UBL must have jury trial

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Are you seriously trying to claim that anti-Semitism today has WORSE effects than Auschwitz and Treblinka? However bad it is now (and it is pretty bad) it's at least 6 million times better than it was in 1945.

I'm talking ideals here. I'm not saying that concentration camps are being run right now.

 

And you read this where?

 

Well, you made the Japanese comparison, so I'm just saying if that's the road you want to go down, those are the results you'll be seeing.

 

I'm not running for any office. If you were referring to the President ("ANYBODY else") I don't think you were too likely to vote for him in the first place, but you should read the disclaimer in my profile anyway. It's reproduced below for your convenience.

Perhaps if you want less people to make this mistake, you should stop talking with so much "we" (i.e. "You don't have a say in what we do") which makes you sound like a spokesperson.

[Guest JMA]

Banner of Liberty, eh? I left as soon as I went to the "Save the Scouts!" link.

 

Note: I realize you were referring to the disclaimer. I checked out the link while I was there.

[Justice 0]

But, you see, Osama didn't commit any crimes in Afganistan.

He ran an international terror organization and had terrorist training camps. What's more illegal than that?

Well, since we are looking at the criminal code of Afganistan here, we can't punish him with Afgani law retroactively since the Taliban did support his operations. And to say that's greater than the 3,000 charges of murder and conspiracy to commit murder is, well, kinda out there.

 

This was a crime committed against the US, not Afganistan.

 

 

Try to remember that Osama has actually done more in his life than 9/11. This is part of the problem in these debates: People who are so full of self-pity they can't see the forest for the trees and concentrate the big picture.

 

... Excuse me, but please explain to me what evil he has committed that is greater than what he did on September 11th, Jobber. I've never heard of him committing massive atrocities there. The Taliban, maybe. But realize this isn't the Taliban. Whatever he has done in Afganistan (If anything) is of little consequence when compared to the attacks he has committed against the US.

 

I don't see a forest because there is only one tree, Jobber. Get it straight.

 

Saddam committed his crimes against Iraqi citizens.

Are you INANE? To compare the few things that he has directly done to a few American citizens, while tragic, does not at overrule the incredible terror and torture that he inflicted on the Iraqi people.

 

Are you drunk tonight or something, Jobber? This is not at all like you to defend something so utterly out there like trying Osama in Afganistan.

[Firestarter 0]

I'm talking ideals here. I'm not saying that concentration camps are being run right now.

Well, isn't that special. What was your point again?

 

Well, you made the Japanese comparison, so I'm just saying if that's the road you want to go down, those are the results you'll be seeing.

Like peaceful, educated, prosperous, and liberated democratic allies springing up in every country we bomb? Wow, neato! I can't wait. Let's start bombing Iran, North Korea, and Cuba tonight!

 

Perhaps if you want less people to make this mistake, you should stop talking with so much "we" (i.e. "You don't have a say in what we do") which makes you sound like a spokesperson.

Most sane people understand that the President doesn't issue policy statements through a spokesman on an Internet bulletin board. This isn't the Howard Dean campaign. As for the "we" in the quoted sentence, I was speaking as an American. Should I apologise for that, since you seem to think we (shit, I did it again) should be apologising for pretty much everything we do anyway?

[Firestarter 0]

Are you drunk tonight or something, Jobber? This is not at all like you to defend something so utterly out there like trying Osama in Afganistan.

I've been thinking that for a few days. He needs to start changing his password regularly or something if this isn't him AGAIN.

[Firestarter 0]

Banner of Liberty, eh? I left as soon as I went to the "Save the Scouts!" link.

I don't agree with some of the things she says, but I liked one or two of her articles a while ago. Haven't visited it in a while, but anyway, I've changed the link now to point to a different site.

 

Real Clear Politics - political commentary for the political junkie

[Guest JMA]

I don't agree with some of the things she says, but I liked one or two of her articles a while ago. Haven't visited it in a while, but anyway, I've changed the link now to a different site.

Ah. Kay.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Are you drunk tonight or something, Jobber? This is not at all like you to defend something so utterly out there like trying Osama in Afganistan.

