Gates: Detainee abuses gave US 'black eye'

[BrAinPaiNt]

LINK (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080613/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/gates)

BRUSSELS, Belgium - Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Friday that reports of detainee abuse in the early years of the Guantanamo Bay prison operation have given the United States "a black eye."

Gates was asked at a press conference about Thursday's Supreme Court ruling that gives suspected terrorists the right to go to federal court to seek their release from indefinite detention at Guantanamo.

The U.S. defense secretary spoke at the conclusion of two days of NATO meetings, unrelated to Guantanamo. He told reporters he would wait until he returned to Washington and received briefings on the court decision before commenting on what it means for the future of the detention operation in Cuba.

Until then, "I'm not going to make any judgment in terms of what we ought to do next."

"I have often said that I thought — as have both the president and the secretary of state — that we would like to close Guantanamo," he added. "I think that despite the fact that in many respects Guantanamo has become a state-of-the-art prison now, early reports of abuses and so on unquestionably were a black eye for the United States."

The detention center in southeastern Cuba opened in January 2002, mainly holding prisoners taken on the battlefields of Afghanistan in the months after U.S. forces invaded to topple the Taliban regime. About 270 men are held there now; most have not been charged with any crimes.

Gates was returning to Washington late Friday.

Attorney General Michael Mukasey said Friday the 5-4 high court ruling would not affect the Guantanamo trials against enemy combatants and President Bush said he might seek a new law to keep the alleged terrorists in a U.S. prison.

On another subject, Gates told reporters in Brussels that the U.S. government must remain patient with the new Pakistan government and work with it to take stronger action against Taliban and al-Qaida fighters operating along the Afghan border. He said Islamabad needs time to "inform itself" about circumstances in the tribal areas where Taliban and al-Qaida operatives have found safe haven.

Asked about the Pakistani government's efforts to strike peace agreements with some of the tribal elements, Gates said, "I think it's fair to say that we have some skepticism, based on past experience, whether some of these agreements will work out, but it's their country and we have to give them the chance to try and deal with it in the way that they think is best."

[vta]

What 'crimes' are enemy combatants to be charged with? Why is anyone trying impose our local codes of law on an international conflict?

Yes, we're humane, yes we should not torture or abuse, but it seems a point is being missed, here. They're not being 'arrested' by law enforcement for 'crimes', relating to U.S. laws and Constitutional Rights, they were caught on a battlefield and are detained to prohibit them from continuing the fight.

Capturing an enemy combatant is a strategy in war, one in which you diminish their numbers. Catch and release is pretty senseless, as they're only going to go back to fighting.

I think arrogance is fueling the prevailing idea that our law is the universal law and one which can be imposed on anyone in the world.

[Vintage]

Like it or not, stuff like Guantanamo Bay undermines US Political Strategy.


Since perception is often reality in politics, it matters not how often stuff like this occured (if it occured at a small rate). What matters is what other people perceive it as.


http://dde.carlisle.army.mil/authors/Strat2.gif
http://dde.carlisle.army.mil/authors/stratpap.htm


Are we willing to sacrafice the grand national strategy for small, short term gains in operational/tactical strategy?

I am not.

That is why the recent SCOTUS ruling is important. It is important we do not sacrafice our beliefs, convictions, and the stuff that makes us "right" in order to combat these problems.

We need the distinction between good and evil to exist. Yes, it handicaps us to a certain extent. But without the distinction, we ultimately will fail without long term occupation. We have to have the distinction to show that our way will/can work; that our way is more "right." Otherwise, our "regime" will look the same as the previous regime (meet the new boss; same as the old boss). And it will never work...

The problem is, the military doesn't like to deal with politics. They want to accomplish their objective as efficiently as they can.

Politics clouds a lot of that. The Military is needed to carry out the objectives from time to time, but politics is needed to make it last.

A free Iraq only happens if the military AND politicians work together. The military is doing their part in "winning" in Iraq, disposing of the regime, etc. But its the broader, political strategy that needs to succeed to make Iraq remain free and democratic.

