Do you think what the U.S. has done with/ about the prisoners in Guantanamo Bay is legal and/or ethical?

Question

Are you aware that not everyone in there has been charged with a crime? Does that change anything?

Answer 1

It violates the Constitution. One is not to be detained indefinately, without formal charges, without legal council. The Constitution guarantees a fair and speedy trial. None of this is happening at Gitmo. But then again George W. Bush thinks the Constitution is just a goddamn piece of paper and his AG says it is obsolete so what are we to expect?

Answer 2

I'm noticing people calling the detainees "terrorists". May I remind people that of the 400 detainees, only 4 have been charged and only one convicted (and he was sentenced to 5 years so... obviously REALLY dangerous!). The rest are being held without charge or trial.

Unless I missed something, the basis of the legal system in every civilised and democratic country is that a person is INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY. Ergo, the detainees in Guantanamo are not terrorists - they have not been convicted (or for that matter even charged) with any terrorism offence.

I personally think at least some of the detainees are probably dangerous, but that is no reason to hold them indefinately without trial. It's time they were put on trial in a fair and open court of law (not the current kangaroo "military tribunal"). If they are guilty, punish them. If not, it's time they were released.

Come on. The US has been holding most of them for 5 years now. By now, if these people were terrorists, they must have been able to dig up some evidence proving it (that doesn't rely on the tortured "confessions" of others).

Many of the detainees have been shown to be captured well away from any combat zones - and even in different countries and continents to Afghanistan etc, and in many cases by people who were being paid huge amounts of money for every terrorist they handed over (surely an incentive like that wouldn't encourage people to kidnap innocent people for the bounty, would it?).

Guantanamo is an affront to every person who believes in truth, justice, democracy and the rule of law. It should be closed, and closed NOW. Put these people on trial and let truth and justice rule once more.

Answer 3

*scratching my head* I am not 100% thrilled with the situation -- to hold someone indefinitely without ever officially charging them is at the very least troubling. But, if they were actually in combat against U.S. troops or caught either planning or in the commission of an act of terrorism agains a citizen of the U.S., if they were helping support, then they need to be locked up, tried and convicted.
No charges filed, no right to a fair (and speedy -- relavent to what?) trial and no established law or court? I have troubles. Can't just let them go... What to do, what to do...

Answer 4

Do you think we should apologize for the Germans we held prisoner during World War II? Harry Truman even had a couple of them hanged in retaliation for how the Germans treated our soldiers.

Answer 5

I don't think it is right what we are doing there no. And for the person who said they aren't torturing people there must not have been reading the reports of the opposite happening. It is a disgrace in the USA to have such a disgusting mark on it's history! How are we any better than Hitler or China?

Answer 6

Yes, definitely.
******
Nope, doesn't change a thing. These are prisoner's of war, not simple criminals. POWs are held until the war is over and THEN negotiations begin for repatriation. That's the way it is and always has been. You can complain to me when we start beheading them and putting that on the internet. It's too bad you aren't as concerned with the prisoners that they are torturing and executing rather than holding at all.

Answer 7

I do think it is legal and ethical since we are in the fight of our life's that is not resolved so enemy combatants should not be released before the war is over to fight again.

Answer 8

If you don't think they are being tortured, look up what happened to Sean Baker when he went undercover as a detainee.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sean_Baker

They have released some of them. Why? Because they found out they weren't terrorists. Some of them have confessed, but only because they were being tortured. Not always at Gitmo, but in other countries as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition

Answer 9

very legal, we are not torturing them. and it has to be ethical because think how many thousands of lives were saved with the information we got from captured terrorists.

Answer 10

I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH IT. THESE PEOPLE ARE ENEMY COMBATANTS. THEY WERE CAPTURED IN AFGHANISTAN. THEY ARE TREATED HUMANLY UNLIKE THE TREATMENT AMERICANS GET WHEN CAPTURED BY THEIR ENEMIES. IF RELEASED THESE PEOPLE WILL JUST SHOW UP ON THE BATTLE FIELD AGAIN.

HENRY THE VII IS WRONG ABOUT THEM BEING PROTECTED BY THE CONSTITUTION. THE CONSTITUTION PROTECTS AMERICAN CITIZENS NOT ENEMY COMBATANTS THEY ARE GOVERNED BY THE GENEVA CONVENTION AND WE ARE FOLLOWING THE LAW TO THE LETTER. THEY ARE ENEMIES OF AMERICA. THEY WERE CAUGHT ON THE FIELD OF BATTLE.