Which Would YOU Prefer?

Filed under: Middle East ~ Russia

You know how those moonbat left-wingers have been urging us to close down the GITMO prison camp and extend lots of wonderful civil liberties to the pack of crazed terrorists housed there that wish to murder us in our beds? Well, now they've got something new to consider.

Hours ago, Russian special forces assasinated Ruslan Odizhev, a releasee from GITMO who the Russian government views as "extremist." Reuters reports:

Odizhev, born in 1973, was included in a report earlier this year by the New York-based Human Rights Watch on the alleged abuse in Russia of seven former inmates of the Guantanamo Bay prison after Washington handed them back to Moscow in 2004. The FSB had placed Odizhev on its wanted listed in 2005 for allegedly helping to organize a raid by Islamic rebels on Nalchik when more than 100 people died.

Now you tell us, dear reader, is Mr. Odizhev better off with his freedom in Russia or without it at GITMO? Which position would you prefer to occupy? And when will the left choose to expend as much energy criticizing what the Russians have done as they did attacking George Bush?

As is so often the case, things are far from being as simple as the moonbat left-wingers would like to have us believe!

Social Bookmarking:

del.icio.us |

digg |

technorati |

stumble upon |

furl |

Comments

nykrindc says:

Now you tell us, dear reader, is Mr. Odizhev better off with his freedom in Russia or without it at GITMO?

That is my problem with the current level of political debate in this country. Why is it always a binary choice, either 1 or 2, decide now! It's too simple. It is not about is he better off in Gitmo, or better off free causing havoc in Russia. Most people who argue for closing Gitmo down, don't argue that we should let those who are guilty go free, rather all that we are demanding is that we institutionalize a process that is both transparent and meets basic standards of justice. In the long, this question is not about them (our enemies, or other countries) it is about who we are as a nation. The threat from al Qaeda and other terrorist groups is, as the President says, a long-term threat. This is a long war, and Gitmo while necessary in the beginning is way past due for closing. It has come to embody the worst of what the US has done in the name of the GWOT. Rightly, or wrongly, it has come to be perceived as something evil, and bad. We have to acknowledge that and move accordingly to solve the problem.

It's been six years since the GWOT began, it is really a failure of leadership that has kept this Gitmo debate open for so long. By now, and given the reality of the long-war, we should have already had a transparent process that involved not only us, but also our European allies in a way that spread responsibility for the handling of these "enemy combatants."

As is so often the case, things are far from being as simple as the moonbat left-wingers would like to have us believe!

This is ironic, because you are guilty of the same thing.

Incognito says:

Actually *we're* better off.. one less mouth to feed and one less person to worry about coming back and biting us in the proverbial butt.

nykrindc says:

Incognito,

You did notice how I choose purposely not to answer the question. The reason I did this is because I don't think that is the main question with regard to the very deep issue underlying it.

La Russophobe says:

NYKINDC:

You're absolutely wrong, a wrong as you can be.

Whilst proclaiming about the evils of GITMO, you say not one single word about a more effective way to preserve the safety of the American people, which is their primary concern (though perhaps not yours). You do not see fit to mention the fact that our GITMOIZED world has been 100% free from domestic terror events.

You ignore the fact that our internal justice system is designed to let people go free on technicalities like the Miranda warning, and that by folding those barbaric maniacs into that system many will, in fact, go free. Like a classic coward, you decline to face that fact and accept the conquences. Shame on you.

And worst of all, you perversely twist my words to suit your own haughty, imperious designs. They're not about "most people," they're about the MOONBATS. Though granted, the moonbats do think they are most people, they are that deluded. Perhaps you're one of them?

nykrindc says:

Evils? All I said is that while Gitmo while necessary in the beginning is way past due for closing. Meaning, that although yes, we had to come up with a way of keeping these guys locked down, and Gitmo was a good short-term fix, it is past time that we established a transparent process we can institutionalize in this long war. Where did I ever say that we would submit them to our internal justice system?

Like a classic coward, you decline to face that fact and accept the consequences. Shame on you.

You make assumptions for which you have little or no evidence. If this is how you reach conclusions, I'm inclined to question them even more. If you didn't know, I supported the war in Iraq, I still support our efforts in Afghanistan, and have argued vociferously for pushing hard against al Qaeda. My main point in the comment above was to note that Gitmo, has become a liability to us and rather than waste resources on a sinking ship it is far better to look for a better way to keep this prisoners confined while also addressing many of the drawbacks of what Gitmo has come to represent. Even the administration acknowledges as much, so is the president also a coward?

you perversely twist my words to suit your own haughty, imperious designs. They're not about "most people," they're about the MOONBATS.