[iceberg]

what were the "abuses" in guantanimo? i remember the knock down drag outs we had in here and all the "gitmo" comparisons that blew things way out of proportion. but i don't remember wholesale abuses of any kind.

[Doomsday101]

what were the "abuses" in guantanimo? i remember the knock down drag outs we had in here and all the "gitmo" comparisons that blew things way out of proportion. but i don't remember wholesale abuses of any kind.

Wern't they chopping off heads? Oh wait that was the other side doing that. :laugh2:

[iceberg]

Wern't they chopping off heads? Oh wait that was the other side doing that. :laugh2:

oh and the outcry that caused!

wait, it didn't.

[Doomsday101]

oh and the outcry that caused!

wait, it didn't.

I'm not going to justify bad behavior from our troops and those found guilty should be dealt with but over the years our troops have suffered under different enemies that pale in comparison. Like you I don't hear the outcry.

[BrAinPaiNt]

I'm not going to justify bad behavior from our troops and those found guilty should be dealt with but over the years our troops have suffered under different enemies that pale in comparison. Like you I don't hear the outcry.

I get so tired of that argument.

I guess by that logic we are equal to our enemy. Last I checked we are better than our enemies but that does not give us...you know what heck with it, I am not going to get in some long drawn out idiotic argument over the topic. I will just leave it with this...

If the current US SEC OF DEFENSE is saying we got a black eye that should tell you something.

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Colin Powell said a similar thing up here in Vancouver last night. It's all over the papers saying that the treatment of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay undermines US strategy throughout the world.

[Doomsday101]

I get so tired of that argument.

I guess by that logic we are equal to our enemy. Last I checked we are better than our enemies but that does not give us...you know what heck with it, I am not going to get in some long drawn out idiotic argument over the topic. I will just leave it with this...

If the current US SEC OF DEFENSE is saying we got a black eye that should tell you something.

Did you miss the 1st part of my statement?

I'm not going to justify bad behavior from our troops and those found guilty should be dealt with

[burmafrd]

So a very few incidents on our side vs THOUSANDS on the other side and in Brains way of looking at things that equals out.

[BrAinPaiNt]

So a very few incidents on our side vs THOUSANDS on the other side and in Brains way of looking at things that equals out.

Can you show me exactly where I said that again?

Until then just more lib lib lib babbling from you.
Typical

[burmafrd]

Maybe Ihave to explain it to you. Your whole gist is that those few incidents make us look as bad as they do. I say that while those few incidents should not happen we still are a whole lot better then the other side which is the point. comprende?

[silverbear]

What 'crimes' are enemy combatants to be charged with? Why is anyone trying impose our local codes of law on an international conflict?

Yes, we're humane, yes we should not torture or abuse, but it seems a point is being missed, here. They're not being 'arrested' by law enforcement for 'crimes', relating to U.S. laws and Constitutional Rights, they were caught on a battlefield and are detained to prohibit them from continuing the fight.

Capturing an enemy combatant is a strategy in war, one in which you diminish their numbers. Catch and release is pretty senseless, as they're only going to go back to fighting.

I think arrogance is fueling the prevailing idea that our law is the universal law and one which can be imposed on anyone in the world.

Well, what you think is pretty much irrelevant, compared to what the SCOTUS thinks on this issue...

Hooray for them...

And FWIW, they would only be released if we can't prove they actually did something... if we can't prove that, we have no business continuing to hold them... seems pretty simple to me...

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Funny how bumfard hasn't commented on Colin Powell's comment.

[silverbear]

I'm not going to justify bad behavior from our troops and those found guilty should be dealt with but over the years our troops have suffered under different enemies that pale in comparison. Like you I don't hear the outcry.

Ahhh, the old "well, HE did it" argument...

That didn't work when you were six years old, did it??

Yes, the Arab terrorists are subhuman monsters, who cut off the heads of people and videotape it... does that mean we now have carte blanche to be subhuman monsters too??

