Four Uighurs Resettled in Bermuda

saying that their release to Bermuda would make the US safer, while insisting the government would guard against their travel to the US.
===========
Good point. For one thing, they were being held there in part because they had chosen not to go back to China. So who was still so outraged at their detention that holding them made us “less safe”?

May we can send some to Antigua, the Bahamas, South of France, etc.
How do you justify ememy combatants being sent to Bermuda? This is stupid, stupid and stupid.

What a pathetic embarrassment.
These men were NO threat to the US and never were. Their only crime was “Evidence indicates that some of the Uighurs intended to fight the Chinese government and received firearms training at the camp.”
So now we’re protecting the Chinese government? I guess it’s a natural offshoot of the Bush administration adopting Chinese style interrogation tactics and (lack) of judicial process.
The US held these men as political prisoners for thought crimes against the benevolent Chinese government for over half a decade – they were never enemies of the US, never fought the US, nor aided those who did. Obama should have stood up to the Republican’s utterly baseless fearmongering and let these men settle in the US, where there were offers of aid from the Uyghur community. I have far greater fear of the extreme right committing terrorist acts (McVeigh, Rudolph, Adkisson, Tiller, Von Brunn, etc.) based on their political ideology than these men who just hate the repressive government of China.

Since the right-wingers stateside are too cowardly to take them, I’m glad to see island locations are stepping up to the plate and not wetting themselves because of the big bad terrorist. It seems all the right have the courage to do is water board in secret and spread fear.

KR:”I think Bin Laden should put out a memo that reads…”
Cute joke, but do you honestly think these men have been cleared of being enemy combatants by the Pentagon, Administrative Review Board, and Bush’s Attorney General’s office just because they personally said they wanted to fight China? And not because of the actual collected evidence and data? Is that your serious contention?

“These men were NO threat to the US and never were.”
So is that our policy? If we capture terrorists intending to attack Spain, Iraq, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Israel, Germany, Great Britain, or any other nation besides ours, we just let them go to some island get-away?
BTW, I admire these guys fighting communist oppression. Unfortunately, our nation has gotten in bed with the communists of China and are now unwilling to confront them so it maintains our trade. A clear example (and both parties are guilty) of national economic needs in front of principled stance against terror.

“And not because of the actual collected evidence and data?”
Yes it was a joke. As far as evidence and data, I’m sure they were in Afghanistan for the food and taking in the sights of Tora Bora.

“What if they’re planning to attack the government of Iran? Or Zimbabwe? Your force equivalence argument just doesn’t fly.”
No it does. We, as a nation, should have a stance against the tactic of terror, no matter who the target it is. The tactic is what we should be against.
Now these Chinese were most likely going to conduct pretty standard guerilla operations. It’s a fine line between a terror tactic and a guerilla tactic as we have discussed in the past and agreed upon.
And I really do not have a problem with these guys going to Bermuda and sipping Mai Tai’s. But the question of principle doesn’t go away, they were training with AQ. They intended to employ those tactics against the Chinese. Were they going to use terror tactics (targetting civilian populations) or guerilla tactics (targetting government/military establishments). We’ll probably never know, but what we do know is an affiliation of training with AQ. So we have to choose principle or politics.
Things like this is what sets policy. Our soldiers down range adust their operations to this kind of stuff. This is why the question is important, if they are not targetting the US, do we care? Because this question, when answered, is implemented at the ground level with our soldiers and it has to be clear.

KR:”No it does. We, as a nation, should have a stance against the tactic of terror, no matter who the target it is. The tactic is what we should be against.”
So we’re the world’s policeman now? Even though we would welcome terror tactics against the government of Iran (arguably even sponsor them).
Now you’re starting to sound as starry eyed as the most rosy-eyed liberals. The tactics of the American Revolution were decried as terrorism by the British.
“Our soldiers down range adust their operations to this kind of stuff. This is why the question is important, if they are not targetting the US, do we care?”
Yes, yes we do. If they are not targeting the US the safest thing to do would be to settle them in the US, as we have done with hundreds of people China would prefer dead. And doing this would have given us incredibly valuable respect in the eyes of all the countries we are going to be asking to take back their nationals from Guantanamo over the next year.
Instead, we look like cowards, scared of a dozen guys who everyone including us agree mean our country no harm. Even Bermuda isn’t scared of these guys. What message does that send to our troops?

