DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - Bush and Obama administration transferred/released 160+ high-risk detainees

**Eagevawax** · 04-26-2011, 07:57 PM

Thank you.

Can you clarify as to why try or release won't work? I'm actually arguing against indefinite detention as a punishment for simple association.

Because membership in a foreign organization is not a crime ... certainly not a crime over which the U.S. has jurisdiction. Thus, with respect to your run-of-the-mill al Qaeda terrorist for whom we have no evidence of the commission of a crime over which the U.S. has jurisdiction (such as an attack within the domestic territory of the United States or, possibly, on a U.S. citizen abroad), release would be mandated under a try or release policy. Obviously, you cannot win a war by letting your enemy walk. The whole idea is to render him hors de combat, i.e. out of the fight. Further, such a policy would encourage our soldiers to kill enemy they encounter rather than doing the more humane thing -- capturing them -- so as not to encounter them again in the field of battle. It's a fool's errand all around.

...

As for Obama getting any political cover from Congress' action, that's absurd IMO. He already made his commitment with the executive order and thus committed to the direction. He then got blocked by Congress where its members did their pandering at his expense. ...

We've been through all this before. He wasn't "blocked," but I understand that's your position. The political cover comes in the fact that he (and his followers) can blame Congress for his failed promise.

04-26-2011, 07:57 PM	#30
Eagevawax Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 572 Senior Member	Thank you. Can you clarify as to why try or release won't work? I'm actually arguing against indefinite detention as a punishment for simple association. Because membership in a foreign organization is not a crime ... certainly not a crime over which the U.S. has jurisdiction. Thus, with respect to your run-of-the-mill al Qaeda terrorist for whom we have no evidence of the commission of a crime over which the U.S. has jurisdiction (such as an attack within the domestic territory of the United States or, possibly, on a U.S. citizen abroad), release would be mandated under a try or release policy. Obviously, you cannot win a war by letting your enemy walk. The whole idea is to render him hors de combat, i.e. out of the fight. Further, such a policy would encourage our soldiers to kill enemy they encounter rather than doing the more humane thing -- capturing them -- so as not to encounter them again in the field of battle. It's a fool's errand all around. ... As for Obama getting any political cover from Congress' action, that's absurd IMO. He already made his commitment with the executive order and thus committed to the direction. He then got blocked by Congress where its members did their pandering at his expense. ... We've been through all this before. He wasn't "blocked," but I understand that's your position. The political cover comes in the fact that he (and his followers) can blame Congress for his failed promise.
	Quote