First-Ever Hearing on NDAA Indefinite Military Detention

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by (marc), Mar 4, 2012.

  1. (marc) macrumors 6502a

    (marc)

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2010
    Location:
    the woods
    #1
    source

    I suggest Bradbury gets locked up first. He seems like a much bigger risk to freedom in the US than terrorism. Maybe he can even try out the torture programs he's responsible for? - what a jolly adventure! :rolleyes:
     
  2. eric/ Guest

    eric/

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2011
    Location:
    Ohio, United States
    #2
    Well there is historical precedence for what is going on. Take a look at Lincoln's actions during the Civil War.

    But I disagree with the way we're doing things. They should be returned to where they are came from, or tried and jailed.
     
  3. CalWizrd Suspended

    CalWizrd

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Location:
    NYC/Raleigh, NC
    #3
    Anything that Senator Al Franken says immediately strains any credibility whatsoever.
     
  4. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #4

    Or anything that B-Movie actor Reagan said either.
     
  5. CalWizrd Suspended

    CalWizrd

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Location:
    NYC/Raleigh, NC
    #5
    Opinions vary.
     
  6. (marc) thread starter macrumors 6502a

    (marc)

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2010
    Location:
    the woods
    #6
    How is this relevant to the discussion?
     
  7. CalWizrd Suspended

    CalWizrd

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Location:
    NYC/Raleigh, NC
    #7
    I just injected my opinion since the article quoted Franken's views. Citizenzen, on the other hand, just needed to get in a shot from his perspective.
     
  8. (marc) thread starter macrumors 6502a

    (marc)

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2010
    Location:
    the woods
    #8
    Al Franken simply pointed out a fact, it's not really a debatable "view" of his.
     
  9. Happybunny, Mar 4, 2012
    Last edited: Mar 4, 2012

    Happybunny macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    #9
    Indefinite military detention should be ended, it never works, and can even be counter productive.
    The British in Northern Ireland tried interment without trial in the 1970's. Because of this pro Irish groups in the US could openly raise money for the IRA.
     
  10. CalWizrd, Mar 4, 2012
    Last edited: Mar 4, 2012

    CalWizrd Suspended

    CalWizrd

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Location:
    NYC/Raleigh, NC
    #10
    How does the bolded text strike you as a fact rather than a debatable view? Are you saying that, by definition, Bradbury is a dishonest individual? Is that a fact, by the way?
     
  11. wackymacky macrumors 68000

    wackymacky

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2007
    Location:
    38°39′20″N 27°13′10″W
    #11
    Absolutly.

    if there is no plan to try them, then we may has well just line them up and shoot them. There is no moral difference is there.
     
  12. Squadleader macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2010
    Location:
    Avalon Hill
    #12
    That would have been preferable...but the rules of engagement was changing as fast as the ambient temperature and I kept loosing my Miranda Card...Not to mention the secrets that they held as well....:cool:
     
  13. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #13
    Holding people indefinitely, without charge, runs counter to all of several of the core principles upon which the United States' system of government was founded.

    It is shocking that such a principle is even considered debatable as a policy. If it happens as the extreme exception to the rule in extreme circumstances, that is one thing. But here we are talking about making it routine, as part of our interminable War on Terror. This is execrable, unjust, and makes a mockery of our system of justice.

    It is potentially a re-implementation of the system of punitive lettres de cachet.
     
  14. Squadleader macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2010
    Location:
    Avalon Hill
    #14

    Holding enemy combatants till the cessation of hostilities is nothing new, nor invented by America...but saves lives..(Its the Americans and Allies, in which I refer)
     
  15. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #15
    No, there isn't anything new about taking people into custody based on suspicion or allegation and holding them incommunicado for indefinite periods of time. That particular form of tyranny has been around sat least as long as jails have been around.

    What is new is the War on Terror. It is an indefinite, undeclared war that is rather vaguely defined and global in scope. This war is too open-ended to make 'until the cessation of hostilities' a reasonable time frame for holding suspects.

    Moreover, simply saving [good guys'] lives does not, on its own, justify any action we might take.
     
  16. KingYaba macrumors 68040

    KingYaba

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2005
    Location:
    Up the irons
    #16
    In order for this to be challenged in court, wouldn't someone have to have standing?
     
  17. codymac macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    #17
    This isn't court, it's a Senate Committee hearing.
     

Share This Page