GTMO Debate; your thoughts.

[Just_A_Mom]

We JAM are going to disagree about this and not politely.

What makes you think we disagree? Even if we don't why not choose to be polite? One can certainly be passionate in one's beliefs while remaining civil. Civil discourse is one of the foundations of a democratic society. You and others have fought to maintain this right.

I'm still trying to figure out what JAM has listed that makes Montana BETTER than GTMO.

I never said Hardin is better than GTMO. I was referring to Colorado. Of course, moving the prisoners to Hardin isn't going to happen, my point was to show that not everyone has the NIMBY attitude. Some reasons why it might be better than Co is it's isolated location, state of the art facility and the lack of other prisoner population there.

There are several different issues here, one is what to do with prisoners who the courts determine must be released, the other separate issue is closing GTMO and moving the prisoners out of there.
The closing of GTMO was a campaign issue that both Obama and McCain campaigned on. The majority of Americans want GTMO closed and the prisoners moved.

To be sure on both sides there are whackos - while Durbin is one, I would not categorize Mike Mullen as one.
Yesterday's Washington Post has Adm. Mike Mullen supporting closing GTMO:

"Well, the concern I've had about Guantanamo in these wars is it has been a symbol -- and one which has been a recruiting symbol for those extremists and jihadists who would fight us. ... That's at the heart of the concern for Guantanamo's continued existence," Mullen said on ABC's "This Week."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/25/AR2009052501574.html
If anyone has any inside information to support this statement it would be Adm Mullen.

David Broder's column about the two speeches - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...5/22/AR2009052201634.html?sid=ST2009052203095
A Worthy Debate it is.

 

[LineInTheSand]

What makes you think we disagree? Even if we don't why not choose to be polite? One can certainly be passionate in one's beliefs while remaining civil. Civil discourse is one of the foundations of a democratic society. You and others have fought to maintain this right.


I never said Hardin is better than GTMO. I was referring to Colorado. Of course, moving the prisoners to Hardin isn't going to happen, my point was to show that not everyone has the NIMBY attitude. Some reasons why it might be better than Co is it's isolated location, state of the art facility and the lack of other prisoner population there.

First, I don't read the Post. I carry the WSJ every day into work, but I won't touch that rag, the Washington Post.

People in GTMO (and I'm talking about the JTF members, not the prisoners) aren't carrying on with NIMBY. We've had ALOT of campaign promises, and just over half of the voting country liked them, and just under half of the voting country didn't. Interesting, you say that a majority want GTMO closed and the people moved, and yet people are not willing to give the President a blank check, across the board.

Unfortunately if we were so concerned about our enemy's "play book", I cannot see how releasing the classified memos in any way corrected that. We're so concerned about how the world views us, all while Iran says it can wipe out Israel in 11 days, the CIA director tells Israel they will not have the support of the United States should they chose to attack Iran preemptively, North Korea tests it's most successful weapon, Chinese boats harrass a U.S. ship, Russian, Cuba and Venezuala plan on joint exercises in the western hemisphere and Russia comments on placing strategic bombers in Cuba.

When we concern ourselves too much with "does everyone like me" kinds of questions, everyone feels the need to influence our actions.

Can we justify the price of moving these people to a neighborhood near you?

 

[ds52262]

Actually according to recent polling (which I hate because it is used to move news and make news) suggests the majority do not support closing GITMO. That is why the Senate moved so quickly away from Obama's campaign promise and demanded a plan before they would finance the closure.

The whole issue of GITMO has been being some kind of evil torture camp has been advanced by Leftist politicians (Main Stream Democrats, Moderate Dems no longer exist ask Joe Lieberman).

No JAM I will not be polite about this because it threatens all Americans!! I have no doubt aboput that. These are not good people. The ACLU activist that have been representing them did everything possible to derail tribunals and complained about the delays in justice.

SO JAM you may want top alert the admin now because yes I am gonna get nasty.

 

[bmorris244]

First, I don't read the Post. I carry the WSJ every day into work, but I won't touch that rag, the Washington Post.

HEAR HEAR!

I like you more day by day, LITS. I'm glad somebody brought up all the other countries' activities, especially N. Korea and Iran. Not to mention Pakistan, Syria, and others...

And I don't want to play moderator, but I'd like it if we could keep this civil.
JAM has a point: the NIMBY attitude is totally true, but this actually supports ds's point that Gitmo shouldn't be closed anyway, and here I agree with him. If no one wants to take them, and they obviously need a place to stay, then why the heck are we closing the place? To answer my own question, (again going back to ds's point

The whole issue of GITMO has been being some kind of evil torture camp has been advanced by Leftist politicians (Main Stream Democrats, Moderate Dems no longer exist ask Joe Lieberman).

One of the most successful lines of lawsuits is in prisons, securing "rights" for prisoners like cable TV. (I don't have cable TV.) This is kind of irrelevant, but I think of the man in Texas who runs a prison camp. When he was sued and lost, he gave them cable TV: the Disney channel. And he makes them all wear pink and learn to sew, too.

My uncle is a JAG lawyer. He's been to Gitmo. He said one of the more successful tortures inflicted on the terrorists was tempting them with Doritos.