From where I sit, if you have to sink to the level of your opponents in order to "win", you've actually lost... if we had been forced to resort to genocide to defeat the Nazis, we would have become what we were fighting against, and if we resort to terror tactics in order to defeat terrorism, we will have become what we're fighting against...

What does it avail a man, to gain a fortune but lose his soul?? I submit the same question can be asked of nations as well... if we lose our direction, or moral compass, in pursuit of a war, we've lost, because we've lost what makes us unique, what makes us special...

[silverbear]

So a very few incidents on our side vs THOUSANDS on the other side and in Brains way of looking at things that equals out.

Man, that's one of the stupidest things I've read in here... Brain didn't say anything CLOSE to that, and you know it...

[silverbear]

Maybe Ihave to explain it to you. Your whole gist is that those few incidents make us look as bad as they do. I say that while those few incidents should not happen we still are a whole lot better then the other side which is the point. comprende?

While there is truth in what you write here, at the same time our standard of comparison ought not be how we stack up against those savages... nope, we should be looking at how we stack up with ourselves, in other times of war...

We don't look so good if we take that perspective... I aspire to more for my country than just being better than Arab terrorists...

[vta]

Well, what you think is pretty much irrelevant, compared to what the SCOTUS thinks on this issue...

Hooray for them...

And FWIW, they would only be released if we can't prove they actually did something... if we can't prove that, we have no business continuing to hold them... seems pretty simple to me...

Did something? If they're enemy combatants, caught in the midst of war, what more needs to be done? Great numbers of people killed? Release them to placate a mindless sense indignation so we can then call it legitmate?

They're not U.S. citizens, committing crimes on U.S. soil. Our laws don't cover them.

What I think is far from irrelevant, it's just not popular.

[Phrozen Phil]

While there is truth in what you write here, at the same time our standard of comparison ought not be how we stack up against those savages... nope, we should be looking at how we stack up with ourselves, in other times of war...

We don't look so good if we take that perspective... I aspire to more for my country than just being better than Arab terrorists...

I visit the U.S. on many occasions, but I worry that Xenophobia is becoming a predominant view in America. George W.Bush has been telling all who will listen that much of the rest of the world is out to kill Americans. Dick Cheney seems to want to kill every body else first.

I'm worried that the next time I visit south of the border, I'll be met by a guy in a rocking chair with an assault rifle across his lap, informing me that he will kill anybody who doesn't look like him, act like him, and believe like him. He will also tell me that he can have anything he wants from me, and that I'd just better give it to him or he'll take it. I hope that the U.S of the future is a country that can people can view with respect, not fear. The last eight years in American politics, from an outside perspective, have been pretty scary.

[iceberg]

I visit the U.S. on many occasions, but I worry that Xenophobia is becoming a predominant view in America. George W.Bush has been telling all who will listen that much of the rest of the world is out to kill Americans. Dick Cheney seems to want to kill every body else first.

I'm worried that the next time I visit south of the border, I'll be met by a guy in a rocking chair with an assault rifle across his lap, informing me that he will kill anybody who doesn't look like him, act like him, and believe like him. He will also tell me that he can have anything he wants from me, and that I'd just better give it to him or he'll take it. I hope that the U.S of the future is a country that can people can view with respect, not fear. The last eight years in American politics, from an outside perspective, have been pretty scary.

i'd stop worrying. it's hard to use that type of a stereotype against us when we're a predominate melting pot isn't it?

what race is holding the gun?
just like "who"?

if that were a problem we'd be hellbent on killing our own countrymen everyday. yes, we're tired of the news also and the crap they spew forth, but not much we can do about it but laugh like the rest should.

[Phrozen Phil]

i'd stop worrying. it's hard to use that type of a stereotype against us when we're a predominate melting pot isn't it?

what race is holding the gun?
just like "who"?

if that were a problem we'd be hellbent on killing our own countrymen everyday. yes, we're tired of the news also and the crap they spew forth, but not much we can do about it but laugh like the rest should.

