The Argument Shed

[shinneri]

well thats ok then <_< *cough*guantanamo(sp) bay*cough*

​

Those are terrorist--enemies found fighting against the American forces in Afghanistan and Iraq. The Patriot Act isn't even applied to these people as it deals with enemies within the United States. Secondly, there have been occassions already where individuals freed from Guantanamo who have gone directly back to fighting along with the enemy. People are being treated well there.

This is a war, and wars are invariably ugly, terrible things. But we can't fall into some delusion where we thinks a "global investigation" can stop an armed, militant enemy. And do you not think the nations are not co-ordinating already? I assure you they are.

 

[Hanz™]

well thats ok then <_< *cough*guantanamo(sp) bay*cough*

​

Those are terrorist--enemies found fighting against the American forces in Afghanistan and Iraq. The Patriot Act isn't even applied to these people as it deals with enemies within the United States. Secondly, there have been occassions already where individuals freed from Guantanamo who have gone directly back to fighting along with the enemy. People are being treated well there.

This is a war, and wars are invariably ugly, terrible things. But we can't fall into some delusion where we thinks a "global investigation" can stop an armed, militant enemy. And do you not think the nations are not co-ordinating already? I assure you they are.

​

Not so.
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/dec2003/hick-d30.shtml
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/jan2003/guan-j03.shtml
and:
http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/rightsandfre...atriotabuse.htm

*I am not saying that everything it wrong with these 2 things but they are being misused and should not really exist.

It's a very bad move for the prime minister to postpone the G8 conference as that is what the terrorists want.

 

[c0ncept]

treated well? Thats good, but what bothers me about that place is that people have been held there for years without trial or due proccess.

Governments need to be seen to be acting transparently in these matters, both in the interests of the 'terrorists' (I applied quotation marks because without trial it cannot be proven) and for the population at large. I mean, surely you'd rather know that suspect A has had a trial, been proven guilty and then dealt with accordingly?

Had any of my family been killed in 9/11, the madrid bombings or the london bombings, I'd feel much better knowing for a fact that those responsible had been dealt with rather than a large amount of 'suspects' being held without any sort of resolution in sight. Closure, you know?

This whole war on terror bothers me actually, having read 1984 a few years ago, it reminds me very strongly of the idea of permanent war that Orwell postulated. Not to mention the rewriting of history that is constantly going on from both the Uk and the US governments.

 

[Mark]

well thats ok then <_< *cough*guantanamo(sp) bay*cough*

​

Those are terrorist--enemies found fighting against the American forces in Afghanistan and Iraq. The Patriot Act isn't even applied to these people as it deals with enemies within the United States. Secondly, there have been occassions already where individuals freed from Guantanamo who have gone directly back to fighting along with the enemy. People are being treated well there.

This is a war, and wars are invariably ugly, terrible things. But we can't fall into some delusion where we thinks a "global investigation" can stop an armed, militant enemy. And do you not think the nations are not co-ordinating already? I assure you they are.

​

Not so.
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/dec2003/hick-d30.shtml
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/jan2003/guan-j03.shtml
and:
http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/rightsandfre...atriotabuse.htm

*I am not saying that everything it wrong with these 2 things but they are being misused and should not really exist.

It's a very bad move for the prime minister to postpone the G8 conference as that is what the terrorists want.

​

He's postponed it? I'm pretty sure he hasn't, and Jack Straw is chairing it.

 

[c0ncept]

no, he hasn't. I was watching his press conference. g8 is actually going ahead without him for a few hours while he travels to london to assess the situation. Apparently he plans to return to the g8 sometime later today. But even that is severly disrupting the summit, which is playing right into their hands.

 

[Mark]

well thats ok then <_< *cough*guantanamo(sp) bay*cough*

​

Those are terrorist--enemies found fighting against the American forces in Afghanistan and Iraq. The Patriot Act isn't even applied to these people as it deals with enemies within the United States. Secondly, there have been occassions already where individuals freed from Guantanamo who have gone directly back to fighting along with the enemy. People are being treated well there.

This is a war, and wars are invariably ugly, terrible things. But we can't fall into some delusion where we thinks a "global investigation" can stop an armed, militant enemy. And do you not think the nations are not co-ordinating already? I assure you they are.

​

Any proof? Nope, thought not.

It's not just ugly, but it's the most shocking thing the civilised world has done in a long time; you have a entrenched Consitituion to protect personal freedoms and rights, yet these don't apply to these people as they are 'suspects', so they stick them in Cuba.

What happened today was terrible. But I'll be damned if Britian and America are involved in a war.

Just like Micheal Moore says, how can you declare war on a noun?

 

[shinneri]

I would never, ever trust those first two sources because I can't help but sense a bias. That second source seems to just be the ACLU (a vastly liberal, anti-Bush organization) trying to raise hell like always. I see no misuse there...

