3 ms·

Tell that to the guys in Gitmo. Though they might be not nice and totally guilty nobody bothered to formally charge them.

by egao1980 7y ago

frozenport 7y ago
They were really POWs, but the Bush administration had too many legal obstacles to declaring them as such.
gamblor956 7y ago
The guys in Gitmo were captured on the battlefield so the alternative is that they could be dead. But let's focus on the lack of process in taking them captive instead of just killing then.
- codedokode 7y ago
  There are international treaties about handling prisoners of war. The thing is that US found a loophole not to admit that they are prisoners of war. What US did is similar to what their enemies like Taliban do.
  - gamblor956 7y ago
    The US didn't "find a loophole." Prisoner of war protections under international treaties only apply to state participants, meaning members of a state army. Terrorists and other non-sanctioned armed forces are not protected by treaties between states because they are not fighting on behalf of a state. This is a recognized and intended exception to the rules governing POWs.
jbay808 7y ago
This is a very good point, and it's part of the reason that much of the western world abhors the US' practices in Guantanamo Bay, and criticizes them for it. It's a black mark on the USA's reputation. You probably won't find a large audience here that defends gitmo though (probably). I expect most of us would agree about this.
contempt 7y ago
it is my understanding that those who ended up in gitmo are typically associated with, and placed there under the understanding that they are suspected to be associated with actively violent "terrorist" organizations (the actively violent rogue groups is the point here, not the terrorist label, whatever that means lmao). It's not just people expressing dissenting opinions disappearing. This seems very very very different to me. Look up the communist student group at peking university in china (who are criticizing the capitalist tendencies and corruption of China) who are __currently__ disappearing. Edit: Not excusing gitmo on moral grounds, just pointing out it's pretty different than a country making its own dissenting citizens 'disappear'
- codedokode 7y ago
  They were threated worse than the prisoners of war are exepected to be treated. This is a weak excuse. An army is a violent group too, do the soldiers deserve such treatment when captured?
dang 7y ago
Could you please stop using HN primarily for political and ideological battle? It's not what this site is for, and it looks like you've been doing it exclusively. We ban accounts that do that, because HN exists for intellectual curiosity, which is destroyed by this sort of thing. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful. You might also find these links helpful for getting the intended idea: https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html https://news.ycombinator.com/hackernews.html https://news.ycombinator.com/hackernews.html http://www.paulgraham.com/trolls.html http://www.paulgraham.com/trolls.html http://www.paulgraham.com/hackernews.html http://www.paulgraham.com/hackernews.html

Tell that to the guys in Gitmo. Though they might be not nice and totally guilty nobody bothered to formally charge them.

frozenport 7y ago

They were really POWs, but the Bush administration had too many legal obstacles to declaring them as such.

gamblor956 7y ago

The guys in Gitmo were captured on the battlefield so the alternative is that they could be dead. But let's focus on the lack of process in taking them captive instead of just killing then.

codedokode 7y ago
There are international treaties about handling prisoners of war. The thing is that US found a loophole not to admit that they are prisoners of war. What US did is similar to what their enemies like Taliban do.
- gamblor956 7y ago
  The US didn't "find a loophole." Prisoner of war protections under international treaties only apply to state participants, meaning members of a state army. Terrorists and other non-sanctioned armed forces are not protected by treaties between states because they are not fighting on behalf of a state. This is a recognized and intended exception to the rules governing POWs.

jbay808 7y ago

This is a very good point, and it's part of the reason that much of the western world abhors the US' practices in Guantanamo Bay, and criticizes them for it. It's a black mark on the USA's reputation. You probably won't find a large audience here that defends gitmo though (probably). I expect most of us would agree about this.

contempt 7y ago

it is my understanding that those who ended up in gitmo are typically associated with, and placed there under the understanding that they are suspected to be associated with actively violent "terrorist" organizations (the actively violent rogue groups is the point here, not the terrorist label, whatever that means lmao). It's not just people expressing dissenting opinions disappearing. This seems very very very different to me. Look up the communist student group at peking university in china (who are criticizing the capitalist tendencies and corruption of China) who are __currently__ disappearing. Edit: Not excusing gitmo on moral grounds, just pointing out it's pretty different than a country making its own dissenting citizens 'disappear'

codedokode 7y ago
They were threated worse than the prisoners of war are exepected to be treated. This is a weak excuse. An army is a violent group too, do the soldiers deserve such treatment when captured?

dang 7y ago

Could you please stop using HN primarily for political and ideological battle? It's not what this site is for, and it looks like you've been doing it exclusively. We ban accounts that do that, because HN exists for intellectual curiosity, which is destroyed by this sort of thing. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful. You might also find these links helpful for getting the intended idea: https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html https://news.ycombinator.com/hackernews.html https://news.ycombinator.com/hackernews.html http://www.paulgraham.com/trolls.html http://www.paulgraham.com/trolls.html http://www.paulgraham.com/hackernews.html http://www.paulgraham.com/hackernews.html