I wonder what people think here....

I have already written two letters to the White House and my Senator and am
interested in getting some public opinion here:

And since we are around the campfire in a free-wheeling discussion I think this is ok:

I fly a lot and wonder "Should the terrorist caught on flight 253 in Detroit and
others like him (or her not to be sexist now hahhah) be treated as a criminal
or as a combatant?" 

As you know this is a BIG difference with different (more severe) rules of trial for
combatants rather than your ordinary-everyday-airline-flying-bomb-carrying passenger!

Rich

PS-

Accepting private answers if this is too volatile for this campfire thread!!

Since the President says we are at war with Al Qaida, I would think "combatant." 

You know, it never crossed my mind that the terrorist could be considered as a combatant. 

Terrorist combatants do not necessarily wear uniforms or fight from distinct frontal lines; they can appear anywhere, at any time, in any guise, and are as much of a threat to innocent civilians as to military personnel. 

An intriguing thought, and since we are engaged in a "war on terrorism" I would have to cast a vote for treating the alledged terrorist as a combatant. 

Perhaps a new classification ("terrorist") should be created with even more severe "rules" and penalties.

Steve

Luca1369 said:

You know, it never crossed my mind that the terrorist could be considered as a combatant. 

Terrorist combatants do not necessarily wear uniforms or fight from distinct frontal lines; they can appear anywhere, at any time, in any guise, and are as much of a threat to innocent civilians as to military personnel. 

An intriguing thought, and since we are engaged in a "war on terrorism" I would have to cast a vote for treating the alledged terrorist as a combatant. 

Perhaps a new classification ("terrorist") should be created with even more severe "rules" and penalties.

Steve

Click to expand...

One or two major differences is that someone caught with a "smoking pair of jockey shorts" in seat
19 is not "alleged"...he could have been legally shot dead if a sky marshall was aboard and had a weapon
that would kill without damaging the aircraft...end of threat!

Secondly, rules of engagement  around the world say that once a person picks up a weapon and points it
at you with clear intent (and a bomb is indeed a weapon (yes..it is a WMD) ) s/he becomes automatically a combatant...and cannot lawyer up
or anything like that and is subject to terminal/deadly force, and not Miranda rights.

R

Combatant. Haul their sorry buts off to Gitmo. 

Mastermtn said:

One or two major differences is that someone caught with a "smoking pair of jockey shorts" in seat
19 is not "alleged"...he could have been legally shot dead if a sky marshall was aboard and had a weapon
that would kill without damaging the aircraft...end of threat!

Click to expand...

Personally, I would have loved to have seen deadly force used against the guy in seat 19. 

But this wonderful system of justice we have, and that the terrorists would love to destroy along with the rest of our way of life, protects these very people.  And if they survive their terrorist activities they are protected by our law and become "alleged" until proven guilty (and allows that guy to plead innocence in a preliminary hearing).

I would advocate a mandatory death penalty for a terrorist action.

Steve

I would advocate a mandatory death penalty for a terrorist action

Click to expand...

 

As opposed to a life term without parole in a fed super-max  -- in a cell alone 23 hours a day.  Death as a martyr is what the idiots want.  A lifetime of gray walls would not be on their agenda.

Guantanamo?  Who cares.  Illinois in another fed supermax is just fine.

Secondly, rules of engagement  around the world say that once a person picks up a weapon and points it
at you with clear intent (and a bomb is indeed a weapon (yes..it is a WMD) ) s/he becomes automatically a combatant...and cannot lawyer up
or anything like that and is subject to terminal/deadly force, and not Miranda rights.

If you read it like that, then anyone that picked up a gun and went into a 711 to rob it could be called a combatant. Like it or not we got what we got. Heck I'm all for cutting fingers off of  theives, firing squad a convected murderer, and so on. and that's just what I would do to the american people.  not the terriorist, I would do one of two things, bomb the heck outta that whole country(you pick one) or I would pull all the troops out of every country, and shore up our boarders, and tell the rest to take care of thier own. I think that's what got us into this in the first place.

kevin said:

Secondly, rules of engagement  around the world say that once a person picks up a weapon and points it
at you with clear intent (and a bomb is indeed a weapon (yes..it is a WMD) ) s/he becomes automatically a combatant...and cannot lawyer up
or anything like that and is subject to terminal/deadly force, and not Miranda rights.

