2006-10-07 15:57:39 · 27 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
HA! You wish, I wish.
Called the Military Commissions Act of 2006, the bill abandons the Geneva Convention (formed after Hitler's atrocities in WWII), legalizes the torture of U.S. citizens, suspends all civil rights for prisoners and allows the President to declare virtually anyone to be an "enemy combatant" -- artists, writers, scientists, protestors or anyone who does not agree with the pro-war stance of the current regime.
It would also retroactively grant blanket immunity to all U.S. military personnel who have committed war crimes under the Geneva Convention. Such immunity would extend to present and future war crimes as well. In other words, the United States will now officially harbor and support war criminals. In the context of international law, the United States is effectively declaring itself to be a criminal state that will respect no international law.
Just as frighteningly, the new Act would utterly nullify the courts and make it illegal for the judicial branch of government to interfere with the imprisonment and torture of anyone, thus affecting a dangerous power shift from the judicial branch of government to the executive branch.
Hitler followed the same strategy in centralizing his own power, and by nullifying the courts while taking over the media, he was able to propagandize his war, arrest all dissenters, and concentrate power in his own hands. The ultimate result was an unjust war and a humanitarian disaster that haunts the world to this day.
The United States is now firmly on the same path. These are dark times for our nation, and future historians will no doubt look upon this historic vote as the trigger that thrust the United States into a full-fledged police state, complete with secret arrests, government spying on citizens, and the mysterious "disappearance" of those who dared to speak out against the dictator.
2006-10-07 16:01:48 · answer #1 · answered by soulsearcher 5 · 3⤊ 6⤋
This is a tough topic. What you have to try to remember is that our troops are doing their jobs. If they don't do it in Iraq, they will be doing it somewhere else. I am proud of our men in uniform and pray for their safety and strength every day, but I don't believe we should pull out of the middle eastern countries at this time. I am just a tad too young to remember Vietnam, but I've learned a lot about it and believe pulling out of Iraq will leave us with the same kind of mess. Iraq deserves to be free, something all too many of US take for granted. So many Americans really do just expect their lives to be what they are and could never imagine living like some other cultures do. We sit on top of the world, and we have enough to share, we are doing some good stuff in Iraq. Some of the Iraqi's, like the insurgents, are making it very difficult for us to succeed, but we are Americans and we should finish what we started. Not all Iraqi's are bad people. America has lots of "bad people", our prisons are full of them. We're just a more civilized and far more advanced culture than they are and deal with things differently. I am grateful for my life as an American woman and would like to see all women have the opportunities I have, no matter where they live in this world, Iraq included.
Regardless of why we went in, under false pretences or lies, the fact is we are there now and have a mission to complete. It's been 5 years since 9/11, many of the Troops in Iraq are there because they signed up for the military knowing they would be defending freedom during a time of war. Let's say you're an administrator and someone pulled you out from your desk and into a safer place, like the copy room, would you like it? It may sound silly, but everyone is doing a job and not unlike like a Marine, Soldier, Sailor, National Guard member or Air Force pilot, they are doing a job they CHOSE. No one forced anyone to serve this country.
I support my Government and my Troops, neither is a job I would want and I am thankful someone is doing it.
2006-10-07 16:12:54 · answer #2 · answered by Cinderella 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I believe that is your opinion. You are entitled to say that he is disgraced while it is my opinion to say you are wrong.
If you didnt know, there is a thing called tours where troops stay home for 6 to 9 months and then go back to their post in the world.
The war in Iraq, is going not that bad. Goals they were going for:
Democracy, Check
Remove Saddam, Check
Create an organized military, Check
Satisfy the specific needs of the people in Iraq, Check
Protect Iraq from any forces Internally or Externally, Check
There are other goals that were successful but without a doubt, some were failed. that happens.
2006-10-07 16:12:57 · answer #3 · answered by tenacious_d2008 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
No, because while Bush fussed and Foley fiddled, the situation is rapidly deteriorating in Afghanistan. The Taliban is rapidly regaining power and the fight is just warming up. We have only 6,000 troops there, with no back up. A terrible price to pay for the fiasco in Iraq. And Bush is rattling his saber at North Korea and Iran. Bit off more than we can chew, the maniac!
2006-10-07 16:15:50 · answer #4 · answered by Smiling Grace 2 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Even if you agree his party is disgraced, why should this effect the decision to pull the troops out of Iraq? I don't think you understand the impact it would have on that country.
2006-10-07 15:59:28 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
One of the best things about Bush is that he does not allow polls or stuff like this to effect important things such as a war.
Unlike his predecessor, he has true convictions!
More information about this scandal has come out. Its good that that scum Foley quit immediately, thats great.
We only have the past to give us the truth about peoples actions and how those actions determine what they are all about. Let me tell you about the Dems.
In 1973 there was a Democrat Mass. Congressman named Gerry Studds who fooled around with pages, he was reported to the Dems in 73. It took until 1983 (my math says thats 10 years!) before anything was done. The Dems only censured him, and they let him stay in office, he was reelected several times. Mass. voters vote for murderers too, see Ted Kennedy. The Dems should have kicked him out, but they were cool with him.
This guy actually had sex with minors, not just dirty emails, like Foley was accused.
Well, trying to keep it pithy, he was given a standing ovation by the Dems as he turned his back when he was censured. And Nancy Pelosi voted for him 5 times for special committees!
Now it turns out that the boy Foley was sending those messages to was 18, that doesn't make it right, but it doesn't make it a crime either!
Lets see, last elections, the major media (who obviously campaign and support Dems), Dan Rather released phoney documents to hurt Bush, and they were caught. Then on election day they reported that Bush was losing. They said he was losing S Carolina and he actually won by 16 points. I guess they tried to scare Repub voters into staying home.
Now, just a little more than a month out of this election we have this.
You won't get this news on ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, NY Times, because they want the Dems to win.
There, I let the cat out of the bag!
Lets see what develops, but if this stuff is all true, the Dems are in big trouble!
I am an independent by the way, for the record.
2006-10-07 16:13:14 · answer #6 · answered by TG Special 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋
The powers that really run this country might do to Bush what was done to John F. Kennedy for trying to end the Vietnam war!
2006-10-07 16:08:07 · answer #7 · answered by matt 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Not likely, after the election I expect we will see an increase in troop levels.
2006-10-07 15:59:24 · answer #8 · answered by Lisa M 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
No because the war on terror is a bogus war like the war on drugs. Drug addiction is a huge problem with the right wing party along with pedophilia. Nothing will ever get accomplished by George Bush.
2006-10-07 22:27:01 · answer #9 · answered by Mortica 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Why is the party disgraced? Because of one man's actions? Is that the reason Clinton did nothing about fighting the Islamic Fascists, because he turned our White House into a Bordello? At least the latest fiasco had Foley, who admitted his mistake, and resigned. Clinton is still lying about his fiasco to this very day. Clinton, or as you believe the party, is a whore!
2006-10-07 16:03:44 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 3⤋
...so that they can then go over to the cause-celeb: Darfur, Sudan? (and die to save one hurd of savages from another)
I'm no big fan of Bush, nor the Republicans. But -- assuming you're talking about Foley -- I don't recall that the Pope disbanded the church b/c some [perhaps many] priest were doing the same.
2006-10-07 16:05:47 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