During WW2 we held hundreds of thousands of enemy combatants for years before releasing them without charge. Does that mean holding them was a mistake? Or is it that you've confused a criminal proceeding with a war?
The reason for holding these people is that we are still at war. Releasing suspected enemy troops during a war is idiotic. They end up rejoining the fight against you.
Agreed. I've actually had the great privilege of being shot at by one of the Gitmo detainees who was "released without charge", so forgive me if I'm not enthusiastic about letting the rest of them go, some, at least according to some comments coming out of DoJ, in the US.
Support the Althouse blog by doing your Amazon shopping going in through the Althouse Amazon link.
Amazon
I am a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for me to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Support this blog with PayPal
Make a 1-time donation or set up a monthly donation of any amount you choose:
201 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 201 of 201Havent many of them been released without charge?
During WW2 we held hundreds of thousands of enemy combatants for years before releasing them without charge. Does that mean holding them was a mistake? Or is it that you've confused a criminal proceeding with a war?
The reason for holding these people is that we are still at war. Releasing suspected enemy troops during a war is idiotic. They end up rejoining the fight against you.
Agreed. I've actually had the great privilege of being shot at by one of the Gitmo detainees who was "released without charge", so forgive me if I'm not enthusiastic about letting the rest of them go, some, at least according to some comments coming out of DoJ, in the US.
Post a Comment