should Bush just put the Iraqis in some camp?

should Bush put all the Iraqis on some type of camp?

  • Yes

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Maybe

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0

Achilles

Banned
Heres my idea, put all of the Iraqis in a bunch of camps all over Iraq, and then sift the insurgents and rebel out of the mix until the only people left are the people that are willing to help with the process of reconsruction, and the bad guys can just stay in prison, and we could just do away the leaders:2guns:
 
Whether it would work tactically or not is one question, but its a good way to commit political suicide. They Iraqis would lost what little trust they had of us now, because we constantly tell them Iraq is not the enemy, but the militias.
 
ok

i think that is a horrible idea and seeing as the opeation was named "Iraqi Freedom", you should be ashamed of bringing it up.camps? you dont want to know what that sounds like!
 
It was jus tan idea

thanks for viocing your opinion, but my basic idea was mainly putting a tougher curfuw on the Iraqis as punishment for the revolt, you know everyone for the rebelion of the minority, and sorry if the word "camp" offended anyone, I wasnt thinking anything like a concentration camp at all!!!!! :shock:
 
ok

Ok, you are making more sens, tougher curfuw is a tactical means to stop the attacks. The problem is to make it stop completely, this will only be done with smart diplomacy, and tough means against the terrorists them selves, not the population. you mess with the people and you get civilian uprising at its worst(and trust me, this are lessons Israel payed for in blood.)
 
about face said:
Heres my idea, put all of the Iraqis in a bunch of camps all over Iraq

Apart from the obvious, clear, almost clinical absurdity that your idea suggests, that i dont think anyone should even bother to talk about - have you considered the logistical implications of what you just said? How long, what amount of resources, time, expenditure and effort would it take to accomplish something that would simply see the iraqi population even more pissed off with the coalition than they are already? In the end all it would achieve would be to cause demonstrations and riots, as well as huge international backlash. Do you think the "badguys" would also go willingly to the camps and not try to hide at all? Unbelievable.
 
Re: ok

sherman105 said:
i think that is a horrible idea and seeing as the opeation was named "Iraqi Freedom", you should be ashamed of bringing it up.camps? you dont want to know what that sounds like!

Agreed!
 
OK Gentleman. It seems we are all united in the view that putting all Iraqis into camps is a crass idea. I would be interested to hear, then, your views on the US holding so many men at Guantanamo Bay, without charge for over two years? Reasonable act to curb terrorism, or a disgraceful breach of human rights? Has it achieved its aims, indeed what is its aims? Is the world a safer place for it? What price has to be paid for the West to feel safe? As we say over here, answers on a postcard please.

Ladies feel free to answer too!
 
To be honest, to answer whether the holding of these people is jusified or not is a question that i dont think that any of us can answer without knowledge of each individual case, which we are abviously not going to get. Personally, i believe that some of the prisoners probably deserve to be taken through an international court right now. As for their detention, from what i have read in the papers about the way they are being held, i think more could be done to increase their quality of life (few more hours excercise time etc.).
 
hmmm, not sure I agree old boy but I am interested to see what others, particulalry Americans, think before I give my tuppence worth.
 
gjc said:
OK Gentleman. It seems we are all united in the view that putting all Iraqis into camps is a crass idea. I would be interested to hear, then, your views on the US holding so many men at Guantanamo Bay, without charge for over two years? Reasonable act to curb terrorism, or a disgraceful breach of human rights? Has it achieved its aims, indeed what is its aims? Is the world a safer place for it? What price has to be paid for the West to feel safe? As we say over here, answers on a postcard please.

Ladies feel free to answer too!

The Gitmo detainees and imprisoning an entire population are worlds apart, the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay were specifically targetted due to their involvement in, to put it lightly, things they shouldn't be doing. I do not see where the connection lies between the two, Sir.
 
gjc said:
OK Gentleman. It seems we are all united in the view that putting all Iraqis into camps is a crass idea. I would be interested to hear, then, your views on the US holding so many men at Guantanamo Bay, without charge for over two years? Reasonable act to curb terrorism, or a disgraceful breach of human rights? Has it achieved its aims, indeed what is its aims? Is the world a safer place for it? What price has to be paid for the West to feel safe? As we say over here, answers on a postcard please.

