Newsnight: Guantanamos military lawer speaks

[RizzyKing]

Our enemy this time doesn't play by the rules and will never play by any set of rules and while some might not like it we will not beat them by playing to some archaic set of so called civilised rules. If you want to play by the rules thats fine but don't hamstring our people and our troops by putting on them the requirement to obey rules their opposition will not adhere too all you do is make it harder for us and easier for the enemy.

This is a simple game really they kill us or we kill them and it's a no brainer for me which way round i want it. We have had this before where we try to fight within a set of rules and take more casualties then we needed too while taking longer to defeat an enemy. You don't have an army to be warm and cuddly, you don't have intelligence services so you can do things in a nice way let the people that do the job do it in whatever way ends this sooner rather then later and in that way limit the damage.

[Maggy J]

So why have elections?Why have law courts?Why have rights?

Because we cannot pick and choose which bits of a democracy we can give up without endangering the other parts of our democracy that give us the freedoms we enjoy.

How can you so casually just give away freedoms that many have martyred themselves for.All the dead of our past wars from our Civil War to WW11 will have died in vain if we just give away all our rights.

[Matt D]

Originally Posted by Benjamin Franklin

He who gives up essential liberty for a little temporary security deserves neither liberty nor security.

[Rob]

Rizzyking, I agree entirely with what you are saying, and I do accept there is a point at which we have to get our hands dirty.

Indeed, bottom line, I have the utmost respect for those who are in combat on behalf of the country, and thus me.

My difficulty, is not with those who are in the front line. it is with those behind the scenes who are perhaps dictating shadowy policy, and probably have little accountability to any of us. As a reasonable human, and that ultimately we want our society to be reasonable. can we be satisfied that those who do get caught up in the mess are indeed those who have some level of involvement. The wall of secrecy behind Guatemala does those who suggest we have a legitimate cause, no credit.

[RizzyKing]

Ok firstly Incog i am not saying we give up rights or anything like that i am saying there is a time and a place for them. You cannot commit the armed forces to a conflict and then tie their hands so we do it in a fair and nicey nicey way all that happens when you try that is you prolong the conflict and the suffering causing harm to more people then you do then if you go in hard fast and do what is needed.

Rob i see the point you are making and trust me soldiers and everyone else involved in "government policy" has a feeling of being a pawn in a game they rarely understand and never control. What worries me is that we will have the public at home wringing their hands and crying out for everything to be done fairly to an enemy that doesn't share the sentiment and grind us down by attrition. It's ok being all civilised and moral here in the UK it's another thing to have to bear it in mind when someone is trying to take your head off in a warzone.

Bottom line for any government if you commit the forces to a conflict let them damn well do what they do best to end it quicker then trying to be a liberal with an assault rifle.

[Rob]

To make it clear. If we commit our people to combat, then they should no in any way be shackled. They should have the right kit, and the right training. Their rules of engagement should, without reservation, be clear that they don't have to wait for the other side to act first. Combat is combat and bottom line, that is nasty and our people deserve to be unfettered if they are to be placed in harms way.

My issue is with the conduct once we have moved outside the combat zone, where things can be more considered and calm. On that basis the hidden conduct of whatever goes on in Guatemala Bay is reducing our society to that of those who seek to do us harm. Yes we can't play this game with our hands tied, but we have to try to play by some of our rules.

[RizzyKing]

We don't run or have anything to do with controlling guantanamo bay although i fully expect we have intelligence officers there. What is going on there i can have a pretty educated guess but thats it because we don't know a thing for sure. We have the usual cat and mouse game as always with this sort of thing and the truth. You say once we move out of the warzone but thats the thing this enemy doesn't actually see any boundary as far as they are concerned your local woolies is a combat zone if they can get there and do damage. This whole war on terror was always going to be dirty, unpleasant, at times barbaric, secretive and bloody in fact all the things war usually is only this time thanks to the media the public will get to see that little bit more in hi def.

[foreverwar]

Ah, the old Vietnam argument - "we had to destroy the village to save it".

If we descend to our enemies level, then we are no better than they - if we are no better than them, what are we fighting for?

[Maggy J]

Originally Posted by foreverwar

Ah, the old Vietnam argument - "we had to destroy the village to save it".

If we descend to our enemies level, then we are no better than they - if we are no better than them, what are we fighting for?

Exactly!

[RizzyKing]

End of the day to be honest i won't be fighting this one so fight it how you like but if we are going to try and do it with rules don't whinge and complain when more body bags are coming back then needed too. Like i have said it's ok to be all high and mighty when your not the one that is doing the fighting and taking the risks and there is nothing worse for the conduct of any conflict then having armchair generals trying to all have their say. But hey we might take more casualties we might inflict more harm and damage due to the drawn out protracted nature of it but we will do it from a position of playing by the rules . Oh and the analogy of Vietnam is very good a war that should have been all over in a couple of years tops dragging on for over a decade causing more and harm and misery because someone wanted to have the moral high ground and thought war could be played in a certain way.

[foreverwar]

Or could we reduce the body bags coming back by equipping our troops properly?

[RizzyKing]

Lousy kit doesn't help but lousy running of a war\conflict will kill people faster then bad kit will. Vietnam yet again a case in point they had the kit and to a point the leadership but lost the war because an army wasn't permitted to do exactly what armies exist to do in war.

As for the constant point that is thrown up about abandoning our civilised ways and descending to their level so how are we any different i will tell you how. We will go to their level to win and put a stop to the pain and suffering and then we will rise back upto the level where we belong and feel more comfortable.

Our enemy is at the level they are by choice and will not rise in any way shape or form till they achieve their goals and we are all dead. Thats the difference we will only kill those we need to and we don't do it indiscriminately and we certainly do not bomb buses and public places purely to inflict pain and suffering in any deliberate way.

[foreverwar]

RK, the difference between Vietnam and now is that the US forces could have legally carpet bombed Hanoi and elsewhere; they decided not to for political reasons (btw, there were lots of illegal operations carried out in Laos, Cambodia, etc) - unlike now, where torture (illegal) and extraordinary rendition (illegal) is being used backed by the highest authorities in the US.

You have greater faith than I in human nature if you believe that if people descend into acts of barbarity, they easily ascend again - we didn't believe that in the Nuremberg Trials, did we?

btw, you were the one who raised "body bags" - as a large percentage of casualties in Iraq have been from roadside bombs, it seems obvious that suitable equipment and transport would have a much more effective reduction in body bags than torture.

[RizzyKing]

Forever if roadside bombs hadn't been effective (which yes they have been thanks to said lousy equipment) you think the terrorists would have given up no they would have found a way that did work. As for vietnam in general the war was lost with the decision to fight a "limited war" there is no such thing your at war or you are at peace if at war just do what has to be done. Personally i would leave it upto the troops as they are the poor sods that have to do the dirty work not you and me safe here in the UK let them choose how to fight it.