Comments
1 - 6 of 6 Comments Last updated Jun 17, 2014
Robert Johanson

Egg Harbor Township, NJ

#1 Jun 7, 2014
Does anyone think it's right to let loose high ranking terrorists who want to kill as many Americans and other's world wide as the can. People who have already proven how good they are at it doing this. This United States has never done this before, does anyone think this was the right thing to do?
Bloody Bill Anderson

Paducah, KY

#2 Jun 7, 2014
Robert Johanson wrote:
Does anyone think it's right to let loose high ranking terrorists who want to kill as many Americans and other's world wide as the can. People who have already proven how good they are at it doing this. This United States has never done this before, does anyone think this was the right thing to do?
You are wrong. The U.S. has done similar things in the past. It released captured Barbary Pirates in exchange for captured American sailors. It released captured Filipino Insurrectos. It released Mexicans captured a hundred years ago - example Maximo Castillo.

The U.S. is setting a dangerous precedent when it calls individuals who were fighting against an invading force in their own country "terrorists" for several reasons. First, it redefines terrorist. The 9-11 attackers were clearly terrorists - that is to say criminals. But someone who is merely fighting against an invasion of their country, even if the invaders are American, is not a terrorist. Second, by so redefining what a terrorist is we are setting a dangerous precedent for the future, when the people fighting an invasion are our friends or allies fighting someone who we consider the enemy. Think about this: by our re-definition the French Resistance who fought the Germans in World War 2 would be considered terrorists. That is, of course what the Nazis called them. We on the other hand demanded that they be treated as prisoners of war. After the war we - and the French - punished some Germans for not doing so.
Robert Johanson

Egg Harbor Township, NJ

#3 Jun 7, 2014
Bloody Bill, you are wrong, the Taliban are terrorizing and killing many people from there own country. Do you think the government of Afghanistan wants these guys back? Ask the families of all the dead people if they are terrorists...
Bloody Bill Anderson

Paducah, KY

#4 Jun 7, 2014
Robert Johanson wrote:
Bloody Bill, you are wrong, the Taliban are terrorizing and killing many people from there own country. Do you think the government of Afghanistan wants these guys back? Ask the families of all the dead people if they are terrorists...
The same thing could be said about the Filipino Insurrectos and the Mexican bandit-guerrilla Maximo Castillo. The U.S.A. nevertheless released them.

As to "killing many people from their own country" the French Resistance did that as well. They killed quite a few collaborators. Same for the Resistance in every Nazi occupied country in Europe. It was particularly true of the Resistance in Yugoslavia. Yet the U.S.A. insisted that the Resistance were waging a legitimate fight and were entitled to treatment as prisoners of war.

Like I said, the precedent that we are setting will eventually come back to bite us, sometime somewhere.
El Rushbo

Baldwin, NY

#6 Jun 17, 2014
Bloody Bill Anderson wrote:
<quoted text>
You are wrong. The U.S. has done similar things in the past. It released captured Barbary Pirates in exchange for captured American sailors. It released captured Filipino Insurrectos. It released Mexicans captured a hundred years ago - example Maximo Castillo.
The U.S. is setting a dangerous precedent when it calls individuals who were fighting against an invading force in their own country "terrorists" for several reasons. First, it redefines terrorist. The 9-11 attackers were clearly terrorists - that is to say criminals. But someone who is merely fighting against an invasion of their country, even if the invaders are American, is not a terrorist. Second, by so redefining what a terrorist is we are setting a dangerous precedent for the future, when the people fighting an invasion are our friends or allies fighting someone who we consider the enemy. Think about this: by our re-definition the French Resistance who fought the Germans in World War 2 would be considered terrorists. That is, of course what the Nazis called them. We on the other hand demanded that they be treated as prisoners of war. After the war we - and the French - punished some Germans for not doing so.
Wow Bloody Bill knows about the Barbary Coast War. This man is a walking history book. What happened in the Second Barbary War, please tell us Bill!
Willard

Brooks, GA

#7 Jun 17, 2014
I may be insane, but I still have my mind thank you very much!

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

New York Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Fox is going down (Dec '09) 6 min ILAL 5,461
Cutting of pastor's role called 'vindictive' (Oct '08) 7 min Bruser 7,874
The United Hates of America (Sep '10) 19 min ILAL 1,455
Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 1 hr Brian_G 305,449
Yankee talk back 4, or is it 5 (Aug '08) 1 hr YANKEES 4 LIFE 307,461
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 4 hr Brian_G 46,316
Drop a Word, Add a Word (Jan '10) 8 hr 40ish 9,885
USA and ISIS in Iraq 9 hr nac 43
Nassau/Suffolk High School Football (Nov '11) 11 hr the real deal 10,343
•••

New York News Video

•••
•••

New York Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

New York People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

New York News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in New York
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••