Ladies feel free to answer too!


Yes its bad, but there isnt much anyone can do as USA dosn't break any agreements.
 
Redneck said:
gjc said:
OK Gentleman. It seems we are all united in the view that putting all Iraqis into camps is a crass idea. I would be interested to hear, then, your views on the US holding so many men at Guantanamo Bay, without charge for over two years? Reasonable act to curb terrorism, or a disgraceful breach of human rights? Has it achieved its aims, indeed what is its aims? Is the world a safer place for it? What price has to be paid for the West to feel safe? As we say over here, answers on a postcard please.

Ladies feel free to answer too!

The Gitmo detainees and imprisoning an entire population are worlds apart, the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay were specifically targetted due to their involvement in, to put it lightly, things they shouldn't be doing. I do not see where the connection lies between the two, Sir.

Although all prisoners have not been told why they ware "inprisoned", they do not get a trail. I think thats very wrong. On the other hand, POW rules do not include terrorists (yet). As they are not counted as Prisoners Of War.
 
EXTRA! EXTRA!

These prisoners are NOT your ordinary run of the mill criminals, they are our ENEMIES.
 
Interesting, thank you all for your views. I hope more will contribute. RnderSafe I would be interested to hear what you have to say on the topic. My points really are these:

1. Yes, there may be international terrorists who have been brought back from Afganistan. However, many it seems were simply Taliban fighters. Whether you agree with the Taliban government or not (and may I point out that I most certainly do not), they have a very good case for arguing that they were simply defending their country against an attack from other nations, in which case there should be POWs.

2. Any 'POWs' should have been returned long ago, even if it is to an Afgani jail for crimes committed before we went in. We must be seen to be uphold ingthe legitimacy of the Afgani government or we will be back at square one before we know it. If it was wrong for the Vietnamese to keep US pilots as captives long after the war ended then so is it wrong to keep these men.

3. What are we the democratic west fighting for at the moment? Surely it is the right to live our lives the way that we have chosen to without fear of attack, that is as democratic, multi-cultural nation states who live by their own constitutions and sets of laws. Yet at a time where we are on the verge of what could be the major conflict of our generation between western democracies and fundementalist Islamic states we are now ignoring what we hold so dear, and working outside what we deem to be acceptable treatment of our own citizens. If the treatment these men are getting is outside what we deem to be acceptable then how can we convince other nations that our way of living is legitiamte?

4. My solution: the Int boys have had more than long enough to gain any int they need. Any men who were fighting for the Talaban should either be held as POWs or sent back to Afganistan. Any terrorists should be tried in civilian courts using existing anti-terrorist legislation and imprisoned in normal jails - we have learned in Northern Ireland that politising terrorists only gives them added legitimacy - terrorism is a crime, therefore they are criminals.

In summary, the detentions at Guantanamo Bay make us look scared and makes our system of Government look weak. There is no ideal solution, but there must be something better than the situation we find ourselves in now.

I am now putting on my flak jacket and kevlar lid preparing for the inevitable accusations of being soft. But beforeyou reply, please just think of the big picture, what we are fighting for, and if any means justify the end?
 
All terrorists should die, they are war criminals rapists, murderers, thieves, plotters, not to mention, overall bad guys :evil: :evil: :tank:
 
Have you thought that terrorists see that you are the bad guys.
But anyway putting people to any kind of camps for a cultural reason isnt very good idea.
Ever heard about Auschwitz :?:
 
hc^patonki said:
Have you thought that terrorists see that you are the bad guys.

Not that it really matters what they think, seeing as they hate anyone who is different than they are (even slightly, like the Shi'as and the Sunnis). Hell, they are pretty much the definitive racists/ethnocentrists.
 
Back
Top