No, this really is the real me (really) and I'm not even so much defending it as saying that I don't think it's the end the campaign you guys think it is. Personally, I don't think it's THAT unreasonable but I don't think it's likely.

[Dr. Tom 0]

I hope Usama gets brought to justice as much as the next guy but killing him would only make him a Marytr.

A "martyr" for whom, exactly? More fuckheaded extemist Muslim terrorists? Good gracious, we've never dealt with any of them before, have we? Bah. Let them come after we cut off his head. Let them all come at once, in fact... there's no point in making our servicemen clean their guns more than once.

[Justice 0]

Are you drunk tonight or something, Jobber? This is not at all like you to defend something so utterly out there like trying Osama in Afganistan.

No, this really is the real me (really) and I'm not even so much defending it as saying that I don't think it's the end the campaign you guys think it is. Personally, I don't think it's THAT unreasonable but I don't think it's likely.

Well, this alone won't end his campaign. But if he keeps up the pace of his gaffs then he's gonna go under pretty quickly.

 

And it does lack a lot of logic to it: Try him in a place where he has committed no crimes against anyone instead of the place he actually committed his deeds? I hope you understand why this seems so out there to me...

[Guest MikeSC]

Unfuckingbelievable. He's certain most Americans agree with his sentiments? He's out of his friggin' mind. I think most Americans want UBL slowly pumped full of thousands of very small calibre bullets by President Bush on live television and the tattered corpse nuked a few hundred times. Forget the comparisons to McGovern, forget the comparisons to Mondale. This guy is going to set the new standard for suffering the most crushing defeat in electoral history.

 

I think, and dear God hope he does too, that Dean means that the country will put the man to trial, and then punish him with death thousands of times over. Seems similar as to what will eventually happen with ole Saddam. As much as I would pay to see Osama (Usama, however the hell he wants his name spelled this week) murdered in cold blood, I think it's just the way the system works. Nuremburg Trials, I think, would be the legal precedent.

 

As for the most crushing defeat? Nah. Least I hope not.

Well, let's face one little thing: The Nuremberg Trials are HARDLY an ideal of a judicial proceeding. The IRC (Iraqi Ruling Council) would be more capable of trying Saddam honestly than the Nuremberg Trials were. The verdicts given to the Nazis were deserved --- but the trials were anything but actually "fair" in an American sense of the word.

 

And, honestly, Osama doesn't really deserve a trial. I'm not going to let a lawyer find some asinine loophole to get Osama off. Put a bullet in the back of his head and end the drama.

-=Mike

[Guest MikeSC]

"As a president, I would have to defend the process of the rule of law. But as an American, I want to make sure he gets the death penalty he deserves... I'm just like every other American, I think the guy is outrageous"

As an American, I'd hope that any President of mine would act first and foremost as a fellow American, and that he wouldn't see any conflict between acting as an American and acting as President.

 

7And "outrageous?" My stars, he's really going out on a limb there! But whoa, hold on. He didn't answer the $64 million question: is UBL truly outrageous, like Jem and the Holograms?!

 

Jesus Christ. "Outrageous" is the best he could do? How about something, anything, that would give a basic idea of whether or not he understands the reality of evil? Shades of Michael Dukakis in the second presidential debate...

 

Bernard Shaw: "Governor, if Kitty Dukakis were raped and murdered, would you favor an irrevocable death penalty for the killer?"

Michael Dukakis: "No I don't, Bernard. I think you know that I've opposed the death penalty during all of my life. I don't see any evidence that it's a deterrent, and I think there are better and more effective ways to deal with violent crime. We've done so in my own state."

 

So I'm confused, JotW, were you trying to come to Dean's rescue here or damn him even more thoroughly than he already has been?

OH MY GOD --- a "Jem" reference? I might, in fact, be in love now.

 

Howard Dean as a nominee takes away the intellectual smugness that so many Dems seem to love to hold. Thing is, Howie will LURCH right in a major way once the primaries are decided --- and the backtracking might be a ton of fun.

-=Mike

[Guest MikeSC]

Everyone deserves a trial by jury. Everyone.

 

According to the UN it's a basic human right (see: United Nations' Declaration of Human Rights), and it only makes the United States of America look BETTER to put him to death after a fair trial. I don't understand why anyone would be AGAINST this, it's not like there's some legal loophole that F. Lee Bailey's gonna find to keep his ass from hanging.