I have no desire to stereotype Americans. I'm not sure that you have a "melting pot" anymore. I think a better description is that North Americans have a "mosaic" in which there is a greater proportion of varying ethnic origins, religions and belief systems.People are holding on to those cultural things that make them unique. I believe that diversity is good for a country.

Unfortunately, the person holding the gun is not the issue, it's the fact that he (or she) is holding a gun at all.

I will be visiting the U.S. again this fall and I look forward to the friends I have there. I applaud the individuals who make a positive difference. I deplore a government who uses fear as a means to justify it's view of the world.

[iceberg]

I have no desire to stereotype Americans. I'm not sure that you have a "melting pot" anymore. I think a better description is that North Americans have a "mosaic" in which there is a greater proportion of varying ethnic origins, religions and belief systems.People are holding on to those cultural things that make them unique. I believe that diversity is good for a country.

Unfortunately, the person holding the gun is not the issue, it's the fact that he (or she) is holding a gun at all.

I will be visiting the U.S. again this fall and I look forward to the friends I have there. I applaud the individuals who make a positive difference. I deplore a government who uses fear as a means to justify it's view of the world.

that's fine. just trying to better understand the worried aspect of coming to the US. never heard someone concerned before. well, we have our "hoods" you don't want to get caught up in, but i don't want to either so i just stay out. : )

i imagine gun ownership will depend on where you are. if texas, yep. ya just never know. if california, i'd doubt it. they'd throw a triple latte at you. (damn, i just stereotyped twice!)

fearmongering does suck man.

[Phrozen Phil]

that's fine. just trying to better understand the worried aspect of coming to the US. never heard someone concerned before. well, we have our "hoods" you don't want to get caught up in, but i don't want to either so i just stay out. : )

i imagine gun ownership will depend on where you are. if texas, yep. ya just never know. if california, i'd doubt it. they'd throw a triple latte at you. (damn, i just stereotyped twice!)

fearmongering does suck man.

I appreciate the response. I have always been treated well in the U.S., but I'm a middle aged Caucasian. I traveled to Florida for a conference with three colleagues who were of Black, South Asian, and Pakistani descent. I routinely had to explain that these other folks "were with me" and even then, they were questioned more closely than I was, even though we all had the same passport. We had occasion to visit some of the "hoods" you mention and I was concerned about the level of poverty, but never experienced any real hostility. We did hear gunfire, and were removed from the area, much to our objection, but never once did I feel that we were in any immediate danger.

I just hope that the next U.S. President is able to reach out to people with hope rather than fear. I would hope that everybody on this board would feel as welcome in my part of the world as most Americans have made me feel.

[ConcordCowboy]

I don't think there is any question to people who will tell the truth that Guantanamo gave the U.S. a black eye.

Gates has the balls to tell the truth.

[iceberg]

I appreciate the response. I have always been treated well in the U.S., but I'm a middle aged Caucasian. I traveled to Florida for a conference with three colleagues who were of Black, South Asian, and Pakistani descent. I routinely had to explain that these other folks "were with me" and even then, they were questioned more closely than I was, even though we all had the same passport. We had occasion to visit some of the "hoods" you mention and I was concerned about the level of poverty, but never experienced any real hostility. We did hear gunfire, and were removed from the area, much to our objection, but never once did I feel that we were in any immediate danger.

I just hope that the next U.S. President is able to reach out to people with hope rather than fear. I would hope that everybody on this board would feel as welcome in my part of the world as most Americans have made me feel.

yea, right now racial profiling will be on people's minds. fair or not that's life and i don't like it either.

you heard gunfire? wow. in 42 years of living in the usa, i've never heard gunfire outside of shooting ranges and dad taking target practice and so forth.

[vta]

I appreciate the response. I have always been treated well in the U.S., but I'm a middle aged Caucasian. I traveled to Florida for a conference with three colleagues who were of Black, South Asian, and Pakistani descent. I routinely had to explain that these other folks "were with me" and even then, they were questioned more closely than I was, even though we all had the same passport. We had occasion to visit some of the "hoods" you mention and I was concerned about the level of poverty, but never experienced any real hostility. We did hear gunfire, and were removed from the area, much to our objection, but never once did I feel that we were in any immediate danger.

