GTMO Debate; your thoughts.

Status
Not open for further replies.
LineInTheSand

LineInTheSand

USCGA 2006
10-Year Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2007
Messages
9,295
Both President Obama and Vice President Cheney spoke today about GTMO and moving terrorists from Cuba to the United States.

While Vice President Cheney's speech was planned for weeks, President Obama elected to schedule a speech before it. In affect, Vice President Cheney's speech was a rebuttal. What did you think of the speeches?


What do you think of the issue at hand as well?
 
I'm afraid we're going to start exporting terrorists to Egypt (to "get" information) again like the Clinton administration. Who knows though.
 
I didn't watch both speeches in their entirety.

What I did see in a large military dining facility in Iraq is no one paying attention to President Obama and people in uniform straining to listen to Cheney.

In my opinion, the Obama Administration and it's supporters vastly overestimate the influence of Gitmo as motivation for young, unemployed, and unmarried Islamic fundamentalists to join the Jihadist movement. Close down Gitmo and those guys are still unemployed, not having sex with women, and brainwashed in religious schools.

Obama needs to realize that much of what goes on over here is driven by the desire for money, power, and wasta. Gitmo has nothing to do with it.
 
And now they can add the memos to their "literature".


I think very few people understand that Gitmo is more than a prison, and it has been there for many many years. People also generally have no idea what it looks like, with the exception of Camp X-ray which was open for only months.

It is clear the issue crosses party lines.
 
I think many politicians signed off on it or ignored it in the past, and now that it has come to the attention of everyone, they've said how bad it is and how they were always against it. It's disgusting. Nancy Pelosi is the one that comes to mind when I say this.
 
Actually the city officials want them - it's the 3 member Congressional delegation from Montana that objects.
 
So the question is whether congress will find a place for long term nuclear waste storage or the detainees first. Tough call...
 
And the city officials want new jobs....best way to go job hunting, offer to take many terrorists to your sleepy little town will all of the voters watch.

This isn't the best time to go job hunting, or pay your credit cards on time.
 
There are several problems associated with bringing GITMO detainee's to the US penal system.

1) They are not going to Hardin Mt., they will be going to the Supermax in Florence Co. just south of CSprings and in close proximity to USAFA. This is the only facility in the Penal System designed to accept the individuals in question. It is also one of the last two Republican districts in Colorado.

2) When they arrive they will be entitled to several rights that they do not currently enjoy in GITMO. Including unsupervised visits with the legal rep of their choosing. You can be sure in addition to a large new ACLU community locating in this area, a large Muslim support community will also locate there.

3) Because they are being held in a US Penal institution they will be extend "Haibius" rights and that is another big can of worms.

Closing GITMO is a bad idea period. The mythology of the left of prisoner abuse and the propaganda they have pushed is horrible. After 21 years in the military I know of no one who would willingly stand by with knowledge of the kind of abuse the left wants you to believe has been occuring. It is a slander against the men and women who wear the uniform and are charged with securing these "ANIMALS" yes "ANIMALS". They would think nothing of killing as many Americans as possible.

That is why closing GITMO is a bad idea and many Democrats side with the republicans last week. They dont want to wake up with one of these guys having committed another tragedy on American soil.
 
It's like wind and solar energy... "Yeah, we should definitely build more solar plants and wind farms... wait, in my district? In sight of my house? NO, THAT CANNOT HAPPEN!"
 
1. I didn't hear that Florence was a definite - could be though. There are already terrorists there and apparently at Terre Haute as well.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/21/AR2009052102009.html
For several reasons, I think Harding MT would be perfect. It's already and empty max security prison standing empty, that could be converted into a super-max facility.

Two years ago, an official from the Federal Bureau of Prisons told the House Committee on Homeland Security that authorities were monitoring inmates who might try to spread extremist ideologies, screening clerics and moving terrorist inmates to special facilities in Colorado and Terre Haute, Ind. The bulk of al-Qaeda-affiliated convicts in the United States are housed in those two facilities, law enforcement officials said yesterday.
Click to expand...
2. I am not sure they will "enjoy more rights" than they already have. After all a Navy JAG lawyer already won a case for a detainee at the SCOTUS
You can be sure in addition to a large new ACLU community locating in this area, a large Muslim support community will also locate there.
Click to expand...
You write this like it's a bad thing.

3. ??? Habeas Corpus? This has already happened from GITMO.
Look up Al Odah vs United States and Boumediene v. Bush.
On June 12, 2008 it was Justice Kennedy who wrote the 5-4 decision that struck down the Military Commissions Act of 2006 and held that prisoners had a right to Habeas Corpus under the US Constitution.

As recently as last Friday, the US Secretary of Defense, Republican Bob Gates (who was appointed by Bush) defended closing GITMO:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30884456/
 
Gates was appointed by Bush to satisfy a Dem Congress after calling for Rumsfeld's head. I have little good to say aboiut Gates so I wont say anything.

They are headed to Florence dont kid yourself. It puts the community a risk!

We JAM are going to disagree about this and not politely. These are bad people, and Dems should be ashamed of the PR campaign they have waged to make them sympathetic. I remember Dick Durbin comparing the GITMO guards to NAZI's.

They shold remain at GITMO and Military Tribunals should have never been stopped. They should never reach the shores of the US and be afford the additional rights and protections they will recieve as soon as they arrive.

SHAME
 
Any more ACLU is a bad thing....just putting that out there....apparently the Department of Defense agreed in part when they asked for the President to block the release of photos.
 
I'm still trying to figure out what JAM has listed that makes Montana BETTER than GTMO. I think some here have signed on to the whole "GTMO is pure evil" despite never having been there.

I've been JAM, the same people guarding those prisoners as wearing the same uniform your daughter will be wearing...

I wasn't aware that Durbin equated GTMO guards (many of which are U.S. Army) to Nazi guards. Thanks for pointing that out.
 
LineInTheSand said:
Classic NIMBY.
Click to expand...
Wise words, LITS.
I remember a speech by some Senator supporting the closing saying how the US certainly doesn't want to take them, but neither does anybody else.
For me it would seem kind of obvious that if we weren't even willing to take care of our own prisoners (particularly in a case like this, concerning the danger of the detainees), why on earth would anyone else?

And the city officials want new jobs....best way to go job hunting, offer to take many terrorists to your sleepy little town will all of the voters watch.
Click to expand...
My dad says much the same thing.

Although it is worth noting: for all the "Joe Rte 1's" out there (my gov't teacher's term for the masses; we live on the east coast near US Route 1), the first thought for a place like Gitmo is not positive. If we're going to try to refute claims of inhuman treatment/torture there, the fact that Gitmo is off US soil doesn't help the cause.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top