Political Punch

SERIOUSLY!, See that's the problem. This is war! These are prisoners taken during war! The 300,000 regular German soldiers that we held for years in prison camps throughout Europe during WWII never saw a lawyer, never saw a day in court, and they didn't expect to either. When the war was over they were released. Even the U. S. Supreme Court ruled back then that the American Judicial System and the writ of habeas corpus DID NOT APPLY to those prisoners.

Following the most recent U. S. Supreme Court ruling, Justice Kennedy stated that while he didn't expect any of the detainees to be released he certainly could not rule that out. SO we might have to release some of these detainees! I hope all you liberals are prepared to apologize for any innocent people who are subsequently killed by any of the detainees should they be released. The whole point of taking prisoners during war is so they don't go back out and resume killing again. But apparently now that we have to treat these prisoners as common criminals we may just have to no longer take prisoners.

Obama can't tell the difference between a patriot and a traitor. Since when do terrorists get constitutional rights? Frightening. Obama has no allegence to the USA. How many soldiers died because of this traitor?

Posted by: geevill | Jul 1, 2008 10:57:41 AM

**********
To call them "terrorists" means you have to PROVE that they are terrorists, right? A recent study showed that 38% of the detainees are not guilty of any crime and many are being detained due to mistaken identity.

What if YOU were detained for 5 years because of mistaken identity. Wouldn't YOU want a chance to prove they got the wrong guy? That's all the Court has said, they at least get a chance to see the evidence agaisnt them.

This is America.

I think the Democrats need to be pointing out that the surge was sold to the America people as a means to start a withdrawal. McCain says the surge is succesful so how come he says that we shouldn't be withdrawing troops? When/what signs are there going to be before McCain is happy to start withdrawing.

This is exactly why Obama was a more credible candidatre than Clinton. A consistent position that the war was wrong, WMDs or no WMDs, regime change or no regime change.

geevill - I agree with you, but FYI Abu Gahrib has nothing to do with our Constitution!!

Reading below posts really shows me how people are falling for the empty talk of Obama.

They think that our military can only fight one enemy at a time (ignoring the fact that history shows that to be wrong) Our military is strong enough to fight numerous battles in this war.

John's conscience - Hate to tell something it is the liberals that increase the threat of Iran not Iraw battle. Iran in 2003 right after we invade Iraq, STOPPED their nuclear programs and was about to open the door, but then 2004 election started up and you libs started with the propaganda which the Iranians listened to and said America does not have the will so lets start the program again and keep America busy to help push the liberals agenda. (Remember Libya, they gave up all there WMD's because of Iraq, now they wish they did not because of the liberal propaganda)

Sometimes I can not tell the difference between Al Qeadas talking points and the libs.

John's conscience - yu say we do not do well in urban or civil war, well first lets leave out the big fact that Iraq was never in a civil and is still not, but those are two fighting scenarios we have a lot of experience in Read History!!

I would like to take this time and Thank President Bush for keeping America Safe and stopping any more terrorist attacks against We know he had a hard time with the libs trying to give the terrorists more rights then our citizens, but he has succeeded up to now!!
Unlike under the previous President where we were attacked at least 9 times!!

Remember we won WWII without getting Hitler!! and we can win this war without getting Obama!!

youth marketing, glowing gradients on over-designed website, packaging, repetitious catch phrases, naivety, staged unity, white guilt, double-talking, race-baiting, teleprompters, big speeches, long rhetoric, bells and whistles = Obama

"The young soldier who first spoke about the prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib – he is a patriot. Recognizing a wrong being committed in this country’s name; insisting that we deliver on the promise of our Constitution"

Obama can't tell the difference between a patriot and a traitor. Since when do terrorists get constitutional rights? Frightening. Obama has no allegence to the USA. How many soldiers died because of this traitor?

"This administration has achieved the almost unimaginable benchmark of managing to carry out a set of policies that have strengthened our two principal adversaries -- Al Qaeda and Iran."

Hey Wrong Emanual .... how exactly has Al Qadea strengthened? I guess you consider the majority of their leadership being killed or captured, and their ability to terrorize massively cut down "strengthened?"

I swear, do these Dems actually listen to the words coming out of their mouths?

Jessy, you wrote: "Just as how he (President Bush) took a nation that WAS no terrorist threat, Iraq and turned it into one!"