I just hope that the next U.S. President is able to reach out to people with hope rather than fear. I would hope that everybody on this board would feel as welcome in my part of the world as most Americans have made me feel.

This isn't about the President. What we (American's) are experiencing transcends the President. It's not a 'neo-con' thing, it's an American thing.

Some will play the 'enlightened' card and say they know better, but the reality is, this country is at war with a people from a certain region of the world and the fear and prejudice transcends partisan politics.

[CanadianCowboysFan]

I just hate the stupid questions from American border guards. I am flying to Disneyland with my wife and son and get asked why I'm going. Well duh butthead.

Or when I drive to the US and say I am going shopping, I get asked what am I going to buy. My standard response is whatever I want. Usually shuts up the civil servant border guard.

[ninja]

It wasn't the detainee treatment(not abuse!) that gave the black eye to America. It was the terrorist-sympathizing, liberal left-wing fanatical media that gave America the "black eye."

We had to deal with the moron commie-sympathizers during the cold war. Russia and communism is dead and the com-symps went into hiding only to come out as terrorist-sympathizers.

The media should have just shut up. This is a war. You are either for America or against America. The media(except FOX) and the left-wingers hate America.

Could you imagine CNN covering WWII today?

[silverbear]

Did something? If they're enemy combatants, caught in the midst of war, what more needs to be done? Great numbers of people killed? Release them to placate a mindless sense indignation so we can then call it legitmate?

They're not U.S. citizens, committing crimes on U.S. soil. Our laws don't cover them.

Then under that definition, they're prisoners of war (not the line I put in bold font), subject to the restrictions of the Geneva Convention... that's not "criminal"...

What I think is far from irrelevant,

Inasmuch as what you think is at odds with what the Supreme Court ruled, yes, your opinion IS irrelevant... like it or not, it's the law of our land, according to SCOTUS, that detainees at Gitmo are entitled to certain protections...

[iceberg]

I just hate the stupid questions from American border guards. I am flying to Disneyland with my wife and son and get asked why I'm going. Well duh butthead.

Or when I drive to the US and say I am going shopping, I get asked what am I going to buy. My standard response is whatever I want. Usually shuts up the civil servant border guard.

don't think your side is the ultimate in fair and would never do this, ccf.

in 1996 i was working for microsoft on the IE3 beta in redmond. one day me and a friend decided to go to vancouver just to get out and "do something".

we both were average white boys with long hair.

and we got stopped and asked to pull over at the border and both had to undergo pretty intense background checks. in the end i was made to feel like i was not wanted in canada because i had long hair. *we* had long hair. we had to go inside the border office and let them make some calls and talk down to us for general crap then were allowed to go through.

so please don't think your side is chock full of intelligence. they kept us held for over an hour on appearance alone.

[ZeroClub]

I visit the U.S. on many occasions, but I worry that Xenophobia is becoming a predominant view in America. George W.Bush has been telling all who will listen that much of the rest of the world is out to kill Americans. Dick Cheney seems to want to kill every body else first.

I'm worried that the next time I visit south of the border, I'll be met by a guy in a rocking chair with an assault rifle across his lap, informing me that he will kill anybody who doesn't look like him, act like him, and believe like him. He will also tell me that he can have anything he wants from me, and that I'd just better give it to him or he'll take it. I hope that the U.S of the future is a country that can people can view with respect, not fear. The last eight years in American politics, from an outside perspective, have been pretty scary.

In my experience, one is far more likely to see a submachine gun in a European airport than in a U.S. airport. Despite this, the customs process in Europe seems more rational, though, and not nearly as officious.

[ZeroClub]

I have no desire to stereotype Americans. I'm not sure that you have a "melting pot" anymore. I think a better description is that North Americans have a "mosaic" in which there is a greater proportion of varying ethnic origins, religions and belief systems.People are holding on to those cultural things that make them unique. I believe that diversity is good for a country.