If you read it like that, then anyone that picked up a gun and went into a 711 to rob it could be called a combatant. Like it or not we got what we got. Heck I'm all for cutting fingers off of  theives, firing squad a convected murderer, and so on. and that's just what I would do to the american people.  not the terriorist, I would do one of two things, bomb the heck outta that whole country(you pick one) or I would pull all the troops out of every country, and shore up our boarders, and tell the rest to take care of thier own. I think that's what got us into this in the first place.

Click to expand...

Sorry..I meant specifically in a war, not your local 7-11 robber, clearly.

We are at war with Al-Qaeda, to quote our President's speech the other day...
Al-Qaeda was responsible for at least a half-dozen attacks on our country..last time
I checked they left the 7-11's to us and just concentrated on little things around the
corner like the Twin Towers and several aircraft, eh?

and when any member of that war, Al-Queda, or Al-Queda  affiliate, from any country
in the world, any age, any sex, etc  (ie "civilian" Al-Qaeda...they don't exactly have uniforms)
picks up a weapon then s/he is a combatant...and thoses rules of engagement apply...

And, however, your 7-11 point does raise another significant point, thank you....we are in
a drug war also according to our Pres as well!!  So anyone pointing a Sat night special
is a combatant as well...but I hear they graduated to Ouzi's lately! heheheh

And I agree with your rest...why does the USA have to be the world's policeman?  I did
a few special ops in Viet Nam..so as you say...let's pull out...leave them to themselves...
after all isn't that what freedom is all about? We then keep a dozen spec op teams and
drones and find ben ladden and then get completly out of dodge....



R

Well, General Pershing had the perfect solution, but in today's politically correct society, it would never be accepted.  General Pershing, while fighting the moros on the island of Mindanao in the Philippines burried muslim extremists with pigs so that they could not enter into heaven, and also had his soliders dip their bullets in pig blood and fat.  This would have a profound effect if used again in today's era.  You can't fight with what you think is ethical intentions against an enemy who doesn't share your same beliefs or values.  This is a recipe for defeat.  How many times is history going to have to repeat itself (Vietnam)?

No amount of diplomacy or reasoning will ever work with these muslim fanatics.  They've been fighting for centuries in the name of "allah", and anyone that thinks that diplomacy (Obama/liberals) can work are not only mistaken, but continue to put our country in jeapordy.

Just my $.02

Carl L said:

As opposed to a life term without parole in a fed super-max  -- in a cell alone 23 hours a day.  Death as a martyr is what the idiots want.  A lifetime of gray walls would not be on their agenda.

Click to expand...

I am a staunch anti-death penalty advocate, but have changed somewhat when I consider the terrorists.

I cannot see the expense of keeping terrorists alive and giving them another chance to hurt, maim, or kill somebody (like their guards). 

Give 'em what they want, send them to Allah.

Steve

Well, General Pershing had the perfect solution, but in today's politically correct society, it would never be accepted.

Click to expand...

I would say that it was a bit less than perfect.  Moro guerrillas have fought the US Army and the Philippine Army right down to this day.  We currently have US advisor's on Mindanao with the Philippine Army fighting Moro guerrilla bands.  It seems to be what Moros do.

Carl L said:

I would say that it was a bit less than perfect.  Moro guerrillas have fought the US Army and the Philippine Army right down to this day.  We currently have US advisor's on Mindanao with the Philippine Army fighting Moro guerrilla bands.  It seems to be what Moros do.

Click to expand...

I know this first hand as I was there in 02 for enduring freedom.  They are no longer called Moro guerillas, but refer to themselfs as the Abu Sayef, and a few other cowardly factions.  Our hands were completely tied because the Philippine Constitution forbids foreign military to conduct combat operations on their soil.  So of course, we were there in a "training" status, not an advisory status.  Again, if these tactics were used today, we would see a significant decline in a majority of these cowardly attacts.  The politicans always get us into the fight, but never let us fight to win!  Food for thought.

