| Author |
Message |
    
Iamarchangel
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 29, 2009 - 04:10 pm: | 
|
What are the specifics of your solution that turns them from fanatics bent on our destruction to our friends?
You're doing that not reading the post thing again.
It's not MY solution, it a US solution. Something worked back then. I am suggesting that it might work again. Who knows, it's a unique situation?
The specifics: I already said I was never able to trace to the specific guide-book or who wrote it. I could find orders, directives and manuals alluding to a structured plan. All the material is public except that specific. Lots of references to it, just can't find it. For a while I suspected McArthur was behind it. Later, i was thinking Eleanor.
In any case, follow Ferris's start at Amazon, read those. Go to a research library, go through the military records. Follow the transcripts and articles. See what you find. There is a common document that is being referenced. It is not named or numbered.
Maybe it is now.
(btw, Honours Level History, my thesis on US treatment of Japanese Prisoners of War got an A+) |
Iamarchangel
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 29, 2009 - 04:14 pm: |
|
We are? Frankly, my head is spinning
Basics really: if you're going to talk, talk. If you're going to shoot, don't talk.
Never thought I'd spend so long defending US policy to Americans. |
P_squared
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 29, 2009 - 04:18 pm: |
|
You're doing that not reading the post thing again.
No, I read your posts. I'm asking you for details since you've stated you have studied the matter.
I'm curious to know what makes you think that solution could be used here & now with the same results, as the general outline you've pointed to here in this post leaves me very doubtful of it being successful.
Just a general, "Treat them like you treated Japanes POWs during WWII" doesn't wash with me on many fronts. Legal issues & different philosophies between the combatants being the 2 that immediately come to my mind. |
P_squared
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 29, 2009 - 04:30 pm: |
|
Iamarchangel, to help clarify why I'm asking (and I'm asking, not trying to have a p!$$ing match), was in relation to the opening "salvo" of the generic PR that we routinely & regularly treat detainees inhumanely. That morphed into the "Gitmo is a recruitment tool" meme. They are both false and have been proven so, contrary to the popular public opinion/MSM line.
The problem with that line of reasoning is that it doesn't matter WHERE we hold the tangos, they will continue to state they are being treated inhumanely. As for the recruitment tool part, it's a red herring IMO. If there wasn't Gitmo, there'd be another reason. Remember, we weren't detaining AQ members there before 9/11, yet 9/11 still happened. They recruited & carried out their plot to strike us.
So, in a detention setting, how do you make these fanatics come to appreciate our country & society? You point to our treatment of Japanese POWs during WWII as a model. For all intents & purposes, we are treating detainees like we treated the POWs in WWII. Main difference being the security measures taken to this point.
A plan of:
Step 1: Close Gitmo
Step 2: ???
Step 3: The tangos now love us
just doesn't work in the real world. |
Hootowl
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 29, 2009 - 04:34 pm: |
|
Thank you for the south park reference. I'm going to have to start working that into daily conversations. |
Iamarchangel
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 29, 2009 - 05:05 pm: |
|
P:
I don't understand what legal issues and philosophies you refer to. I don't see any: a detainee has a legal status, the US has legal authority. There was some confusion internationally before but I think that there's common agreement now. As captives under the US, they come under US philosophy. Again, confusion with the IRC before but common agreement now.
I disagree with your PR and breeding ground positions, they doesn't affect the rest of the discussion. They lead to a common conclusion anyway: we both want an honourable US position and no-repeat customers.
I also agree it doesn't matter where the camps are. We don't have to return to that.
The Japanese were treated with overwhelming generosity. There were work camps and work details that purposely took them to beautiful places. Education and medicine were supplied. They had enough rations to send home and were allowed to.
The status between officer and regular was maintained but no other social division was allowed. Worship was clearly defined and encouraged.
It is truly mind-boggling to read the accounts knowing what was happening to Allied soldiers in Japanese care. And knowing the US knew. But it made a difference.
Again, ONLY the US did this. The British and Australian were brutal: Australia has the largest prisoner death record from WW2. (Canada had a very short role in the Pacific and were mostly in the prisoner position. Towards the end, any prisoners were forwarded to the US forces.)