Why not send the rest of the Gitmo detainees to Bermuda. Isolated, not direct land links, nice weather…

There is NO evidence of that.
=======
Sorry. I’ll be more precise. They were in a camp in Afghanistan, and the Uighur separatist movement is considered by some to be associated with alQeada.
A Uighur separatist group set off a bus bomb in Shanghai in May 2008, killing 3 people.
We don’t support tactics like that.

“So we’re the world’s policeman now? Even though we would welcome terror tactics against the government of Iran (arguably even sponsor them).”
Besides the fact that we have always been the military arm of the U.N., it has nothing to do with the point of the statement. And I would argue that we would not welcome terror tactics against the government of Iran, possibly not even guerilla tactics against Iran. In a civil war would we choose sides against the current regime? Surely we would, but dont mince them up in the same language.
“The tactics of the American Revolution were decried as terrorism by the British.”
Actually it was described as not being a gentlemans war, I have found no links that the British described it as terror, thats a modern day label people have tried to pin on it. Revolutionaries employed guerilla tactics learned from the Indians.
“If they are not targeting the US the safest thing to do would be to settle them in the US,”
Really? By what criteria do we support terrorists relocating into the US? Terrorists against Iran and China welcome, terrorists against Israel = bad. Someone better make a list of these so called “good terrorists” so our soldiers know the difference. And would that make the US a state sponsor of terror to the Chinese or Iran?

“Yet we put Saddam Hussien in power! How many times has our Govt. in the past supported “rebels”?”
Actually a correction, we didn’t put him in power, we supported him against Iran, who was supported by Russia in that lil old thing called the Cold War. No doubt during the Cold War we supported shady characters as pawns in the bigger game of the Cold War. But to sit here, years after it ended, and have a sanctimonious view of events back then isn’t fair to our leaders at the time who saw it as a necessary evil to combat the bigger threat of Russian world influence.

KR – Yes, it is fair to hold them accountable! They make decisions everyday that will effect our world in centuries to come! They know this and sign up for the job anyway! And because they are “past” Pres. once they get out of office we are supposed to hold them in high regard! During the Cold War, Russia would never have bombed us, as we wouldn’t either! Both sides knew that would be the end of world as we know it! THINK! It was, as much as I hate to use this phrase, a Mexican standoff! All sides know today, if it begins, it will destroy us all. N. Korea is the exception, but lets be honest, NONE of their missiles, as hard as they try will not reach the US. Even if they try, do you not think China or Japan would intervene? Wake up! I have traveled the world, I know what they think of us, have you?

“”I have found no links that the British described it as terror.
Nevermind, found one,…”
Actually I retract again, it was an editorial. You have any link to a British quote in the revolutionary war referring to revolutionaries as terrorists? Can’t find a good source. The source I thought I found it at admitted at the bottom that they used a synonym for terrorism.

“Obama’s change” allowing terrorist to go to a cush island, I hope they don’t object to the change in their living quarters and I do hope they got an all inclusive place. We had a Muslim kill a U.S, serviuceman in Ark. the guy stated he did it because that is what muslims are supposed to do. The news media has completely ignored the killing and what is a most certain muslim hate crime.
What is happening to America, sending terrorist to cush islands and just brushing off a muslim killing an Army private in Arkansas. If this is Obama’s change I am very scared for the U.S. we will have terrorist working out in the open here in the states, they can see we no longer are willing to fight them. “God save America”!!!!

Most liberals I know were thrilled to see the ‘violent’ action taken against Afghanistan. And I have even been surprised by some I had pegged as die-hard hippies admit they would have supported the war against Saddam murderous regime “if it was being run by competent adults.”
Since the population of liberals who fit your fantasy strawman seems awfully low, good luck finding anyone to debate.
Posted by: jhw539 |
——————-
What a crock. In the primaries, the single most distinguishing characteristic of Obama was his consistent opposition to the Iraq war and his repeated promise to “end” it. And by that time the war was finally being “run by grownups”. You do remember General Betrayus don’t you?

That is just wonderful……Obama is releasing terrriosts to islands that Americans go to vacation. Why don’t Obama just invite them to the white house and have them settle there. I can’t wait until his term is over with. America continues to go down hill.