Perversely? That's a strong accusation. All I said was that I disagreed with the way you were framing the debate. In other words, I argued that it was not a binary choice between keeping them in prison and letting them go free, but rather a more complicated issue of addressing the drawbacks of Gitmo, while also keeping these dangerous individuals confined where they could no longer do harm. Fighting a war is more than just bombing and killing the enemy, or imprisoning him. It is about fighting that enemy in an intelligent manner and avoiding giving him, or anyone else ammunition to use against us.

As Tom Barnett would say, it is about viewing war not solely within the context of war, but within the context of everything else.

RTLM says:

Libs argue against repatriating Gitmo prisoners for fear of "torture" when they arrive in their countries of origin.

So close Gitmo and send them ALL to Russia.

Or keep it open and they can live long, dull, uninteresting lives.

And get fat too.

Aris Katsaris says:

Okay, I'm fucking done with this -- same way as I'm fucking done with the delusional idea that I held onto that we hold anywhere near the same political views on anything other than "Putin is Evil".

Habeas Corpus is one of the greatest achievements of Western Civilisation -- indeed IMAO it can be said to *define* Western Civilization.

As such I proudly declare myself one of those "left-wing moonbats" that would be willing to lay down their lives to defend it.

I'm a "left-wing" moonbat who has spent years of his life bashing Russia's abuses, and trying to inform people about them. So screw you kindly, you supporter of the GITMO and of *Bush's* abuses. So screw you kindly, you and the thousands like you who give the West a bad name -- you who think\ that bloody neo-Soviet *Russia* should be the moral standard with which to judge Western civilization.

But then again, as long as America keeps GITMO open and utilizes torture like it does, it can barely be said to even belong to Western civilization, and its war against Islamofascist is merely a war between torturing villains-vs-genocidal villains. As long as GITMO is kept open, along all its accompanying torture and abuses, America is not the "good guys" but merely the lesser of two evils.

I'm sure you'll consider the paragraphs to be "moonbattery". I call them "clarity" instead.

But anyway - this post of yours defines the moment where Publius Pundit has stopped supporting western civilization and started opposing it instead -- where Publius Pundit stopped supporting democracy and freedom and started supporting tyranny instead.

This blog is merely another apologist of tyranny now, no better than any of the Putin-apologist russophile blogs. Kudos for the moral decline.

VA Gamer says:

Aris, what do you propose to do with the enemy combatants that we capture in our efforts against Al Qaeda and other Islamic extremists? Do we jail them and give them every legal right afforded American citizens? A jury trial will assume these combatants are innocent unless proven guilty. Soldiers, however, are not policemen. They are not trained to gather evidence to be used in a trial. Even if they were, how are they supposed to do this while dodging bullets and IEDs?

Would you prefer that we summarily execute those we find on the battlefield? This would be legally permitted according to the Geneva-Hague Conventions. We certainly did that to spies and sabateurs in WWII.

Perhaps you would prefer that we allow our "allies" Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, et al. to retain custody. We all know that these countries treat their prisoners with respect. They certainly wouldn't torture them, right?

Nevertheless, I agree with you to a point. GITMO has become an albatross that hurts the US image abroad. I could not care less about those we imprison there, but I would like to see it closed so that the hand-wringing Euro-weenies and defeatist lefties would have one less thing to whine about. I would suggest imprisoning these combatants in Iraq. Let the Iraqis have at them.

RTLM says:

Aris Katsaris -

Habeas Corpus is one of the greatest achievements of Western Civilisation -- indeed IMAO it can be said to *define* Western Civilization.

As such I proudly declare myself one of those "left-wing moonbats" that would be willing to lay down their lives to defend it. That I doubt.

Do you think Abraham Lincoln was a good President? FDR?
You may believe the Constitution is a suicide pact. I don't.

It is absurd to grant Constitutional rights to terrorists. People who have a hard time with that usually hate the US.

in other words you're a fairy typical moonbat. (Betchya hate Israel too)
And you misspelled "Civilization".

Aris Katsaris says:

in other words you're a fairy typical moonbat. (Betchya hate Israel too)

Given that since my teenage years I've consistently found myself the *only* person in my highschool, my university and now my workplace, to be willing to defend Jews, Israel, or America, that's yet another assumption from you to indicate what a fucking idiot you are.

And you misspelled "Civilization".\

And you're a parochial idiot. Both are good spellings. When you try to find a spelling mistake why can't you attempt to find an actual one I make? They're not that rare.

Aris, what do you propose to do with the enemy combatants that we capture in our efforts against Al Qaeda and other Islamic extremists?

I expect you not to rape them -- as Taguba reported happened. I expect you not to use attack dogs to savage them -- as in the photos we've all seen. I expect you not to torture them to death -- as there have been many incidents already. I expect you not to waterboard them or do a number of other torture techiniques on them.

