Forum Thread

Negotiating with Terrorists

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 4 Posts
  • Democrat
    Missouri
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    After reading a new report generated on Yahoo News, "When Bush Paid Terrorists a Ransom", I was appalled at the notion of Republicans, Tea Partiers and even Democrats upset with Obama negotiating Bergdahl's release. Since nobody has bothered to enter into a discussion on how and why America can continue holding the "proclaimed" terrorists in Gitmo, than I though it makes good comparison on what Bush had done in 2002. America has not legally charged these enemies and just keeps them locked up paying enormous sums of money we don't have.....for what? What can America do with them. You can't have a legal forum to charge or convict them, because there insufficient evidence to label them terrorists. They are rebellious countryman fighting for their own country. They will most likely return fighting for their cause when released.

    Now, on Bush where he negotiated a sum of money $300,000.00 and paid the funds to the Al Qaeda in 2002. Why didn't America get upset over that payment to a "Terrorist organization"? Even after Bush performed a public speech on "not negotiating with terrorist", that did not stop his administration from paying out money to the Al Qaeda.

    In Bergdahl's defense, he is a member of the armed forces and it is recanted in all branches of military, "leave no soldier behind". We parlayed for his release, which was costly releasing some dangerous POWs. So, which President acted in bad faith to their country, Bush or Obama? I believe Obama desires closing Gitmo, but in a phased approach releasing POWs as the war ends, than close Gitmo altogether.

    Please read the Yahoo News article mentioned above.
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Yes, you've got some good points. The only thing I still do not understand is why in the past (and may be in the future) do we attack/invade whole countries, instead of going afier the individuals, who indeed did us harm. Saves a lot of lives/money and does not need VA hospitals either afterwards.

    Also there is an internatial tribunal in the Hague ( Den Haag) in the Netherlands, why is n't that used to judge and convict international criminals etc.

    I never understood the Guantanamo set up; the whole world finds it strange to keep people prisoned without any trial or conviction. If another country does do that to one of our own people we scream "blue murder" , like now in N.Korea
  • Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    This is what frustrates me about the whole "prisoner exchange". Of the five Taliban prisoners turned over to Qatar, three of them appear to be nothing more than bureaucrats who had been working in the Afghan government. I don't know to what extent they resisted the invasion of American troops, but they are not military people and they are not al Qaeda. A fourth is a policeman...not a soldier. The fifth should be charged with crimes against his own people and tried in Afghanistan, much like Saddam Hussein was tried by Iraqis. But did he fight American troops? We don't know, and the very fact that none of these people have been charged with anything suggests that we do not have a case against any of them...except that they are Taliban, a pseudo religious-political organization. But does being a Taliban automatically label you as a "terrorist"?

    The mainstream media seem to use the terms 'terrorists' and 'Taliban' interchangeably. The Taliban did not attack us on 9/11 and unlike al Qaeda, they have not carried on their fight against western interest beyond the borders of Pakistan and Afghanistan. They do not seem like a threat to the United States of America unless we occupy their countries.

    In the minds of many right wing thinking Americans they are "guilty by association" and are perfectly comfortable with them spending the rest of their lives in Gitmo without a trial. The only crime I can see being committed is the American government holding them in perpetuity without being charged for anything and without a trial...and letting ignorance rule.

    Let's start think critically instead of emotionally.
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Schmidt Wrote: This is what frustrates me about the whole "prisoner exchange". Of the five Taliban prisoners turned over to Qatar, three of them appear to be nothing more than bureaucrats who had been working in the Afghan government. I don't know to what extent they resisted the invasion of American troops, but they are not military people and they are not al Qaeda. A fourth is a policeman...not a soldier. The fifth should be charged with crimes against his own people and tried in Afghanistan, much like Saddam Hussein was tried by Iraqis. But did he fight American troops? We don't know, and the very fact that none of these people have been charged with anything suggests that we do not have a case against any of them...except that they are Taliban, a pseudo religious-political organization. But does being a Taliban automatically label you as a "terrorist"?

    The mainstream media seem to use the terms 'terrorists' and 'Taliban' interchangeably. The Taliban did not attack us on 9/11 and unlike al Qaeda, they have not carried on their fight against western interest beyond the borders of Pakistan and Afghanistan. They do not seem like a threat to the United States of America unless we occupy their countries.

    In the minds of many right wing thinking Americans they are "guilty by association" and are perfectly comfortable with them spending the rest of their lives in Gitmo without a trial. The only crime I can see being committed is the American government holding them in perpetuity without being charged for anything and without a trial...and letting ignorance rule.

    Let's start think critically instead of emotionally.
    My feelings exactly; I guess it is the "dumb" factor and "indoctrination" factor as well the "fear" factor.
    In general, I find most Americans very "emotional" especially if they feel insecure; that's why they run to the church like "hell".