Thing I'm going to love is --- WHO on the Human Rights Council is going to MAKE us do it?

 

Syria?

 

China?

 

The U.N has kinda hurt itself with the whole "appointing sub-human terrorist monkeys to key council positions" approach to multilateralism.

-=Mike

[Guest MikeSC]

1. The Moslem fanatics cannot hate us more than they do already. No measure you can propose will pacify them. None. You are a fool if you think otherwise.

Which is why I've thought defense, not offense, it incredibly vital. Aside from slaughtering millions of Arabs and Muslims and wiping their civilization off the Earth (hello WW3,) there's no way to stop religious extremists. Whether they be Muslim, Christian, Hindu, Jewish, or Other.

Well, as we learned throughtout the 90's, doing NOTHING --- or attempting to appeasing them --- is INFINITELY worse. Khaddafy gave up his WMD program because he was terrified of ending up like Saddam, so obviously, it works.

3. UBL dead is far, far better than UBL alive. His "war" is a religious movement but there is also a cult of personality element to it. Shoot him in the head and he'll lose a lot of mystique as well as a lot of blood.

 

Name me a world tyrant who's death stopped the cycle of violence he was pitching. Hitler? Nazis still do exist in the world and anti-Semitism is much more evident. Saddam's capture hasn't shattered the resistance, and I can't imagine Al-Qaeda being unable to operate without Osama.

Please tell me you're kidding. Last time I checked, Nazis didn't have control of a huge chunk of Europe and aren't busily slaughtering Jews by the trainload. A few nuts don't exactly mean that the Nazis are ANYTHING resembling a political force.

 

Saddam's capture helped inspire Moammar to quit his WMD --- so it worked quite nicely.

 

And, the way you seem to be advocating action here is horribly ineffectual.

Criminal justice is for criminals. UBL is a declared enemy of the United States. We don't give such people show-trials and we don't lock them up. We kill them.

 

Unless they surrender, we do. And I thought a trial was the right idea here, as evidenced by Saddam?

Hard to kill a guy who is surrendering. We're not that low.

Remember Pearl Harbor? When the Japanese declared war on us, FDR didn't promise to bring the Emperor to justice. He promised to crush Japan.

 

So, we need to kill lots of innocents and turn the Middle East into an isolated society (or one more isolated than it already is)? Wonderful.

And YOUR plan is what?

 

Either you learn to live as a humane member of society or you suffer the consequences.

-=Mike

[Jobber of the Week 0]

And YOUR plan is what?

 

Either you learn to live as a humane member of society or you suffer the consequences.

 

I have to make a statement which is not a passionately-fought rebuttal as it is a slight disagreement of how you've thought things through.

 

The Middle East is one of the oldest human civilizations ever. Our country has been around over 200 years now, and we've fought everyone from Britain to Germany to Japan to Russia in that time. And for the most part, the Middle East is mostly sitting around quiety.

 

The point I'm trying to make is, we've been around the hill a time or two ourselves, but this "America must die at any cost" attitude is fairly new.

[Vern Gagne 0]

It might be fairly new. But it's reality.

[Guest MikeSC]

And YOUR plan is what?

 

Either you learn to live as a humane member of society or you suffer the consequences.

 

I have to make a statement which is not a passionately-fought rebuttal as it is a slight disagreement of how you've thought things through.

 

The Middle East is one of the oldest human civilizations ever. Our country has been around over 200 years now, and we've fought everyone from Britain to Germany to Japan to Russia in that time. And for the most part, the Middle East is mostly sitting around quiety.

 

The point I'm trying to make is, we've been around the hill a time or two ourselves, but this "America must die at any cost" attitude is fairly new.

The America must die mentality came about for a variety of reasons:

 

1) We were, in their view, THE driving power in the founding of Israel.

 

2) When colonialism ended, their lives got WORSE instead of better and since they needed a reason for it, the West became the easiest target. The Soviets lives were just as horrid, so they had to find a scapegoat.

 

We are scapegoats for their horrible lives. More than anything else, they want to blame somebody and we're the easiest ones to blame.