Can you make tiny small concessions to civilisation like *that*, before we fully determine the appropriate level of rights they ought have?

Because right now your "full jury trial" comment sounds like a sad joke, as there have been more incidents of "tortured to death" than of even "going to military tribunal" (let alone trial by jury).

So first fix the torture-in-Guantanamo issue, before I find the debate on "jury trial" even worth having, as anything other than satire.

Aris Katsaris says:

Well, was my previous post in response to the above comments deleted? Because I'm still not seeing it. Well here's yet another try.

Here's a summary of my response comments: That given how up to now you've tortured several of your prisoners to death, it's absurd to the point of insanity that you're even raising the issue of "jury trial".

You have not even been able to make basic borderline concessions to civilisation as "no rape, no torture, no interrogation-room deaths". So, VA Game, don't make me laugh by going all the way to "full trial by jury", as if there are no steps you could be taking in between to ensure you remain within viewing distance of civilized behavior.

It is absurd to grant Constitutional rights to terrorists.

To people that various tyrannies around the world have handed to you *claiming* they are terrorists you mean; or even people you've yourselves grabbed at random. Some of them you've ended up releasing anyway, not finding anything against them, even after torturing some of them to death.

Have you even heard of Bagram?

And given how civilized nations grant constitutional rights to rapists and murderers, I don't see the "absurdity" to grant rights to so-called "terrorists". If they are criminals treat them like criminals. If they are prisoners of war, treat them like prisoners of war. If they are something else that's well-defined treat them as something else that's well-defined.

But right now, your current practice is that your government can lock anyone up, for as long as your government wishes, for whatever reason your government says so, and torture them depending on your goverment says so.

I honestly wonder if you'll enjoy that idea as much when it'll be a president you didn't vote in favor of.

The only reason you don't give a damn about all of this, is that these prisoners tend to be brown-skinned Middle-easterners. Not because they are *terrorists* -- many of them *aren't* terrorists and you can stop pretending not to know that. But most of them happen to be Middle-easterners, so really, who gives a damn?

What was it? 2 or 4 months in prison that your soldier got after torturing an innocent Middle-easterner in Bagram to death over a period of days? Torturing a middle-easterner to death is roughly as bad as stealing a bike.

Bloody-well start behaving like a nation of laws, instead of a nation of rape and torture.

Do you think Abraham Lincoln was a good President? FDR?

I think that they presided over well-defined wars, not over a Forever War that's meant to be lasting indefinitely. And somehow I doubt either of them committed as much torture and sexual abuse in their interrogation rooms as your current administration has authorized to be done. Correct me if I'm wrong. I'll certainly have to revise my opinions of Lincoln and Roosevelt downwards if they also authorized the mass torture and abuse of prisoners.

(Betchya hate Israel too)

Since my teenage years I've often found myself the only one in my high school, my university, and my workplace to *support* Israel, Jews and even America.

So that's yet another vile assumption of yours that indicates your idiocy.

And "Civilisation" is a valid spelling, you parochial idiot. Couldn't you find a real typo or spelling mistake to criticize?

La Russophobe says:

ARIS:

Nothing was deleted but we have been having some technical issues with the server that could have caused some comments to be lost, if so we apologize. We believe this problem has now been solved.

RTLM says:

Aris

What's your idea of "foever"? (US has Been in Germany and Japan quite a while now).

Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus and FDR created internment camps.

They both won their wars.

I think you're conceited, ignoramus, pompous fuckin' idiot.

RTLM says:

Edit -
...They both won their wars.

I think you're the conceited, ignoramus, pompous fuckin' idiot

And you are likely a Jew hater.

Aris Katsaris says:

RTLM> "I think you're the conceited, ignoramus, pompous fuckin' idiot"

I think you are a supporter of murder, of torture, of rape, and of tyranny.

I prefer what I am a hundred times over what you are.

"Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus"

You do know that *suspension* of the Habeas Corpus is allowed by your constitution in cases of rebellion, right? No, you probably don't: I doubt you've ever read it.

Bush abolished it entirely of course, he didn't merely "suspend" it.

How many did Lincoln murder or rape in interrogation rooms, that's what I asked from you.

and FDR created internment camps

Which was wrong, but I'm guessing fewer people got tortured and murdered there, than is currently the case in Bush's prisons. If I'm wrong, correct me. Give me the statistics.

They both won their wars

Bush has not only *already* lost his, he has managed to make it so that even a "victory" would be meaningless -- as he'd be merely installing another set of torturers on the thrones of the ones he cast down.

And you are likely a Jew hater

Based on what? My support of Israel in their war against Lebanon? My support of Jews and the right of Israel to exist a hundred times over since my highschool years in a country and society that's probably a hundred times antisemetic than yours?

