Are We Treating Terrorist Prisoners Of War Way Too Nice?

Question

Screw the Geneva Convention, it only applies to UNIFORMED prisoners of war, not scumbag towelhead psychopaths. I think we should pluck out eyeballs, cut off fingers, anything it takes to get information from these pieces of dung if it saves american lives!

Answer 1

cut one joint from one finger each day. and while the terrorists might be telling lies (for all you misinformed libs who think torture rarely gets the truth) by the time you rotate back through for the next joint (6th day) it's amazing the look and answers you get. Answers that are pretty close to the truth!

Answer 2

Probably.

Given their tactics of loading up their bombs with lethal shrapnel and detonating them at weddings, religious ceremonies, crowded markets and so forth - I think finding out what their next adventure will be is critical.

The information the Saudis got from a terrorist detainee saved the lives of hundreds of innocent men, women and children in London - the Islamic terrorists were subsequently arrested in London just prior to implementing their plans to blow up two commercial jets over the Atlantic Ocean.

I am seriously concerned about the probability that, if the United States had captured this dirt bag, we wouldn't have gotten this little tid bit of information.
I doubt very much that the terrorist gave up all the names of the members of this radical Islamic cell in London during casual conversation over a hot meal and a beer.

In a war against an ideology, we can't pin point specific targets - it is imperative that we have to be a step ahead of any new plans they have cooked up to maim and kill more innocent people.

It simply boils down to the "rights" of a terrorist vs. the rights of thousands of innocent men, women and children.

No contest.

Answer 3

A fifty-three-page report, obtained by The New Yorker, written by Major General Antonio M. Taguba and not meant for public release, was completed in late February. Its conclusions about the institutional failures of the Army prison system were devastating. Specifically, Taguba found that between October and December of 2003 there were numerous instances of “sadistic, blatant, and wanton criminal abuses” at Abu Ghraib. This systematic and illegal abuse of detainees, Taguba reported, was perpetrated by soldiers of the 372nd Military Police Company, and also by members of the American intelligence community. (The 372nd was attached to the 320th M.P. Battalion, which reported to Karpinski’s brigade headquarters.) Taguba’s report listed some of the wrongdoing:
Breaking chemical lights and pouring the phosphoric liquid on detainees; pouring cold water on naked detainees; beating detainees with a broom handle and a chair; threatening male detainees with rape; allowing a military police guard to stitch the wound of a detainee who was injured after being slammed against the wall in his cell; sodomizing a detainee with a chemical light and perhaps a broom stick, and using military working dogs to frighten and intimidate detainees with threats of attack, and in one instance actually biting a detainee.

Answer 4

Time to close gitmo and send the prisoners to a real hell on earth ,
1st we send the prisoners out to the DoE area in Southern Nevada and let them clean up the area we used for Nuclear testing .
2nd we make them live in tents , if they dont want to work fine we dont feed them, nearest town is pahrump (35 miles away ) and Las Vegas is over 70 miles away , not much water and there is no food , I think they will co-operate by this time .
3rd even if they escape where are they going to go,and bonus the air force can track them down since there in the middle of a bombing range odds are there would be unexploded munitions for them to trip over and get hurt on .
4th and best of all It would piss Harry Reid off

Answer 5

Yes

Answer 6

But a good handful of those "prisoners" ARE AMERICAN.

And many of them are not proven to be enemy combatants.

Lets throw scumbags like YOU behind bars and start plucking eyeballs and cutting fingers just for the hell of it, why don't we?!

Answer 7

The Innocent ones too?

Answer 8

I don't know if you are just trying to shock people or if you are really uneducated in this question. We all know that torturing people rarely gets at the truth.....when suffering enough people will say whatever you want......SO WE ACCOMPLISH ABSOLUTELY NOTHING IF WE ARE LOOKING FOR THE TRUTH.

Answer 9

Thats what they said to the jews.