-=Mike

[Firestarter 0]

The Middle East is one of the oldest human civilizations ever.

BS. First of all, there never was any "Middle East" civilisation. There were the Persians. The Israelites. The matriarchal moon-goddess worshippers. The Scythians. There was never any one all-encompassing "Middle East" civilisation, and so your statement about its antiquity has no meaning whatsoever. Even if it did, the Greeks, the Celts, the Romans, the Indians, and the Chinese would have far greater claim.

 

Our country has been around over 200 years now, and we've fought everyone from Britain to Germany to Japan to Russia in that time. And for the most part, the Middle East is mostly sitting around quiety.

Really? For the last two hundred years, eh? That's quite a claim. In that time, much of what we now call the "Middle East" was sitting around "quiety" (sic) because they were busy fighting each other and the West under the banner of the Ottoman Empire. They didn't have time to send terrorists to our shores.

 

The point I'm trying to make is, we've been around the hill a time or two ourselves, but this "America must die at any cost" attitude is fairly new.

That attitude has always existed in a certain segment of the Moslem population. It has existed since the inception of the religion. Their prophet was its foremost exemplar and it is extolled in their Koran. It is only now, with the advance of telecommunications and technology, that they have had the opportunity to exercise their evil desires. Your ignorance of history, religion, and culture notwithstanding, to claim that the Middle East was a quiet, peaceful region, not bothering anyone until we came along (or more precisely, until President Bush came along, I suppose, since you said they haven't bothered anyone in the last two hundred years - someone should let the Beirut survivors know sometime) is still the height of absurdity. The Middle East has been drenched by tides of blood since the beginning of recorded history.

[Zorin Industries 0]

That attitude has always existed in a certain segment of the Moslem population. It has existed since the inception of the religion. Their prophet was its foremost exemplar and it is extolled in their Koran. It is only now, with the advance of telecommunications and technology, that they have had the opportunity to exercise their evil desires. Your ignorance of history, religion, and culture notwithstanding, to claim that the Middle East was a quiet, peaceful region, not bothering anyone until we came along (or more precisely, until President Bush came along, I suppose, since you said they haven't bothered anyone in the last two hundred years - someone should let the Beirut survivors know sometime) is still the height of absurdity. The Middle East has been drenched by tides of blood since the beginning of recorded history.

So what do you do about this?

 

This isn't the sameof toppling Saddam, who was one Dictator of one country, this is an old and deep rooted religon. How do you cut out militant Islam from the body of the faith itself, without convincing the faith as a whole that you want to destroy it totally. Can it even be done?

[Firestarter 0]

Make it irrational, self-destructive, exorbitantly expensive, extremely difficult, just plain flat-out impossible, or all of the above for anyone to follow its more abhorrent doctrines. No stoning or burning women to death. Sorry guys, you try it and we'll shoot you. We really will. We don't care what your traditions say, women are people, and Israelis are people too. Either face reality and don't try to murder them, or reality, in the form of a United States Marine, will blow off your head with its sidearm. Your women are free to drive. Try to stop them and we'll tie you to a chair and hang a bunch of frilly panties on you and then put up a sign above your head saying "ONE DAY ONLY VICTORIA'S SECRET CLEARANCE SALE EVERYTHING MUST GO." See how long you last in the middle of that... and even if you survive, you'll curl up in a corner and cry like a little girl if anyone with breasts ever raises her voice to you again. No chanting "Death to America." We put up with it for a while but enough is enough. Shut your mouths and learn to brush your teeth. Get a goddamn shave and experience the joys and wonders of deodorant, coming soon to a Safeway near you (you're welcome). Read Plato. Improve yourselves; God knows (no, not your god) you need it. Try to refrain from issuing death sentences on anyone who questions the date the Koran was written. We don't find it amusing and we will throw you in prison to rot. Oh, and no more trying to take over the entire world and making everyone bang their heads against the floor five times a day. Bad Moslem. Bad! We're NOT interested and we will slap you down again if you haven't yet got the message. And don't even think about trying to get WMDs. You saw what happened last time.

 

Will it work? It's already working. Look at Libya.