That's one piont no one seems to bring up. If we stay at war, we can never win, even if we find and kill Bin laden, they(his people) will never stop trying to kill us. They have been fighting against us and are way for ever. What makes us think that it is a winable war? All the fighting in the middle east will continue, no matter what we do, fight them, or try to talk to them, NOTHING works.

does not matter if your a Dem or Rep, they will never stop. To say it's better to have the war over there than here don't get it, we are sending kids into a meat grinder. It will never stop, just like with the war on drugs, you kill 1 and 3 dealers pop up, you catch a drug trafficer and 3 more take his place. seems like a good time to start praying if you have not already.

Yeah - it won't end, that's pretty clear.  Doing nothing (or almost nothing) about the problem was tried a couple of administrations ago and we still had embassy's bombed, the Trade towers were almost bombed, citizens were killed, etc.  So, doing nothing isn't a real feasible option either.

I believe we need a long-term strategy that makes the best use of our resources while applying maximum pressure on the terrorists and minimizes the loss of life - civilian and military.

Freedom isn't free.

kevin said:

That's one piont no one seems to bring up. If we stay at war, we can never win, even if we find and kill Bin laden, they(his people) will never stop trying to kill us. They have been fighting against us and are way for ever. What makes us think that it is a winable war? All the fighting in the middle east will continue, no matter what we do, fight them, or try to talk to them, NOTHING works.

does not matter if your a Dem or Rep, they will never stop. To say it's better to have the war over there than here don't get it, we are sending kids into a meat grinder. It will never stop, just like with the war on drugs, you kill 1 and 3 dealers pop up, you catch a drug trafficer and 3 more take his place. seems like a good time to start praying if you have not already.

Click to expand...

Indeed it Will never stop, it never has and never will.  It is history.  Once upon a time we were fighting Red Brigades, Bader-Meinhof Factions, and Weathermen.    They are now history.  If you are #1, people will want a piece of you, no matter what you do.  In fact, even if you fell to #120 folks would want to do you dirt.  It seems to be what people do.

We hire cops and soldiers and charge them with the job of making life difficult for the thieves and  killers.  Inevitably cops and soldiers will get killed doing that task.  That does not mean that you quit having them do the task.  You may change tactics and reinforce means but you cannot leave the task unengaged.

 

This problem would have been done long time ago if our leaders were not so worry about image (how the rest of the world see us). Now we have a POTUS that bends over any country leader and tries to use diplomacy with a leader who is not embarrased to say that he wants to destroy Israel and has declared a "Dead to America" day for people to freely express their sentiment towards us on that day. Now with all the political correctness going on, we are not even safe on our own soil. I'm sorry, but the POTUS needs to get a dictionary and lookup "terrorist", that way he can stop calling it an isolated incident or a man made disaster. Not admitting his failure on keeping us safe (like bush kept us safe), does not look good on him as a leader. As per the original question, I think, the attacker should be treated as a terrorist and not as an average joe criminal, and if they want to treat him as a criminal, then he should be charged with 300 counts of pre-meditated attempt of murder, and fry him on old sparky, cause I would hate to know that I would have to feed him and cloth him for the rest of his life with my tax dollars.

surely you don't suggest that bush kept us safe

kevin said:

surely you don't suggest that bush kept us safe

Click to expand...

Yes he does....and don't call him shirley......lol

  I've been to Mindanao several times. My BIL was killed by the MLF for his M/C. My wife left S. Catabato this morning and is now in MNL. Due to my close personal ties I'm resisting the urge to rant and rave.
  There are 57 innocent people dead from the latest blood bath of the current Muslim Political group wanting to retain power in Maguindanao. The Mayor of a nearby town has been charged. The execution was carried by local police, the bodies were buried using a Provincial Gov't backhoe.
  Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo hesitantly sends in Troops to restore peace. Hesitantly because she needs the support of the Muslim Politicians.
  When Gloria gets enough pressure she warns the MLF they have 3 days to evacuate their stronghold before she sends in the Phils Marines. A few 'disposable ones' remain for news headlines. Now who taught her that??
  Not wanting to take sides on the death penalty I'll quote my Wife's Grandfather after he escaped the Muslims.........."The only Good Moro is a Dead Moro" (in Visayan of course)
  My 1 PHP worth.