? Are you out of your mind? That has to be the most stupid and insensitive statement I have seen on these boards thus far.
2006-08-31 13:01:54 · answer #10 · answered by Juble 3 · 3⤊ 2⤋
For the same reason that we still allow liberals in this country.
2006-08-31 13:20:51 · answer #11 · answered by Robert S 1 · 2⤊ 2⤋