Obama says U.S. may reach out to Taliban
WASHINGTON (March 8) - President Barack Obama says he hopes U.S. troops can identify moderate elements of the Taliban and move them toward reconciliation.
Asked in an interview with The New York Times if the United States is winning in Afghanistan, Obama said "no," while adding "our troops are doing an extraordinary job in a very difficult situation."
What the hell is this guy's problem? He comes out and tells the world that we're losing in Afghanistan? Just goes to show his inexperience. Way to break our troops' morale there moron! He could have avoided the answer and focused only on the positives. You don't send a message to our troops that they are losing!!
And later down in that article - we find this:
Obama added that the U.S. doesn't torture its suspects and noted in some cases those being held would have an opportunity to challenge their detention in federal courts.What? These are enemy combatants you idiot! They should NEVER EVER have access to our court system. If you want to try them - you try them in an international court. Our court system, based on our Constitution, is for Americans. You do not try war criminals in our Federal court system. If you do that then you have to give up military intel in order to try them - you know - national security stuff. These people are terrorists and terrorists have no legal rights in the American system.
Sheesh! I hope you guys on the left are really happy that the O is making a mockery of our soldiers and our constitution.
13 comments:
Pauly,
I'm totally with you on the enemy combatants thing. I myself refer to them that way on my blog. But I don't think what Obama said about losing in Afghanistan was that big a deal because he was only stating what should be obvious to everybody by now. But then, I never served in the military, although i did spend some time in Afghanistan as an aid worker and so i got to see how shitty the situation is over there.
Yeah, I'd love to nuke these Islamic bastards. And to hell with nation-building. That seems to be an American tradition - we destroy our enemies, then rebuild their countries from scratch. Lol
And what the hell is Obama doing closing Gitmo??? Where the hell else are we supposed to send these guys? Nobody else wants them. I say keep them there.
I’m not a Republican, but I’m awfully glad I didn’t listen to the star-struck media and voted for McCain instead.
http://politicalanimal.today.com/
We used to prosecute terrorists in our courts, in the pre-dubya era.
Hi SKW - I'll assume you're probably still a yungin'. We have never tried terrorists or enemy combatants in our U.S. court system ever. The closest thing you could possibly compare it to is the Quirin case in the early 50's. We have always tried enemy combatants by Military Tribunal. In 2006 a liberal majority in the Supreme Court ruled that Military Tribunals are unconstitutional - which is a bunch of bullshit.
In the Quirin case - which was another afront at usurping the executive powers of the CiC - the WWII prisoners were found guilty by the military tribunal and were sentenced to death. The U.S. courts tried to step in and ultimately sided with the military tribunals.
I'm not sure where you were learning your history - but - we don't try terrorists and enemy combatants under our court system. Under our rules of the court - we would be forced to give up military intelligence and other surveillance secrets in order to prove their guilt. Obama and his idiots would essentially be giving the terrorists around this world a glimpse in to the way our national security operations work by allowing this to occur.
If you bring up the Sheik Rahmani - he was tried as a murderer - not as an enemy combatant or terrorist.
Again - this man has no experience and it is showing. He doesn't give a shit about this country. If he did - he would not allow stuff like this to even be a remote possibility.
I am with you my friend, Obama's actions are ridiculous. But as far as the prosecution of the terrorist's and war criminals, I have to say that a 45, or a 9mm could end all the problems and discussion about the trials
-Mark - sorry - forgot to respond there. I agree. GITMO needs to stay open.
-Lot 2 Learn - I'm with ya on that one! We probably could close GITMO then! :)
-Mark - sorry - forgot to respond there. I agree. GITMO needs to stay open.
I can't ever forgive you, but maybe the Lord can.
http://politicalanimal.today.com/
If I was a US soldier, I would be very disappointed in the big O right now.
Beth - I'm sure there are a lot of disappointed soldiers right now.
Stunatra - there are reports coming out now that many more who have left GITMO went back to Al Qaeda than originally thought. In fact, the new leader of the AQ in Afghanistan is a former detainee. Closing GITMO is a huge mistake.
Mark - LOL - you're just wrong man! :)
We prosecuted Fawiz Yunis for terrorism in the mid-90's (I believe that's the date... might have been earlier), Timothy McVeigh comes to mind too. John Walker Lindh, the American Taliban member, was prosecuted in the states. Richard Reid, the airplane shoe bomber, currently serving a life sentence in a Boston prison. Jose Padilla, who was attempting to create a dirty bomb, recently indicted in Miami. Zacarias Moussaoui, the frog that played a role in 9/11... We have a long history of prosecuting them in our courts, along with other cases of prosecution in our military tribunals.
@skwguitar, Timothy McVeigh was a US citizen, what we call a domestic terrorist, so he, obviously, and deservedly got a trial in the US.
SKW - Fawaz Yunis - 1989 - convicted of hijacking and air piracy - not terrorism.
Timothy McVeigh, John Walker Lindh, and Jose Padilla - all American citizens - they are considered domestic terrorists (even if fighting alongside the enemy) - there is a difference.
Richard Reid - convicted of one attempted use of a weapon of mass destruction against U.S. nationals outside the United States and two of interference with flight crew and attendants using a dangerous weapon.
Not one of these individuals were tried as "terrorists" nor were they convicted of terrorism.
Foreign enemy combatants have no standing as they are not uniformed. The UCMJ, Geneva Conventions, or our constitution and courts have no jurisdiction or relevance. If they are to be tried, they should be tried in an international court.
Alright, fair enough. I can't argue this one too much, it's a subject that I really don't care too passionately about either way. I just wanted to point out that terrorists have been tried here in America before.
1 - 2 - 3 - ding ding ding!
No prob! :) At least you gave it the ol' college try mate!
Post a Comment