Unfortunately, the person holding the gun is not the issue, it's the fact that he (or she) is holding a gun at all.

I will be visiting the U.S. again this fall and I look forward to the friends I have there. I applaud the individuals who make a positive difference. I deplore a government who uses fear as a means to justify it's view of the world.

Interracial, intercultural marriages are common in the U.S. these days. It is not at all unusual to see children of multiracial backgrounds. To my eye, the melting pot is still very much in force. There are racial/ethnic communities/neighborhoods, true, but that's nothing new to the U.S. It usually takes a few generations ....

The current U.S. president's approval ratings are quite low, so there is absolutely nothing novel about your opinions of him.

[vta]

Then under that definition, they're prisoners of war (not the line I put in bold font), subject to the restrictions of the Geneva Convention... that's not "criminal"...

Basically what I said; they are not common criminals and don't fall under the U.S. codes of law. Do you know the Geneva Convention codes of conduct pertaining to POW's?


Inasmuch as what you think is at odds with what the Supreme Court ruled, yes, your opinion IS irrelevant... like it or not, it's the law of our land, according to SCOTUS, that detainees at Gitmo are entitled to certain protections...

It's pretty much a given that the opinions on this board are ineffectual on influencing policy; I don't think anyone posts here thinking they are. My question is pertinent to this topic.

It seems what SCOTUS has ruled is in contrast with existing provisions of the Geneva convention regarding POW's: they are not U.S. criminals, bound by and to be judged by or benefitting from U.S. laws. It says nothing of length of detainment, or a 'right to an attorney' or 'habeas corpus'.

If the Geneva Convention states no such a things, why would SCOTUS rule in such a way?

[CanadianCowboysFan]

don't think your side is the ultimate in fair and would never do this, ccf.

in 1996 i was working for microsoft on the IE3 beta in redmond. one day me and a friend decided to go to vancouver just to get out and "do something".

we both were average white boys with long hair.

and we got stopped and asked to pull over at the border and both had to undergo pretty intense background checks. in the end i was made to feel like i was not wanted in canada because i had long hair. *we* had long hair. we had to go inside the border office and let them make some calls and talk down to us for general crap then were allowed to go through.

so please don't think your side is chock full of intelligence. they kept us held for over an hour on appearance alone.

Our guards are buttheads too no doubt. They just ask other dumb questions. They only ask me questions about how much I bought overseas or in the US. Your guards worry about drugs, our's worry about duty and guns.

Worst part is, we are now giving our border guards guns. Just what we need, psycho cop wannabes on the Canadian and US side holding guns when all we want to do is smuggle some clothes back and forth across the border.

it is so different when you fly to Europe. In Britain they asked where I was staying and for how long and whether it was for business or pleasure. That was all. In France, the guy just looked at my passport and stamped it. It was my wife and my first trip to Europe so we expected to go to customs somewhere but never did. It was odd, no dumb questions, no grilling, just bienvenue en France.

[Phrozen Phil]

It wasn't the detainee treatment(not abuse!) that gave the black eye to America. It was the terrorist-sympathizing, liberal left-wing fanatical media that gave America the "black eye."

We had to deal with the moron commie-sympathizers during the cold war. Russia and communism is dead and the com-symps went into hiding only to come out as terrorist-sympathizers.

The media should have just shut up. This is a war. You are either for America or against America. The media(except FOX) and the left-wingers hate America.

Could you imagine CNN covering WWII today?

Are you serious? During the Second World War, the head of the BBC was asked if he could make the news "more positive". This was at a time when HMS Hood had been sunk and the war was not going particularly well for the Allies. That man indicated that "The Truth would not be the first casualty of war". The radio networks had plenty of news, some of it bad, but they reported it.

I for one want honesty from the media, but if your looking for your news from Fox, you will only get the truth when they feel that it reflects their opinion. Whatever they do, it is most assuredly not journalism. You talk about hate, but it seems to reflect your own view of the world, which reflects the paranoia of Joseph McCarthy.