Answer 10

That governments have permitted terrorist acts against their own people, and have even themselves been perpetrators in order to find strategic advantage is quite likely true, but this is the United States we're talking about.

That intelligence agencies, financiers, terrorists and narco-criminals have a long history together is well established, but the Nugan Hand Bank, BCCI, Banco Ambrosiano, the P2 Lodge, the CIA/Mafia anti-Castro/Kennedy alliance, Iran/Contra and the rest were a long time ago, so there’s no need to rehash all that. That was then, this is now!

That Jonathan Bush’s Riggs Bank has been found guilty of laundering terrorist funds and fined a US-record $25 million must embarrass his nephew George, but it's still no justification for leaping to paranoid conclusions.

That George Bush's brother Marvin sat on the board of the Kuwaiti-owned company which provided electronic security to the World Trade Centre, Dulles Airport and United Airlines means nothing more than you must admit those Bush boys have done alright for themselves.

That George Bush found success as a businessman only after the investment of Osama’s brother Salem and reputed al Qaeda financier Khalid bin Mahfouz is just one of those things - one of those crazy things.

That Osama bin Laden is known to have been an asset of US foreign policy in no way implies he still is.

That al Qaeda was active in the Balkan conflict, fighting on the same side as the US as recently as 1999, while the US protected its cells, is merely one of history's little aberrations.

The claims of Michael Springman, State Department veteran of the Jeddah visa bureau, that the CIA ran the office and issued visas to al Qaeda members so they could receive training in the United States, sound like the sour grapes of someone who was fired for making such wild accusations.

That one of George Bush's first acts as President, in January 2001, was to end the two-year deployment of attack submarines which were positioned within striking distance of al Qaeda's Afghanistan camps, even as the group's guilt for the Cole bombing was established, proves that a transition from one administration to the next is never an easy task.

That so many influential figures in and close to the Bush White House had expressed, just a year before the attacks, the need for a "new Pearl Harbor" before their militarist ambitions could be fulfilled, demonstrates nothing more than the accidental virtue of being in the right place at the right time.

That the company PTECH, founded by a Saudi financier placed on America’s Terrorist Watch List in October 2001, had access to the FAA’s entire computer system for two years before the 9/11 attack, means he must not have been such a threat after all.

That whistleblower Indira Singh was told to keep her mouth shut and forget what she learned when she took her concerns about PTECH to her employers and federal authorities, suggests she lacked the big picture. And that the Chief Auditor for JP Morgan Chase told Singh repeatedly, as she answered questions about who supplied her with what information, that "that person should be killed," suggests he should take an anger management seminar.

That on May 8, 2001, Dick Cheney took upon himself the job of co-ordinating a response to domestic terror attacks even as he was crafting the administration’s energy policy which bore implications for America's military, circumventing the established infrastructure and ignoring the recommendations of the Hart-Rudman report, merely shows the VP to be someone who finds it hard to delegate.

That the standing order which covered the shooting down of hijacked aircraft was altered on June 1, 2001, taking discretion away from field commanders and placing it solely in the hands of the Secretary of Defense, is simply poor planning and unfortunate timing. Fortunately the error has been corrected, as the order was rescinded shortly after 9/11.

That in the weeks before 9/11, FBI agent Colleen Rowley found her investigation of Zacarias Moussaoui so perversely thwarted that her colleagues joked that bin Laden had a mole at the FBI, proves the stress-relieving virtue of humour in the workplace.

That Dave Frasca of the FBI’s Radical Fundamentalist Unit received a promotion after quashing multiple, urgent requests for investigations into al Qaeda assets training at flight schools in the summer of 2001 does appear on the surface odd, but undoubtedly there's a good reason for it, quite possibly classified.

That FBI informant Randy Glass, working an undercover sting, was told by Pakistani intelligence operatives that the World Trade Center towers were coming down, and that his repeated warnings which continued until weeks before the attacks, including the mention of planes used as weapons, were ignored by federal authorities, is simply one of the many "What Ifs" of that tragic day.