RANGER AGAINST WAR: Dangerous Liaisons <

Thursday, December 11, 2008

Dangerous Liaisons

Which way did he go?
Which way did he go?
--Deputy Dawg

In a rush to judgment, the U.S. military is putting on the heat in an effort to bring charges against 5,000 "dangerous" detainees before the new Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) goes into effect (U.S. Builds Cases on Dangerous Detainees.) If they have not been charged by that time, they will probably be released by the Iraqi government in a process that resembles that once followed in the U.S.

What is their charge? Is it resisting an invasion of their homeland? Taking up arms against foreign aggressors? The U.S. has released a record 17,500 detainees this year, nearly double the number released last year. T
he 5,000 are described as "dangerous detainees," but no description was given as to what constitutes "dangerous".

17,500 added to the 15,800 detainees remaining elsewhere in American custody equals 33,300 Iraqis held in U.S. prisons without being charged or adjudicated guilty by a court of law. Is this how the U.S. spells

Imprisoning people sans charges is what Saddam Hussein used to do.
How does U.S. policy differ? "Our focus is to go back and get detention orders on these 5,000," said Brig. Gen. David Quantock, commander of detainee operations in Iraq. What is a "detention order"? It sounds like something used to keep one 30 minutes after school for bad behavior.

Ranger always thought
that one could only be detained while awaiting trial or any legal or administrative actions. Imprisonment in Western civilization mandates a court trial. There is no "preventive arrest" concept.

One cannot presume a conviction, thereby vindicating a vague detention. Why has this imperative been suspended in the
Phony War on Terror (PWOT ©)?

"Most files
contain the necessary statements and other evidence to convict, said Marine Maj. Neal Fisher, a military spokesman in Iraq, but Iraqi judges may release some prisoners for lack of evidence.

"'We're realistic,' Fisher said."

Well, if there is evidence to convict, why no conviction? Just because you say you're realistic does not make it so.

How many of these detainees would still go imprisoned without charges if there were no SOFA?

Labels: , , , ,


Anonymous tw said...

You're on a roll !

Great post !

Thursday, December 11, 2008 at 8:48:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger BadTux said...

But remember, Saddam was evil and Aye-rab and suspiciously dusky and a member of one of them heathen religions, while we're good white Christian folks, so it's okay if we do it.

- Badtux the Cynical Penguin

Thursday, December 11, 2008 at 9:21:00 PM GMT-5  
Anonymous sheerahkahn said...

So...does this mean we're still playing de facto "World Policeman"?

If so, I think the US should opt for a pay raise, a desk job, and let someone else beat the street.

As for these guys...hey, I would like to point out that if someone invaded my country, and was killing my family, friends, and neighbors all the while saying "We come in peace" as the martians did in Mars Attacks with Jack Nicholson, you bet I'm going to be the most deadliest son of a b*tch the invader has ever met.

I think we need to get over ourselves and realize that no, we're not the guys in white hats, where the guys in the everyday color hats. We screw up just like everyone else, and baby, we screwed the pooch in Iraq. Time to declare "mission accomplished" and bug out, leaving the Iraqi's to deal with their own countrymen.

I wonder about us.

Friday, December 12, 2008 at 11:31:00 AM GMT-5  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home