Or based on the fact you merely want a nasty insult to give that's based on absolutely nothing? Screw you, and the torturers you love both.

What's your idea of "foever"?

A "war on terror" lasts forever, almost by definition. As long as there are *any* terrorists out there among those billions of human beings, you are at *war* against them.

How do you expect a future president to declare an end to this "war of terror"? By going live and saying "We have determined there are no longer any living terrorists that want to hurt innocents anywhere in the universe"?

A "war on terror" is pretty much the archetypical example of a Forever War. "War on Drugs" is another good example, ofc. "War on Poverty" too.

(US has Been in Germany and Japan quite a while now).

You're not currently *waging a war* in Germany or Japan, you know. That war was pretty much over when their governments surrendered. Who do you think you're kidding with this nonsense?

RTLM says:

Thanks Aris - happy to get under your skin. Your hysterical, verbose response to my "nasty insults" prove to me that you're not only an overeducated, under experienced moonbat lib, but are also a true hater. You hate the US and you hate Jews. All libs do. Even Jewish ones.

IE: If you call an obese person a fat ass, he gets hurt and angry. Because the cruel truth of the insult lays bare his vulnerability and humiliation. Same is true when calling a lib a lib.

Libs throw the BushNaziTorture line around so much its now a worn out, meaningless cliche.

The absurd moonbat conspiracy theories you obviously buy into reveal you only to be as a petulant juvenile - butting up against the all powerful "Daddy" Bush.

You're a ferret-faced lightweight lib that has been debunked and brought out as an anti-US, antisemitic troll.

piss off.

(or go face first into another punkish, pseudo-intellectual diatribe and embarrass yourself further)

Aris Katsaris says:

Am sure you can find lots of things to "prove to you" whatever it is you want "proven to you". As such I'm glad and proud that it was my love for liberty that you found as the firstmost incriminating sign.

The absurd moonbat conspiracy theories you obviously buy into

LOL! I've stated no conspiracy theories at all. The only thing I've said that America has tortured innocents to death -- and that's a fact, not a conspiracy theory.

Your courts have even convicted people for doing that -- a few months' convictions, indicating your system's contempt for non-American life, but convictions nonetheless.

And as long as Publius Pundit remains supportive of these policies of torture, it remains supportive of tyranny as a whole.

Have a nice stay in hell, RTLM. Assuming you're a Christian (most conservative assholes tend to be), you do realize that every person whose torture you've supported will be counted as if you were torturing Jesus himself with your own hands?

RTLM says:

Aris -

...you do realize that every person whose torture you've supported will be counted as if you were torturing Jesus himself with your own hands?

That's quite the stretched orifice mouthful from a moonbat lib antisemitic Atheist.

Heh

Come back to me Aris baby - you know I love ya :)

Aris Katsaris says:

Even as an atheist, I'm a much better Christian than you are, RTLM.

And I certainly don't mind responding to you - after all every word out of your mouth displays the utter disconnect from both reality and morality that the torture-loving side of conservatism has.

You're such a great example of conservative wankery and deliberate self-delusion that if you didn't exist we would have had to invent you.

phez says:

Publius Pundit defending liberal democracy and promoting GITMO? Credibility my arse!!

warhammer gold says:

warhammer gold
warhammer Online gold
warhammer money
buy warhammer gold
cheap warhammer Online gold
twelve sky Gold
12sky gold
twelvesky Gold
12Sky Silver Coins
12 sky gold
shaiya gold
shaiya money
cheap shaiya gold
shaiya online gold
buy shaiya gold
priston tale Gold
priston tale Money
buy priston tale Gold
cheap priston tale Gold
Anarchy credits
Anarchy Online credits
Anarchy gold
Anarchy online gold
buy AO credits
World of Kung fu Gold
WoKf gold
buy World of Kung fu Gold
cheap World of Kung fu Gold
World of Kung fu money
kal geons
kal gold
kal online geons
kal online gold
kalonline Geons
Archlord gold
Archlord money
archlord online Gold
Archlord cheap
buy Archlord gold
Tiffany jewelry
replica tiffany Jewelry
tiffany Replica Jewelry
knockoff jewelry
Tiffany 925 Silver
925 tiffany Jewelry
Tiffany Silver Jewelry
Tiffany jewelry
replica tiffany Jewelry
tiffany Replica Jewelry
knockoff jewelry
Tiffany 925 Silver
925 tiffany Jewelry
Tiffany Silver Jewelry

TrackBack

TrackBack URL: http://publiuspundit.com/mt/contages.cgi/250

Which Would YOU Prefer?

Filed under: Middle East ~ Russia

Comments

Post a comment

TrackBack