Edited December 31, 2003 by Cancer Marney

[Zorin Industries 0]

But lets face it, it's not that easy. Islam is one of the worlds fastest growing religons, one false move along the way and you will have millions of people thinking that this is a new crusade. How COULD you combat a religous popultaion which may become violently opposed to any attempt to alter there way of life?

[Firestarter 0]

I think my Victoria's Secret sale idea would reform even the most hardened terrorist. He'd be living in a state of constant nervous anxiety, starting at sudden noises, unable to think of anything but RUN! RUN! RUN FOR YOUR LIFE! if he saw a bourka or a miniskirt approaching. All we'd have to do, therefore, is flash huge images of Playboy centerfolds on giant monitors next to every security terminal. Anyone who started shuddering convulsively and whimpering, or otherwise experiencing what appears to be some species of epileptic fit, would promptly be dragged off to a federal prison. And even if it didn't work, at least it'd make airports more fun.

[Zorin Industries 0]

Well, I wouldn't complain myself

[EricMM 0]

In some sort of big Culture-Kampf the Islamic Fundies will lose to America for many reasons. First of all, people tend to go where the money is, and clearly it's with the west. Secondly, Americans are FREE to practice whatever religions they please. There's no reason a Muslim cannot practice Islam here. Granted they can't stone people, but if that's SO important to their religion, then we'll just put them in prison or something....

[Zorin Industries 0]

It's all about HOW the U.S. goes about it, it wouldn't take a whole lot to turn moderate Muslems into fundamentalists. Already I think their are signs of polorisation between moderate Islam and Fundementalist Islam, if the U.S can engage with the voices of moderate Islam and get the message out that they wish to live peacefully with the Arab world, then they could cut off some support for the hardliners.

 

However, saying that, I don't think that is the message coming through. While I wouldn't say this looks like a crusade yet, I don't think it would take much for the Arab world to see it like that.

 

If it gets to that stage, then youv'e lost. You could invade every single Muslim country, try to smash their religon and their culture, but you would never have peace with the Middle East again.

 

Edit: And after a year and a half, thats a thousand.

[Firestarter 0]

If we don't have peace with evil people, we've lost? That's a new one on me. Paging Mr Chamberlain, paging Mr Neville Chamberlain. There's a gentleman at the reception desk who wants to borrow Munich...

[EricMM 0]

I mean it will start with Iraq of course. As long as things work out, and an actual democracy with free market pops up there, it'll do FINE.

 

And when it DOES do fine, when the rest of the region sees it doing fine, and having many nice things and yet STILL being Islamic and faithful, and growing and learning and prospering instead of blowing themselves up, maybe they'll learn from someone besides a fundy nut

[Zorin Industries 0]

If we don't have peace with evil people, we've lost? That's a new one on me. Paging Mr Chamberlain, paging Mr Neville Chamberlain. There's a gentleman at the reception desk who wants to borrow Munich...

I meant the Arab worldi n general, the main thrust of my posts has been that the war on terror could very well spiral out of all control, leaving us with a polorised world. It really would be like the Crusades all over again, and that to be honest scares the hell out of me.

[Zorin Industries 0]

I mean it will start with Iraq of course. As long as things work out, and an actual democracy with free market pops up there, it'll do FINE.

 

And when it DOES do fine, when the rest of the region sees it doing fine, and having many nice things and yet STILL being Islamic and faithful, and growing and learning and prospering instead of blowing themselves up, maybe they'll learn from someone besides a fundy nut

I see your'e point, the thing is we won't know for years, say 15 - 20, if this will work or not. The U.S. may have made the first step towards making a better world, or it amy have amde it possiable for things to become worse. I personnelly feel that it will make things worse, but I cant say for certain. I hope it dosen't, I just don't have much faith that the Western world knows how to properly handle the Middle East.

[EricMM 0]

15-20 years begin today, then.

 

Obviously the previously 20 years weren't preventing the kind of violence that occured in the 90's relating to Middle East affairs.

 

I mean I think the only other way to avoid violence besides "fixing" the middle east as I posted, would be to total leave it. Leave Israel it's it's own devices (which would involve most likely a slow war followed by a nuclear detonation and a lot of death) moving out of Saudi Arabia and all other places in the area.

 

And, who knows if THAT would work?