I agree that the POWs in Guantanamo deserve a trial, and I do not know why they have not done so in greater numbers yet, so in that regard, I agree with you, concept.

G8 is continueing. Blair will be returning there later today, I believe.

 

[xboxit]

I agree. You can/should not claim to start war on terrorism because to win is impossible. There will always be threats out there. The only way to get rid of such theats is to take away freedom but by no mean am i saying that should happen.
I have a bad thought in the back of my head that says this is to do with london wining the olimpic bid.
But if AlQuieda is claiming to be behind it then FFS, why do such a thing. I'm glad my sister is ok and am very sorry to anyone who lost someone.
I just thank my lucky stars that i didn't go to london today.

 

[KickinWing]

war on a noun, i've never heard of that before, a noun is also a person, place, or thing. So if they mean War on Terror, or War on Terrorism. Neither Terror or Terrorism is a noun.

There's no way to get rid of terrorism, even though 99% of the terror acts are done by one group of people, even if you got rid of every person, there'd be another to take it's place. The best thing to do is fight back i agree, terrorist are basically savages and you cannot use diplomatic strategies with savages.

 

[Mark]

war on a noun, i've never heard of that before, a noun is also a person, place, or thing. So if they mean War on Terror, or War on Terrorism. Neither Terror or Terrorism is a noun.

​

What? Terror is a noun.

 

[shinneri]

Any proof? Nope, thought not.

​

I live here. We are a free society, and, if anyone feels they are being treated unfairly, they can and would challenge the government.

And what exactly do you suspect that the government is doing...?

 

[KickinWing]

i just looked it up and your right, though i don't see how it qualifies for a person, place, or thing. But your right. my bad. just nevermind

 

[Mark]

Any proof? Nope, thought not.

​

I live here. We are a free society, and, if anyone feels they are being treated unfairly, they can and would challenge the government.

And what exactly do you suspect that the government is doing...?

​

I hate to use Micheal Moore again, since some of his stuff is slightly dubious and he's a 'filthy liberal' but I recommend you watch Fahrenheit 9/11. As I say, take it with a pinch of salt, but it gets the point across.

America is the only country I know of where critism of the president is seen as being unpatriotic. That's hardly good to challenge the Government is it?

 

[KickinWing]

i'm not a huge fan of the president, and i feel alot of the things he's done have been handled wrong, but nowhere, at least in the area I live and sourrounding areas, does critisizing the president been seen as unpatriotic, every president since Washington has been critisized and every president in the future will be.

EDIT: and i don't care if you guys get pissed off over this comment or not, but you don't live in the states. I don't live in England. I would never critisize your government because i don't know how it works, yet everybody can critisize and blame the American government for everything yet you've probably never stepped foot on our soil.

 

[Mark]

i just looked it up and your right, though i don't see how it qualifies for a person, place, or thing. But your right. my bad. just nevermind

​

Never mind. I think this threads gone rather off topic anyway....

 

[shinneri]

I hate to use Micheal Moore again, since some of his stuff is slightly dubious and he's a 'filthy liberal' but I recommend you watch Fahrenheit 9/11. As I say, take it with a pinch of salt, but it gets the point across.

America is the only country I know of where critism of the president is seen as being unpatriotic. That's hardly good to challenge the Government is it?

​

Michael Moore's a madman. I don't know if some of his points are coherent or not, but most of them aren't and that really kills any and all of his credibility.

Criticism is one thing. Blind hatred and fighting/hating everything that the man stands for or tries to do (Michael Moore comes to mind) I think could be construed as unpatriotic. I've criticized Bush on several of his beliefs and policies (like his insane position on illegal immigrants).

 

[Nova]

London Police have confirmed at least 33 dead, and apparently there is a tube train full of them that they cant get to

 

[KickinWing]

http://www.msn.com/

reporting 40 dead, horrible.

 

[Mark]

I hate to use Micheal Moore again, since some of his stuff is slightly dubious and he's a 'filthy liberal' but I recommend you watch Fahrenheit 9/11. As I say, take it with a pinch of salt, but it gets the point across.

America is the only country I know of where critism of the president is seen as being unpatriotic. That's hardly good to challenge the Government is it?

​

Michael Moore's a madman. I don't know if some of his points are coherent or not, but most of them aren't and that really kills any and all of his credibility.

Criticism is one thing. Blind hatred and fighting/hating everything that the man stands for or tries to do (Michael Moore comes to mind) I think could be construed as unpatriotic. I've criticized Bush on several of his beliefs and policies (like his insane position on illegal immigrants).

​

You really just proved my point.

 

[shinneri]

Blind hatred and fighting/hating everything that the man stands for or tries to do (Michael Moore comes to mind) I think could be construed as unpatriotic.

Read the whole sentence, and you'll see I most certainly didn't. Regardless, I'm not debating any longer as nothing is being gained from it. This is a terrible event that has occurred, and a discussion of it should not incite a fight between individuals from two good, free nations.