-- Posted by tkedwn119 at 5:52 pm on June 12, 2008 The Courts ruled that Islamic terrorists being held in Guantanimo Bay are indeed people, and therefore have rights.  I think thats so stupid, they want to kill us and destroy our way of life. If I had my way they'd be dead the second we caught them. -- Posted by IndecisiveBitch at 5:53 pm on June 12, 2008 They are indeed people, and therefore they have rights. -- Posted by sexytinkerbelle at 5:53 pm on June 12, 2008 i agree -- Posted by Kkkkaseey at 5:53 pm on June 12, 2008 I actually agree with that, it's ridiculous. -- Posted by iinsurgent at 5:53 pm on June 12, 2008 how much do you know about the people in guantanamo bay? -- Posted by fedoragirl at 5:53 pm on June 12, 2008 :/ They are indeed people & should be treated more humanely.   -- Posted by Petchy at 5:54 pm on June 12, 2008 They aren't terrorists, they are fighting for a cause in which they thought were just, regardless of what we thought was right or wrong. If you were being held in a Islamic high security prison, you would wish to god there were people out there fighting for your rights too. -- Posted by alastrxxna at 5:59 pm on June 12, 2008 That;s good? Idk they still deserve to be totured in my opinion. -- Posted by gokusk8boy at 6:01 pm on June 12, 2008 its kinda like an iffy situation. because on one side u want them to die. but if u where in their positions (killing americans because they are told to) u would hope that u have some rights -- Posted by happygoluckyelf at 6:06 pm on June 12, 2008 People are people and they still have rights. I don't think there is any justification for torture. Ever. -- Posted by Bud2400 at 6:51 pm on June 12, 2008 First, prove that they're terrorists in a court of law.  Then I'd be more inclined to let you do whatever the hell you wanted with them (although morally, I disagree with torture on all grounds). As far as Supreme Court rulings go, this has to be one of the better ones. -- Posted by tkedwn119 at 6:59 pm on June 12, 2008 Quote: from Bud2400 at 9:51 pm on June 12, 2008 First, prove that they're terrorists in a court of law. Then I'd be more inclined to let you do whatever the hell you wanted with them (although morally, I disagree with torture on all grounds). As far as Supreme Court rulings go, this has to be one of the better ones. Just like Row v Wade was a great one too?  We just need to nuke all of the islamic world. It would make american policy easier -- Posted by Bud2400 at 7:29 pm on June 12, 2008 Quote: from tkedwn119 at 6:59 pm on June 12, 2008 Just like Row v Wade was a great one too? Roe VS Wade was one of the more atrocious rulings the Supreme Court has came up with.  I may support abortion, but in no way do I support judicial activism on that level which violates the rights of each state. We just need to nuke all of the islamic world. It would make american policy easier At the cost of what?  Earning the enmity of the entire world?  Destroying an entire region won't do the US any good if the rest of the world retaliates in some manner, either directly through force or economically through sanctions.  The US cannot go it alone and sustain itself, I'm sorry to say. -- Posted by happygoluckyelf at 8:25 pm on June 12, 2008 Quote: from Bud2400 at 10:29 pm on June 12, 2008 Quote: from tkedwn119 at 6:59 pm on June 12, 2008 Just like Row v Wade was a great one too?   Roe VS Wade was one of the more atrocious rulings the Supreme Court has came up with. I may support abortion, but in no way do I support judicial activism on that level which violates the rights of each state.   We just need to nuke all of the islamic world. It would make american policy easier At the cost of what? Earning the enmity of the entire world? Destroying an entire region won't do the US any good if the rest of the world retaliates in some manner, either directly through force or economically through sanctions. The US cannot go it alone and sustain itself, I'm sorry to say. I agree. Our economy would completely crumble, not that it isn't on the rocks already. Plus, the astronomical loss of life for a lot of innocent civilians, and all the environmental damage the radioactivity would cause. -- Posted by tkedwn119 at 8:25 pm on June 12, 2008 Quote: from Bud2400 at 10:29 pm on June 12, 2008 Quote: from tkedwn119 at 6:59 pm on June 12, 2008 Just like Row v Wade was a great one too?   Roe VS Wade was one of the more atrocious rulings the Supreme Court has came up with. I may support abortion, but in no way do I support judicial activism on that level which violates the rights of each state.   We just need to nuke all of the islamic world. It would make american policy easier At the cost of what? Earning the enmity of the entire world? Destroying an entire region won't do the US any good if the rest of the world retaliates in some manner, either directly through force or economically through sanctions. The US cannot go it alone and sustain itself, I'm sorry to say. You support abortion, then you might as well be support murder.  Screw the world, we don't need them.  And the querr UN can't do a thing.  The Security Counsil needs a unanimous decision to act and US is on it -- Posted by Kokasion at 8:27 pm on June 12, 2008 My Morals and my Understanding contradict each other. People don't have rights, they have mercy, they earn mercy. "Terrorists" have made a bunch of people angry, so "Authoritive Figures" decide to point fingers at whoever appears to be a terrorist. First of all, I think We are probably justified in holding these people captive. Liberals are quick to point fingers, just like Conservatives, and say "You're not doing the right thing." Because they're looking at it from one perspective. I'm sure they have gathered Intel on these suspected terrorists. But, they do owe the captives an explanation. They're not doing that because they don't want them to have the slightest ability to figure out how it is we know what we know. It sounds like an excuse, but it does serve as a good reason. -- Posted by happygoluckyelf at 8:28 pm on June 12, 2008 Quote: from tkedwn119 at 11:25 pm on June 12, 2008 Quote: from Bud2400 at 10:29 pm on June 12, 2008 Quote: from tkedwn119 at 6:59 pm on June 12, 2008 Just like Row v Wade was a great one too?      