What's Wrong With This Sentence?

SicTimMitchell · Post by **SicTimMitchell** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 9:52 pm

I'm reading this article, thinking hey, it's a start towards more humane treatment of detainees.

Then I get to this:

Officials also said the Army will create 35 special "internment/resettlement" units comprising 3,000 soldiers specializing in handling detainees by 2008.

Ummm...

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=s ... a_abuse_dc

vaulos · Post by **vaulos** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 9:54 pm

I'm told that they'll have water-less showers.

Post by **Relbeek Einre** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 10:07 pm

OK I'm scared.

Burz · Post by **Burz** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 10:14 pm

Heard FDR Approved it.

Get ready west coast Japs.

Alannia_Raindancer · Post by **Alannia_Raindancer** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 2:26 am

SicTimMitchell wrote:I'm reading this article, thinking hey, it's a start towards more humane treatment of detainees.

Then I get to this:

Officials also said the Army will create 35 special "internment/resettlement" units comprising 3,000 soldiers specializing in handling detainees by 2008.
Ummm...

I'm, once again, confused.

Given the rest of the article, I read that comment as they were "special training" people for these detainment camps, which I can't really argue with. Can you guys clarify what you're concerned with? The timeframe? That it -SHOULD- be common sense how to treat people, and we shouldn't need "special units"? The word "resettlement"? (that one kind of gave me hives, but I don't trust journalists enough to use appropriate wording anyways, so it was easy for me to ignore....)

what did I miss??

SicTimMitchell · Post by **SicTimMitchell** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 8:26 am

2008.

Partha · Post by **Partha** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 8:33 am

Who are you KIDDING, Bang?

Me and Dd were telling you guys in 2003 that it would be 15-20 years in Iraq, minimum.

First the Bushies told you one year.

Then it became 2.

Then it became 2008.

Then it became 2010.

Did you actually believe these people?

SicTimMitchell · Post by **SicTimMitchell** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 1:16 pm

It doesn't necessarily suggest a protracted war in Iraq to me, Partha.

It's much more disturbing than that.

Our man Burz hit the nail on the head -- only World War II ended and the internment of Japanese citizens stopped. The "War on Terror" will never end.

Bluesman · Post by **Bluesman** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 1:46 pm

We will be there in some form for the rest of our lives, we are still in South Korea from Korean War (part 1?)

Aabe · Post by **Aabe** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 3:24 pm

Rats, I told the army about Beek and Parha, just said they needed to handle em specail is all.. I never expected this. =(

Tromor · Post by **Tromor** » Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:00 pm

And I, for one, welcome our new Rebublican overlords.

Embar Angylwrath · Post by **Embar Angylwrath** » Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:10 pm

Partha wrote:Who are you KIDDING, Bang?

Me and Dd were telling you guys in 2003 that it would be 15-20 years in Iraq, minimum.

First the Bushies told you one year.

Then it became 2.

Then it became 2008.

Then it became 2010.

Did you actually believe these people?

Partha -

I'd agree with Tim. The article doesn't say anything about protracted US troop involvement in Iraq. The article is addressing new policy changes that will take effect regardless of location.

What in the article led you to beleive that it was an Iraq-only policy?

Post by **Relbeek Einre** » Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:13 pm

Ironically, it'd be somewhat less disturbing if it WAS an Iraq-only policy.

Embar Angylwrath · Post by **Embar Angylwrath** » Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:15 pm

I disagree Beek. Something had to be done about the treatment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib. Having detention centers with trained staff instead of putting 21 year-old leathernecks in charge of prisoners seems like a good idea to me.

Post by **Relbeek Einre** » Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:17 pm

That's a good point, however, including the word "resettlement" in their job title makes me extremely concerned.

Kulaf · Post by **Kulaf** » Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:28 pm

One would assume that would ba the removal of someone from a combat area to the "internment" facility or between internment facilities....much like prison guards who are trained to transport/transfer prisoners.

Aabe · Post by **Aabe** » Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:31 pm

well, given a batch got sent to Cuba, perhaps they could brandish the title "tour guides"?

Brell Rants

What's Wrong With This Sentence?

What's Wrong With This Sentence?

Re: What's Wrong With This Sentence?

Re:

Re: