Terrorists. Criminals, or organized army declaring war on the US?

Question

which is it? If they are criminlas, they should be hunted down, and tried and convicted and punished. And there should be more police work, and less brute force. If they are 'organized' their actions should be punished according to the geneba conventions. So which is it?

heehee, geneva conventions. sorry :)

yes, Eli, it determines how they are treated WHILST being punished. just to clarify

Answer 1

While not an army in the conventional sense, what we call terrorists are an armed force, in many ways resembling our own forces before the US got it's independence from Britain. They too were considered the terrorist rebels of their time, you'd be hard pressed to find a British publishing calling the United Statesian rebels our Continental Army 'patriots' at the time of the revolution.

These people are an army, no doubt. Because of that their treatment should be regulated by the Geneva Convention.

Btw. The Geneva convention specifies how to treat prisoners of war, not how to punish them. It is how NOT to treat them for the most part.

Answer 2

No one has declared war on USA.
And it has never been attacked from outside.
The only attack was from the inside, on 9/11.
It is of extreme importance that people stop hiding behind the comment of 'conspiracy theorist', and just walk away.
America is under attack constantly from its own government, and freedoms are being reduced daily.
Those who are blinded by patriotism, or naievity are a danger to themselves and others.
Do you know of the plan to sell out America completely, and write a new constitution.
Just examine the plans for the North American Union, for example.

Did you know of the 600 concentration camps built around America ready to receive literally MILLIONS of inmates, who will be mostly Americans.

I find the lack of true knowledge demonstarted by the Americans absolutely amazing.

Just read the information at the sites below for an insight into what is really happening, and never mind the conspiracy theories - these are true news reports, not theory!!

Answer 3

To halt the spread and effect of terrorism, you must do two things:

a) be steadfast and unwaivering on the assault on inhuman acts such as terrorism. These are individuals participating in a non-state, organized paramilitary outfit with no designs on government but strict goals of anarchy, destabilization and chaos. They must be eliminated first, and if captured alive, they should be given the due process of military justice (not civil). This is a war, not a police action.

b) be steadfast and unwaivering on supporting America's interests and defense. This means securing borders, improving economic security, rewarding allies who support democracy and capitalism, thwarting socialist/communist movements domestically and abroad, and working diligently to maintaining and growing America's stature as the pre-eminent global leader in political, military, economic and technological endeavors. America must lead, for others have no desire or competence to do so.

This may sound imperialistic, but it's a small planet, and leaving the future of this planet to the warped, self-serving and radical elements of nations like Iran, N. Korea, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Cuba, Bolivia and Sudan is irresponsible and unacceptable. There is evil in the world, it is not American, and sovereignty should not be respected when it compromises the sovereignty and security of other nations. This is why we invaded Afghanistan and Iraq and it is why we will continue to press for regime change in other radical and freedom-suppressing nations. The alternative is to do nothing, and be run over by the radical and regressive elements in the world, much like France and China were in WW2. The stand takes place here and now and must be uncompromising.

Answer 4

Initially I would say organized army, but their method of fighting falls outside of the Geneva Convention, which makes it more difficult to categorize them as such. Therefore, they may be more of an organized army of criminals, or perhaps something else entirely.

I don't know how I would categorize them, and am glad that the decision does not fall on my shoulders to make.

Answer 5

The organized criminals in Washington have declared war on the US constitution and yes they should be punished severely for stealing that which your and my ancestors have given their blood to keep sacred for us.

Answer 6

eh?

Depends on which one it is.

A good lot of the world of all types, nations, groups, thugs, dictators, Presidents, Prime Ministers..etc etc all hate U.S. Foreign policy under the current Regime.

The answer really depends on the entity disliking the Bush Regime.

Im sure they are asking the same question of how to handle the U.S.

Answer 7

Republicans and people who call themselves the religious right....God or Jesus has nothing to do with them, but they are the ones destroying and attacking America

Answer 8

they fit the definition of criminals best

Answer 9

These aggressors don't fit into the cookie cutter categories of former conflicts we've engaged in. Being loosely affiliated and having no clear design to invade and rule, they are not the organized army. On the other hand, they are working in concert to overthrow our sovereignty, demanding we act according to their wishes. They are not uniformed, not afilliated with one nation, not openly supported by the economy of one nation.

We can't apply Geneva Convention standards to our troops and allow the enemies to treat our troops in the atrocious ways they have been when captured. Never mind the non-combatant citizens they capture. Remember Nicholas Berg? They sawed his head off with a semi-sharpened knife and published the video of this horror on the internet. Remember the Fox news journalists they released? They were forced to renounce Christianity and to commit to Islam.