One of the books I have is a survey of Japanese WW2 vets in their nineties. They have no unpleasant memories of being US captives. |
P_squared
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 29, 2009 - 06:17 pm: |
|
Legal issues:
Japanese were recognized as lawful enemy combatants or civilians under Geneva conventions. This provides a very clear cut basis of what can/can't be done in regards to their detention under either the 3rd or 4th Convention as appropriate.
Gitmo detainees do not meet the definition of either civilians or uniformed combatants under the 3rd or 4th conventions. This causes a lot of grey area in what is legal. Do you treat them as uniformed combatants who aren't? Do you treat them as civilians who aren't? Do you mirandize them and give them access to our legal system on par with the same rights as Americans? Or do you treat them like terrorists who don't have legal rights under international treaties to which we adhere to? I prefer the last, but it seems some folks don't agree with that.
Philosophical issues:
The Japanese during WWII strongly adhered to the tenets of Bushido.
The current crop of tangos don’t. Big difference between their basic mindset in how they approach their detention.
General observations:
On the issue of basic treatment, we supply food, medicine, prayer, education, etc. We curtail movement & interaction due to security. Keeping security issues in mind, I don't see where/how we could change the current dynamic in any meaningful form.
1 of the problems with a work camp/work detail in a scenic setting(s) is what work & where? You need tight security, as escapees in this day & age could probably make it out of the country a lot easier than those of WWII. I can already imagine the hue & cry of "slave labor camps" as an added bonus to that move. Think I'll take a pass if at all possible.
So how do we treat them better than they are already being treated in a manner that fundamentally changes their beliefs without unnecessarily endangering our own society? |
Ferris_von_bueller
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 29, 2009 - 06:44 pm: |
|
Imam, I dont know where you get your info that the British and Australians were " brutal" in comparison to the U.S. I know there were instances of prisoner mistreatment but I've never read or heard of it being official policy. There are plenty of resources that would take exception with you. The Australians suffered a large Japanese prisoner escape near the town of Cowra in 1944.
The Italians had fought tenaciously during the war, but finally had been forced to surrender. Like the soldiers of most armies they saw no lasting disgrace in their surrender, but accepted it as a necessary part of the fortunes of war. They were aware of their rights under the Geneva C onvention, and were content to see out the war as prisoners on foreign soil.
The Japanese, however, found the act of surrendering a deeply humiliating experience. Many adopted false names when they were captured so that their brothers-in-arms and families would presume them dead. The Australian guards were aware of the deep-seated unhappiness of the Japanese in B compound, but held no fears of an outbreak. The camp adhered very closely to the Geneva Convention and the guards treated their prisoners well.
http://www.anzacday.org.au/history/ww2/anecdotes/c owra.html |
Aesquire
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 29, 2009 - 06:57 pm: |
|
Iamarchangel, That actually is an interesting idea. I'm not sure how you translate the meme into todays situation, but there are some interesting parallels.
The Japanese soldier was brought up with the concept of Bushido. He may not have been of the Shinto faith, but he was for certain exposed to the beliefs, and the officers & leaders had the Bushido code. ( more or less ) So like any American ( or Canadian ) may not be Christian, he has a clue what the behavior pattern in his society is supposed to be.
The modern jihadist is "raised" or converted to a perversion of Islam. Like the panty bomber, some move to that perversion as they are seduced by "solutions" to their own life problems offered by that perverted movement. The panty bomber had a hard time with England's customs, and was reportedly lonely. The jihadist movement ( like many bad guy groups ) preys deliberately on lost & angry youths. I'm actually surprised how well their schtick works on older guys too.
We'd have to tailor the "pow" thing to suit todays reality, but having the enemy combatants send care packages home....Priceless!
It is obvious that catch & release...then try and catch again, is as insane as the L.B.J./mcnamara refusal to bomb SAM sites until they fired on our planes, they were "sending a message". Dolts. The message they sent is "you can screw us, because our reality isn't based on the real universe". War is not precinct politics by other means.
If they are enemy, you hold them until the war is over. Period, fraking dot.
if their war is eternal... too bad. |
Cityxslicker
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 29, 2009 - 08:34 pm: |
|
They are terrorists, their legal status is at the end of a yard arm, the muzzle of a gun, or the point of a bayonet.
Go read the Law of Land Warfare. According to the Geneva Convention, and all of its signatories; you can kill terrorists on the spot. Its a good rule, it applies to pirates as well.
