A country that arrests innocents and imprisons them without trial, isn't that a bad country ?

Question

So in a way, America...

I'm talking about Guantanamo, of course, amongst others. Did you know that the CIA or FBI is actually interrogating people and interning them in camps in Europe we're not supposed to know about ? Sure, they don't do it IN the states, but since when is a country fake when it's not recognized by them ? I am in no way supporting terrorists, but sometimes I wonder who are the terrorists. Trial, and fair trial, must happen.

Answer 1

Ask FDR and Abe Lincoln. They did the same thing on a much larger scale during wars.

Answer 2

The people interred at Guantanamo Bay are there because they; a) have ties that are suspicious; or
b) are known to have made anti-Amercian remarks; or
c) have acted in some suspicious way; or
d) are believed to have incited religious hatred; or
e) all the above

If the authorities were not suspicious of them or their motives, they would not be there. Whether or not they are innocent remains to be seen, but for the security of all nations, sacrifices must be made - whether or not those sacrifices impinge on these individuals' civil liberties.

The reason they have not been tried is because investigations into whether or not the have ties to terrorist groups are not complete. Until that day, they must remain where they are - un-charged and with no trial.

At all costs, we must do everything possible to prevent the disgusting, cowardly attacks of 9/11 (US) and (7/7) UK from ever happening again.

And yes, the UK has the same policy and has several people in detention, awaiting the outcome of investigations into their lives and backgrounds.

Is the UK also a bad country? Or are we correct in what we are doing to safegaurd the country? If we are, the US must also be correct.

Answer 3

It would be helpful to know of whom you speak of when referring to "innocents." If you are speaking of those who are suspected of aiding, abetting or being involved in terrorist activities, the question takes on different implications. If you accept the notion that the United States is at war with terrorists and terrorism, and your "innocents" are a member of this population, I would submit that the answer to your question would be no. This individuals would be under the heading of Prisoners of War to which the same safeguards that are enjoyed by citizens of this country regarding illegal activity would not apply. If your "innocents" are those aliens who are attempting to cross the borders of the United States in other than acceptable means or matters, again I do not believe the Constitutional protections for citizens of this country would be applicable. As the media has dubbed this population of people "illegal immigrants" I submit that if they are "illegal" there should be no other question. These people would clearly be here illegally and should not be afforded the full panoply of rights that would be afforded citizens. I do not thing the United States is a bad country. Any country that tolerates actions or activities that are bent on destroying that country is clearly suicidal.

Answer 4

It's a bad thing, not a bad country. What I'm referring to specifically, is that we all do good and bad things. America has done and continues to do some wonderful things. But also some very disappointing things, sometime even shameful, I agree. Even so, that doesn't make it intrisically bad, and the most disappointing thing about it's recent behaviour in foreign policy is that we know it could be so good!

Therefore, I think it's best to be against the behaviour and for the country/person/actor.

Answer 5

If you are talking about the detainees at Guantanamo Bay, then you obviously are confused. They are enemy combatants. They are not entitled to rights that are meant for US citizens. Why you ask? Well, we are at war, they are not US citizens and are members of Al Qaida or some other extremist group trying to kill Americans. If we let them go, what makes you think they won't go back to plotting another attack on us? As a matter of fact, a majority of them are probably thinking their next move for an attack if they ever get out. Our laws don't apply to them, end of story.

Answer 6

Who are you referring to when you say "innocents"? If you mean the terrorists in Cuba, who says they are innocent? First, our Constitution does not apply to anyone who is not an American citizen. Second, the Geneva Convention does not apply to them, because they are non-uniformed, non-soliders, from an unrecognized State. People really should read the Constitution and Genevea Convention before speaking about them. It is not our fault that jihadist terrorists choose to act outside of the Geneva Convention and therefore lose its protections.

Answer 7

If you are refering to the detainees at Guantanamo don't forget they are enemy combatants. Prior to the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006 enemy combatants were not recognized by the Geneva Conventions. Ununiformed combatants were subject to summary execution regardless of sex or age. The US was the first country in the world to recognize those combatants and give them rights.

Also, are you aware that many of the 700 detainees cannot be repatrioted as their countries do not want them and they are not welcome back in Afghanistan?

Answer 8

A country that arrests the guilty and imprisons them without trial, isn't that a good country ?

Answer 9

In America innocents aren't imprisoned without a trail. You have nothing better to do that try to get people roared up. Get a life.

Answer 10

We don't arrest innocents; we arrest criminals and terrorists, and our Constitution was written for and applies to the protection of Americans, not foreign born nationals who are bent on doing us harm.