This struggle isn't about Iraq or Afghanistan or Iran and Syria. This is about changing hearts and minds. I have my criticisms of the Bush administration but I believe he is doing the best job he knows how to do, and I believe this country was caught with its breeches down on 9/11. We didn't know how to react, because we simply didn't have the information we needed at the time to make informed decisions. This is the fog of war. We know this, we suspect that, and none of it is sure. I have to lay a large part of that at the feet of Bill Clinton because he cut the budget of the military and intelligence organizations to balance the federal budget while spending like drunken sailors on everything else. He said last Sunday that "he was aware of the threat of Bin Laden and that he tried and failed to kill Bin Laden but at least he tried." But the tragedy of 9/11 was exacerbated by the fact that we had nobody in intelligence with boots on the ground in the Middle East to listen to the political climate, to collect the kind of information that can't be retrieved with satellites and spy planes.

The real issue here is, what will make Muslims less of a threat to world peace and security? And the answer as far as I can see is to convince the mouthpieces and those that trust them, that prosecuting aggression against the west will not net them the results they seek. They have plainly spoken their agenda and it isn't to be taken lightly. They want to rule the world and they have multiple plans in operation to achieve just that.

One way is to immigrate to western states as in France and by sheer numbers take over the government. Another is by force as in Spain. Another is Bin Laden's way. He believed we would not respond in a long drawn out campaign because we have lost our American spirit. Bush told us atop the pile of rubble that it would require a long drawn out campaign to accomplish the necessary task to turn the tide of terror. It only took months for half the country to forget those words and the spirit in which they were received. Was Bin Laden right? Have we lost our spirit? http://judgeright.blogspot.com under the article titled "In Their Own Words" you'll find many links to video of their most popular political and religious leaders saying exactly that under the bold words.

Why do the media prosecute a war against the American reputation in the world, even our own media? They compare the actions of a few Americans to those of all terrorists and demand that we treat them according to edicts of the Geneva Convention when they are not held to the same standards. The reveal our secret operations and methods of interrogations which by the way do not even enter the same solar system as the jihadi's treatment of captured citizens let alone military. They compare our operations against aggressors with their targeting of innocent civilians.

Personally, I wish they would treat this as more of a conventional war. Again on my blog, you'll find that the TV networks are spewing murder and hatred 24/7 through music videos and movies and just about every religious program against the West. In Iran, Syria, Palestine, etc., over Palestinian Authority TV and al Jezeera. We have to blast our own TV signal into these regions to get the message of the West into the people because they are getting nothing else from their own networks. It is popular to hate the west, it is taught in the school curriculum in Iran, it is overwhelmingly accepted that the West is the Great Satan.

I am not looking for a new crusade, but logic tells me that a great defeat, and blame for mass destruction on the heads of these same leaders, called down on them by their own words, is the only way to change this torrent of mass lies and hysteria.

P*ssy footing around and blaming America for the damage done to innocents, as the media and half our politicians are doing is strengthening the enemy's resolve and encouraging their recruitment rates. Whereas, flattening the capitols of 1 or 2 countries could save the long drawn out struggle. Look at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. These two explosions brought a long drawn out struggle to an abrupt end. Many lives were saved on balance. Had the struggle continued as it had for two more years, as much as a million troops from both sides would have been lost not to mention the innocents that were dieing from the carpet bombing campaigns. Just because we have the technology to surgically strike does not make surgical strikes the best option. Our reputation is suffering in the world anyway, what motivation do we have to continue a struggle with surgical strikes when a double standard is applied to our forces compared to our enemy's? What benefit to innocent lives if the struggle continues for another 5 or 20 years?

Why does the U.N. condemn U.S. tactics while the terrorists march merrily on with heinous acts against civilians? I don't like being seen as the big bully on the block either, but thanks to the U.N., the media, and half our politicians, that is our image. Sometimes people need to see a bully tactic to gain perspective on reality. Reality is, up till now, we have been the only morally influenced party in this conflict. If we know the location of al Jezeera and the Palestinian Authority's TV broadcasting operation, they should be powder by now. If we hear another dictator dictate morality to us, he should be in the very same condition. If we know Bin Laden or any other terrorist leader is within a 50 mile radius, we should dump a radio active firestorm on his cave, mountain, or city. See how long the attitude of blame America carries on, then. I guarantee that every country's leader will dump the bodies of these gnats called terrorists on our doorstep pleading with us to take our big stick and go home, because they will make sure we have nothing to worry about anymore. If a bully we are called, then a bully we should be, at least for a little while.

Answer 10

how many times has someone told me to use spell check........