We should stick to international law, return Gitmo to Hilton, maybe it will be a nice bail out for the Cuban economy.
The problem with them being housed on US soil, and subject to US courts is now the enemy is afforded Constitutional protection.... due process, Miranda, and a lax liberal penal code.
Watch for more 'art' therapy. It is all they are willing to do to get tough with terrorists
Hearts and minds of the enemy, its one in the head and two in the chest.
When you let the fox sleep with the chickens, are you surprised when fowl go missing ? |
Liquorwhere
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 29, 2009 - 09:06 pm: |
|
Imam, I dont know.............
Dammit man!! I almost spit my beer all over the screen.....issuing fatwa's....lol... |
Iamarchangel
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 29, 2009 - 09:39 pm: |
|
Technically, the Japanese were not under the Geneva Convention. As their war fortunes faded, they agreed reluctantly to follow it. History knows how well that went.
McArthur set prisons up on islands. That's pretty secure.
Ferris, for now google will work for you. The Cowra outbreak, and there is doubt on that aspect, lead to the machine gun death of over 200 mean. The wiki article says armed. Other historical accounts suggest not. Featherstone in NZ was another incident. Later, you can read real history books and not just web accounts. British kept detainees as forced labour until '47, beached a ship on a deserted isle for months, etc.
Why am I having trouble convincing you the US was once the "Good Guys". |
46champ
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 29, 2009 - 10:47 pm: |
|
You aren't having trouble convincing us we're the good guys we just think that this enemy is different than the Japanese prisoners of WW II. Their might be some members of various terror groups that can be rehabilitated but some that can't. Most of the Japanese prisoners were draftee's, not a psychopathic volunteer.
It is possible that the only way we may get rid of them is to do the same thing the American and British Navies did to the Caribbean Pirates in the 1820's. |
P_squared
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 30, 2009 - 12:41 am: |
|
Technically, the Japanese were not under the Geneva Convention.
Not exactly relevant since we were. See Section 1 of the 3rd convention.
McArthur set prisons up on islands. That's pretty secure.
Isn't Gitmo an island too? Seems pretty darn secure to me as well as being a pretty good solution to a sticky issue in regards to legal issues in relation to detaining persons afforded no protections under either the 3rd or 4th conventions.
Why am I having trouble convincing you the US was once the "Good Guys".
No trouble convincing me at all. But I'd change that to say we still are the "Good Guys" instead of potentially implying we aren't.
Keeping in mind the major issues (legalities, philosophies, general observations, etc.) I don't see how/where the situation can be improved without unnecessarily introducing an increased risk with little to no foreseeable gain? |
Cityxslicker
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 30, 2009 - 01:28 am: |
|
There are dark holes in Uzbekistan and Krygyzstan that would love to have those 'Illinois boys'
Wont solve the over all problem, but it will fix these malcontents. |
Ferris_von_bueller
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 30, 2009 - 10:43 am: |
|
I still don't buy Iama's argument that good treatment by the U.S. of Japanese soldiers helped stabilize Japan after the war. It's a nice feel-good postulation on his part but I'm not feeling it.
Sending jihadists to art classes is a colossal mistake and goes to show the naivety of some of our leaders. |
Fast1075
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 30, 2009 - 11:24 am: |
|
There is an actual cure for the mental imbalance that causes terrorism...it is cheap and easy to administer.
The prescription is 260 grains of lead applied sub-durally....repeat as need until cure is complete. |
Ft_bstrd
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 30, 2009 - 11:31 am: |
|
The Japanese were not willing to have peace until they were willing to submit.
Two mushroom clouds altered the will of the Japanese people. Once they were willing to submit, the US was willing to work toward the cessation of hostilities and the normalization of relations.
Terrorists are no different. It just may take longer to reach the point of submission. In stead of doing it 100,000 at a time, we have to do it person by person. They will either submit or be killed. There is NO other way. |
Cityxslicker
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 30, 2009 - 12:37 pm: |
|
Mecca and Medina, the New Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Make sure you hit them during Haj at Ramadan.
When you let politicans and news media sway military actions, you have lost the skirmish/battle/war. We didnt learn a damn thing from Vietnam. |
Ft_bstrd
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 30, 2009 - 12:41 pm: |
|
I sincerely wish we were the international bullies the hand wringing pacifists think we are. |
|
