16 Comments

• 1. Some Assembly Required  |  May 8th, 2008 at 9:53 am

  Just a couple questions here, since he was captured as an enemy combatant in Afghanistan, why was he transfered to Kuwait? Why was he acquitted in Kuwait? Why was he not under surveillance?

  I don’t believe this incident should be any reason to push for public trials of prisoners in Guantanamo. Public trials would inevitably allow more prisoners to walk considering evidence which could incriminate them would most likely be classified. So it’s a catch-22. I do not agree with waterboarding at Guantanamo, but lets be real, if your captured firing at American troops you become a prisoner of war. It’s just that simple.

• 2. Zach  |  May 8th, 2008 at 10:07 am

  I agree with you SAR.

• 3. Bigfoot  |  May 8th, 2008 at 10:42 am

  if your captured firing at American troops you become a prisoner of war.

  This is not quite true. The term “prisoner of war” applies to captured legal combatants, in other words, those who wear recognizable uniforms, carry their weapons openly, have a chain of command, avoid attacking civilians, avoid using civilians as human shields, etc. The detainees at Gitmo are illegal combatants, because they have disobeyed these rules. However, both types may be confined during the duration of the war, without any civilian trial. The difference is that captured legal combatants, the true “prisoners of war”, have protections that the illegals do not. For example, the interrogation of true POWs is generally limited to name, rank and serial number.

  I realize I’m nit-picking here, but I thought that this distinction needed to be pointed out.

• 4. Some Assembly Required  |  May 8th, 2008 at 11:07 am

  Your right bigfoot. I should have been more specific considering the big difference between to two. Nevertheless, I do not believe because they are illegal combatants waterboarding should be conducted. I know terrorist will not give up valuable information willingly, but this is what makes us different from them.

  That being said, sometimes in order to defeat whats coming from the sewer you need to be standing in the gutter. Just as long as you always know where the street is and return to it I do not see any harm.

• 5. Kahn  |  May 8th, 2008 at 11:12 am

  We should not take prisoners.

• 6. Iraq » And Democrat&hellip  |  May 8th, 2008 at 11:30 am

  […] World Affairs Board - Military, Defense and Political Forum wrote an interesting post today on And Democrats Want These People FreeHere’s a quick excerptThe Associated Press reports that an enemy combatant formerly held at Guantanamo carried out a suicide attack in Iraq last month. […]

• 7. Danish Artist  |  May 8th, 2008 at 12:24 pm

  SAR, you accuse me of not reading!

  “since he was captured as an enemy combatant in Afghanistan, why was he transfered to Kuwait? ”

  From the first sentence of the article:

  “A Kuwaiti freed from Guantanamo Bay… ”

  Regardless of your irrelevant question, the man was an enemy combatant, not a member of a regular army and therefore not subject to the articles of the Geneva convention.

  Oh, and way to go sticking to the topic - waterboarding has only been used in three instances.

  Another distaster brought to us by “liberal guidance”.

• 8. Some Assembly Required  |  May 8th, 2008 at 1:00 pm

  Dude, further down in the article…

  “Despite his problems at Guantanamo, in 2005 al-Ajmi was transferred to Kuwait, which was supposed to ensure he would no longer pose a threat.

  But in May 2006, a Kuwaiti court acquitted him of being a member of al-Qaida and raising money for the terror organization. The court also acquitted four other former Guantanamo prisoners.”

  Those questions were not attack questions. Thank you for proving my point without even having to make it. Sheesh

• 9. Danish Artist  |  May 8th, 2008 at 3:04 pm

  SAR, you are projecting again.

  You ask irrelevant questions and the answers were provided in the article, that you referenced in your last post.

  Do you enjoy arguing with yourself and losing?

• 10. Kahn  |  May 8th, 2008 at 6:04 pm

  Should not have taken him prisoner in the first place. Pop Pop Pop, no more threat.

  Innocent people are dead because we released him - alive.

• 11. Some Assembly Required  |  May 8th, 2008 at 6:14 pm

  Kahn, agreed. Well, about the releasing part anyway. What gets me about the article is that al-Ajmi was know where near a model prisoner during his 3 1/2 year sentence but they transfered him from Guantanamo to Kuwait anyway. Then the man is acquitted in Kuwait. Sounds to me like we need to stop transferring prisoners out of there who at least do not exhibit model behavior. Not to mention he was detained as a combatant in Afghanistan.

• 12. Rich  |  May 8th, 2008 at 6:21 pm

  Woohoo- Looks like Iraqi’s captured al-Masri, the head of Al-qaeda in Iraq.

• 13. majoriot  |  May 9th, 2008 at 5:19 pm

  Any proof that they are illegal combatants?

  anyone? anyone?

• 14. Danish Artist  |  May 9th, 2008 at 6:11 pm

  “Any proof that they are illegal combatants?”

  What an assinine question! What else can we expect from the majoridiot!?!

  These were defined by the Geneva Convention more than 60 years ago. But why let facts get in your way majoridiot, when liberal talking points come first.

  I grow bored deal with this mental midget.

• 15. bongoman  |  May 10th, 2008 at 1:12 am

  Deleted - links to anti-American hate site.

• 16. bongoman  |  May 10th, 2008 at 5:42 am

  antiwar.com a hate site? Who are you kidding?

Matt Margolis on Twitter