Roe VS Wade was one of the more atrocious rulings the Supreme Court has came up with.  I may support abortion, but in no way do I support judicial activism on that level which violates the rights of each state.       We just need to nuke all of the islamic world. It would make american policy easier    At the cost of what?  Earning the enmity of the entire world?  Destroying an entire region won't do the US any good if the rest of the world retaliates in some manner, either directly through force or economically through sanctions.  The US cannot go it alone and sustain itself, I'm sorry to say. You support abortion, then you might as well be support murder. Screw the world, we don't need them. And the querr UN can't do a thing. The Security Counsil needs a unanimous decision to act and US is on it Excuse me?! "Screw the world"?! Look, I know we may have been better off when we took an isolationist stance on foreign policy, but now that we're firmly in the global market (and in huge amounts of debt to other countries) we can't just pull out like that and defy all the treaties and pacts we've agreed to. -- Posted by Kokasion at 8:30 pm on June 12, 2008 Quote: from tkedwn119 at 8:25 pm on June 12, 2008 You support abortion, then you might as well be support murder. Screw the world, we don't need them. And the querr UN can't do a thing. The Security Counsil needs a unanimous decision to act and US is on it You just want control. I'm all for being part of the Dominate Nation, it does make things a lot easier. But I don't want to be associated with Contradictive hypocrites. Like yourself. -- Posted by tkedwn119 at 8:32 pm on June 12, 2008 Quote: from happygoluckyelf at 11:25 pm on June 12, 2008 Quote: from Bud2400 at 10:29 pm on June 12, 2008 Quote: from tkedwn119 at 6:59 pm on June 12, 2008 Just like Row v Wade was a great one too?      Roe VS Wade was one of the more atrocious rulings the Supreme Court has came up with.  I may support abortion, but in no way do I support judicial activism on that level which violates the rights of each state.       We just need to nuke all of the islamic world. It would make american policy easier    At the cost of what?  Earning the enmity of the entire world?  Destroying an entire region won't do the US any good if the rest of the world retaliates in some manner, either directly through force or economically through sanctions.  The US cannot go it alone and sustain itself, I'm sorry to say. I agree. Our economy would completely crumble, not that it isn't on the rocks already. Plus, the astronomical loss of life for a lot of innocent civilians, and all the environmental damage the radioactivity would cause. Really I could care less about the enviroment, it can screw itself -- Posted by Kokasion at 8:35 pm on June 12, 2008 Quote: from tkedwn119 at 8:32 pm on June 12, 2008 Really I could care less about the enviroment, it can screw itself I fear for our future, because I know there are already people just like this guy deeply rooted in political offices. Edit: And he said Economy, not environment. I think it would be best if we stopped dignifying his ignorant running fingers/mouth with a response. (Not to mention, multiple responses.) -- Posted by Bud2400 at 8:35 pm on June 12, 2008 Obvious troll is obvious. Quote: from tkedwn119 at 8:25 pm on June 12, 2008 You support abortion, then you might as well be support murder. Strawman, but save this for another debate. Screw the world, we don't need them. The US's trade deficit begs to differ.  As of right now, the US has a huge negative trade balance with every other country on the face of this planet - meaning that the US imports far more than it exports.  In other words, the US consumes far more than the US produces.  If the US were to go it alone, this trading would stop and the US market would go crazy. Granted, the rest of the world is as dependent on the US as the US is on them, but if the rest of the world were to simultaneously severe ties with the US, they could bounce back after an initial economic recession, whereas the US would be ruined from isolation. And the querr UN can't do a thing. The Security Counsil needs a unanimous decision to act and US is on it This has nothing to do with the UN.  You don't have to propose economic sanctions through the UN, you know. -- Posted by happygoluckyelf at 8:38 pm on June 12, 2008 Really I could care less about the enviroment, it can screw itself So, when you die from poisoned groundwater will you care about the environment? I mean nature is resilient, but we can't keep punishing it because we'll pay for it in the end. Like our use of fossil fuels. Lots of people have taken them for granted for a long time and now we're paying for it, and in a literal way. If there wasn't as much deman for petroleum products, including gasoline, home fuels, and petrochemicals, then the prices wouldn't be so high. They've been used in such copius amounts in the past that now it's hard to stop using them and they're getting harder to find. We may not run out for another 100 years, and that's a high estimate, but it will be harder to find and production costs will continue to rise. And yet you have the balls to sit here and say the environment doesn't matter... Very educated statement, pal. -- Posted by Kokasion at 8:38 pm on June 12, 2008 Quote: from Kokasion at 8:35 pm on June 12, 2008 Quote: from tkedwn119 at 8:32 pm on June 12, 2008 Really I could care less about the enviroment, it can screw itself   I fear for our future, because I know there are already people just like this guy deeply rooted in political offices.   Edit: And he said Economy, not environment. I think it would be best if we stopped dignifying his ignorant running fingers/mouth with a response. (Not to mention, multiple responses.) Edit: Edit: Dammit, now I look like a dumbass. Environment was in there somewhere... Anyway....