If you Google "Iraq" and "terrorist training camps" you will find a lot of information regarding Saddam Hussein's terrorist training camps. These camps trained thousands of Iraqis and non-Iraqis to be terrorists.

Obama pays his women staffers much less than McCain does. Another example of Obama being all talk.

“Well, I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president"
.....so true. "

Posted by: jessy | Jul 1, 2008 1:30:46 AM
_________________________________

HMMM... Do you think he did it all those years ago just to have fodder for his election speeches?

Do you think MCcain almost gave his life just so that you could have something to sneer at all these years later?

What about all of his military medals?
Did he buy them in an army-navy store?

How about his many years of service in the Congress?

OH!

I forgot!

Mccain service is being compared to that slim shred of a resume carted around by Obama under his left thumb.

Obama's state senatorship earmarked more to Obama's church ($15,000,000) and Michele's employer (moer than $1,000,000) than was ever earmarked to his constituents schools... or reform....or health care!

He makes big puffy promises on which he can't deliver because he doesn't supply the programs to do so!

Obama is for Obama!
Don't be fooled..

You've already gotten rid of the BEST candidate.

Now,

It must be COUNTRY BEFORE PARTY!
(MCcain before B O!!!!)

What about all the OTHER years he put his country first.... on all the OTHER

james, you do realize that training camp was in a part of Iraq that the US was responsible for, right? That was out of Saddam jurisdiction. you know hat, right? The international community already had full access to that place wihtout saddams approval.

john's, not only did the attack on Iraq excellerate the nuclear ambition of iran, so did bush putting a bullseye on iran by calling them very publicly, one ofhte axis of evils. Admit it, if Iraq had gone well, wewould haveattacked Iran next. What would you do if you were president of Iranknowing that? What else would deter us BESIDES a nuclear weapon? would we attack them IF they had a nuclear weapon pointed at us or Israel ready to be deployed? no. It was a complete selffullfillijng prophecy by Bush. He declared them a threat and therefore, they became one. blame that on ZERO diplomatic savy by Bush. Just as how he took a nation that WAS no terrorist threat, Iraq and turned it into one!

Rick - get your facts straight. 29 soldiers died in June, up from 19. Is that what you mean when you say country is more secure?

The fighting has been going on for a hundred years in Iraq between the different factions of the three religious groups. Sometime it slows down for a few years, then one group or another rears its discontended head and all h##l breaks loose. Those people in Iraq do not know how to compromise and become happy campers. Don't think either of our presidential candidates has the solution to the mess. It is simply a shame that so many of our troops have been killed or injured and the same goes for the Iraq people and their damaged country. Perhaps the best solutionn is for the USA troops to leave and let whatever happens happens. We have problems here at home to solve and manage.

To get their mojo back? That would be implying they ever had the mojo to begin with.

Even the New Yorker is coming out with an article about how Obama better start changing his tune on Iraq because the surge has worked and Iraq has started to stabilize.

Ooops. When the liberal New Yorker is turning on Obama - watch out!

Lol.

No they cannot, because everyone has heard enough of Barack Obama congratulating himself for the speech he made against "dumb wars" half a decade ago and once you look beyond that his record demonstrates a depressing lack of leadership on the issue. Even McCain, a Republican, was more bold than Obama in taking on the pathetically inept Rumsfield and his failed approach in Iraq. Now the issue of Iraq boils down to who has the knowledge and experience to extract us in an intelligent manner. Americans trust McCain more than Obama on this issue as well they should.

Right now, the democrats are trying to get the egg off their faces.

Can the Democrats "get their mo-jo back" ?

I think so, but it takes time for perceptions to change. The public's perception of the Republicans' foreign policy "experience" is definitely been changing. Iraq has been another Katrina.

Even under the kindest description, no progress has been made in rebuilding the infrastructure in Iraq. Perhaps even less progress has been made in finding a way to give all parties a share of power, or a stake in the future of Iraq.

It is hard to see how there can be a stable future there without giving everyone a stake.

Iraq is improving, relative to how terrible it was a year ago, but it is unstable. Our word regarding intel is cause for laughter. The dollar is in a severe decline. Iran's influence is rapidly expanding.

John's concience, you should read my comments more carefully. I did not assert that there was any collaboration between Iraq and al Qaeda. To the contrary, I stated that the 9/11 Commission found NO evidence of a "collaborative relationship." BUT THERE WERE CONTACTS -- per the 9/11 Commission.