American Politics XXI

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Anneilise, Triskele,

We should be willing to try these guys in civilian courts or hold them as POWs.

[The_BlauerDragon]

Which aspect is hilarious to you, precisely?

That your president is being compared to an egomaniac who established a cult of personality?

That you agree with the above assessment and then someone else across the world made a series of merchandise to express that sentiment?

That the Chinese business entrepreneurs are making money off of an American President?

That Obama is likened to a cultural-historical icon force-fed to the populace who are now less than subtle about their ambivalent evaluation of that icon?

That. And...

That the Chinese government was so concerned about it that they rushed out to stop people from selling the shirts. Did they think that having a few humorous T-Shirts floating around when he visited was going to cause an international uproar or something?

Anneilise, Triskele,

We should be willing to try these guys in civilian courts or hold them as POWs.

I would much rather have them tried in civilian courts than held as POWs. Holding them as Prisoners of War lends legitimacy to their cause in more than just a few ways. Honestly though, as long as they aren't being detained in torture camps and denied all rights of law and convention, I could care less how they are tried.

[TrueMetis]

The EPA de-listed the California Grey Whale back in the mid-90s and that is why the Makah sought permission to exercise their treaty rights to hunt whales. Traditionally, the whales were hunted for subsistence, but there was a long period where they were not allowed to do so because the population was endangered (mind you, not because of the miniscule take of indigenous people). So, when the species was no longer endangered according to ESA criteria, the Makah got support from the Clinton administration to petition the IWC for a schedule that allowed them to take some whales each year. The Russians have supported the right of indigenous Chukotka to harvest whales and have obtained permission from the IWC for a subsistance take for those people. In support of the Makah, the US worked out a deal through the IWC that allowed the Makah a piece of that action. Technically, the Makah were not reliant on whales for subsistence like the Chukotka, but they did have a treaty right, and the IWC recognised the cultural need of the Makah for whom the whale plays a central role. The Makah did harvest some whales under this agreement, but that was several years ago, and I have lost track of the current situation.

So it's longer ago than I thought.

[awesome possum]

I'm wondering... since when did this Khalid Sheikh Mohammed become the mastermind of 9/11? You mean Bush lied to us when he said bin Laden was behind it all or is it just that they actually were able to catch this maggot?

[lokisnow]

I'm wondering... since when did this Khalid Sheikh Mohammed become the mastermind of 9/11? You mean Bush lied to us when he said bin Laden was behind it all or is it just that they actually were able to catch this maggot?

if we'd caught Bin Ladin we couldn't have invaded iraq or capturing him might have triggered popular support to withdraw from both warzones and that would mean money lost for Halliburton/Blackwater et al and would have plunged us into our current Supply-Side-Great-Recession sooner (since the only thing keeping it from being triggered earlier was the war spending stimulus).

Why would we want to catch Bin Ladin? There's no upside and plenty of downside.

iirc KSM was the one who planned and implemented the 9/11 attacks, according to the torturers at least, Bin Ladin was the CEO who said, "lets do this thing!"

[Lord O' Bones]

I've always found Bones' posting style to be a bit Seacrestian.

Shit just got real.

[sologdin]

aspect is hilarious to you, precisely?

what, terra? you don't think it's as amusing as that Bushitler shirt that we all wear to our secret commie terrorist hippie al qaida meetings?

ETA--

incidentally, it appears as though there is such a thing.

[Peter Irving]

I find that in rather poor taste.

[Edda van Heefmstra Ruston]

Which? Obamao or Bushitler? Or both?

[Max the Mostly Mediocre]

I find that in rather poor taste.

uh, duh?

[Peter Irving]

Which? Obamao or Bushitler? Or both?

both. Their comparing our presidents to horrible mass murderers.

[Max the Mostly Mediocre]

What, you mean like Andrew Jackson?

[Peter Irving]

yes like that disgrace for a president.

[sologdin]

is there a US president who was not a mass murderer?

perhaps william henry harrison, who did everyone a favor by dying after a month in office--but, then, his presidential credentials were based on being a slaughterer of native americans--so, fuck him, too.

[TrackerNeil]

As usual, Greenwald is spot-on. A good friend of mine, who follows these issues closely in the news, said once that on September 11, the hijackers delivered the United States a mid-term exam on our principles. (Not that such was their intention, but it was the result of their actions.) The United States failed that exam with a big red "F." We proved to the world that, given enough fear, we will promptly jettison our beliefs for the illusion of security. Yay us. :(

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Sologdin,

Hoover, Coolidge, and Harding were mass murderers?

[sologdin]

scot--

good question. the US was involved in banana wars/monroe doctrine policing at the time, but it was low key. i guess we task them also for jim crow and the routine deaths that occur under capitalist ecnomics, and hoover additionally for the negligent response to the global crisis of his tenure--which is the same as tasking mao for the great leap forward (at least in kind, if not in degree).

[Peter Irving]

but soloqdin would you compare bush to hitler? I mean did Bush intentionally try to exterminate several ethnic groups?

[Commodore]

As usual, Greenwald is spot-on. A good friend of mine, who follows these issues closely in the news, said once that on September 11, the hijackers delivered the United States a mid-term exam on our principles. (Not that such was their intention, but it was the result of their actions.) The United States failed that exam with a big red "F." We proved to the world that, given enough fear, we will promptly jettison our beliefs for the illusion of security. Yay us. :(

Please. Setting up tribunals to try combatents means we "jettisoned our beliefs for the illusion of security"? What a drama queen.

People want to make this out to be some monumental issue that will test our humanity. It's just two separate ideas about how to deal with these guys, civilian courts or military tribunals. They both have pros and cons, but neither are immoral. As if trying these guys in a military court would be shredding the Constitution and make us no better than the terrorists. That's a little over the top don't you think?

Which begs the question, what criteria determine whether a Gitmo detainee will be tried by a civilian court or a tribunal (the likelihood of conviction?)? As I understand it, there will be both.

[sologdin]

commodore--

you neglect to mention the third alternative, which is preferred by the article's targets, of locking pre-trial detainees up in gitmo forever sans right to an attorney or right to trial.

peter--

i don't think bush II has intended or attempted to exterminate any groups that enjoy the protection of the genocide convention or the SICC.

i do think that he has waged aggressive war against several states and thereby violated art. 2(4) of the UN Charter as well as humanitarian law regarding jus ad bellum principles, both in iraq & afghanistan as well as in the covert ouster of several governments during his tenure, including, but not limited to venezuela and haiti.

in these latter items he is comparable to any other leader who violated the law of warfare and art. 2(4), a club which includes hitler as its most memorable inductee. i suspect a comparison to hitler only makes sense if someone is invoking an intentional genocide, and bush II, for all his flaws, didn't appear to be a genocidal maniac, although his marred elections, authoritarianism, and bellicose irrationality make it easy for his detractors to make the hitler comparison. obama, on the other hand, has not made the comparison easy, but the detractors are determined to make it.