 

[packermatt7]

3 terrorists were waterboarded... one being the mastermind behind 9-11-01 attacks. There are memos that say that valuable information was received from enhanced interrogation. Now, it seems that only parts of certain memos are being released... just that we did use those methods, but not the results of the methods.

I think closing GITMO was a way to try to make the United States' image look better and to get people back on our side. That isn't working.

Dick Cheney made some good points in his speech.


It seems that lawmakers jumped the gun on closing GITMO... sure they wanted to close it, but now what? No one wants terrorists in their state, and if they are put in prisons with Americans, they won't last 3 months.

 

[Viper56]

Club Gitmo is the perfect place for the human garbage captured overseas. Closing it down and moving the inmates into our mainland prisons is one of the dumbest security mistakes we could possibly make. When in our history have we ever brought prisoners captured overseas and given them due process in our legal system? Doing so would severely endanger national security:

1. The terrorists would have the same rights as common criminals where they would have the right to confront witnesses. That process would compromise the identities of our military personnel and operatives, putting them and their families at tremendous risk.
2. The USA would have to present evidence in trial, where highly classified would most likely be divulged.
3. If found not guilty, I guess they will be free men and can make themselves right at home in any community. In fact, I recently heard on WMAL in Wash DC that VA Congressman Jim Moran would gladly welcome Gitmo detainees in Arlington neighborhoods. I think the official name of this absurd program is called, “Adopt a Terrorist.”
4. Just last week the FBI uncovered a plot where homegrown terrorists planned to blow up Synagogues in NY as well as fire at military aircraft near Newburgh. All of these thugs converted to radical Islam while in prison.

Never in any war in our nation’s history has a commander-in-chief GWB) been hamstrung by the opposing political party and the courts. Dear Leader Mao-bama (thanks King Dude) compares himself to FDR and Lincoln. I’m not sure that he’s aware that Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus for Confederate sympathizers and prisoners, while FDR rounded up Japanese-Americans and sent them to internment camps.

There is only one solution: leave Gitmo as is and try them through military tribunals. Recently I saw a gentleman wearing an orange colored T-shirt that puts Gitmo in proper perspective, “Your tropical retreat from the stress of Jihad.”

 

[Just_A_Mom]

Fearmonger – that is Dick Cheney. He is so upset that there hasn’t been another Al Queda terrorist attack on the Homeland that he is running around spreading fear and trepidation. He got his buddy, Rush “blowhard” Limbaugh to sign on and Rush is laughing all the way to the bank.
I don’t know how anyone can trust anything Dick Cheney says. He got us into Iraq under false pretenses by insisting an Al Queda connection – finally admitting there wasn’t one after all. He spent 7 years hiding in his undisclosed location and finally emerges to protect his “legacy” by running around the talk show circuit trying to convice little old ladies that Al Queda is being relocated from GITMO to the house next door. Laughable really.
As for GITMO – who should we believe? Look at the list and ask yourself who is more trustworthy -
Those who want to close GITMO:
Bob Gates - US Secretary of Defense, Former CIA director, USAF Veteran, an American Hero
US Senator John McCain – USNA Grad, ret. Naval Officer, Vietnam War Combat Veteran, former totured POW, an American Hero.
Admiral Mike Mullen – Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, USNA grad, Vietnam War Veteran, an American Hero
General David Petraeus – Command US Central Forces, Army 4 Star General, USMA grad, Vietnam War Vet, an American Hero
General Jim Jones – Marine Corps General (ret., 4 star), National Security Advisor, Vietnam War Veteran, an American Hero.

Those who want to keep GITMO open:
Dick Cheney – Former Vice President, liar and narcisisst, NOT an American Hero
Rush Limbaugh – will say anything as long as his bank account grows, NOT an American Hero.

Seems like a no-brainer to me.

 

[Luigi59]

I don’t know how anyone can trust anything Dick Cheney says.

Many feel the same way about the President, Vice President, Speaker of the House, and Senate Majority Leader.

Perspective is everything.

 

[Just_A_Mom]

Except that The President has hired these people that I mentioned to advise him. He takes his lead from them. That is how it is supposed to work. He is not the person who lied to the American people and got us into a war under false pretenses. He inherited this mess and now must follow expert advice to get us out of it.

Bottom Line - If you can't trust President Obama on this issue then you can't trust Gates, Mullen, Jones or Petraeus.
As for McCain - why not trust him?

 

[Luigi59]

Poll: Americans Overwhelmingly Opposed to Closing Gitmo

Americans are strongly opposed to shutting the doors of the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, or moving terrorism suspects to detention centers in the U.S., according to a recent poll.

Tuesday, June 02, 2009

Americans are strongly opposed to shutting the doors of the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay and moving terrorism suspects to detention centers in the U.S., according to a recent poll.

A USA TODAY/Gallup Poll released Tuesday found that those surveyed oppose the closing of Guantanamo by more than 2-1.

By more than 3-1, respondents oppose moving the detainees to prisons within the U.S., according to the poll.

Sixty-five percent of Americans polled said they do not support closing Guantanamo and sending its detainees to U.S. prisons while just 32 percent said they did support the idea.

 

[America's Finest]

Those who want to keep GITMO open:[/FONT]
Dick Cheney – Former Vice President, liar and narcisisst, NOT an American Hero
Rush Limbaugh – will say anything as long as his bank account grows, NOT an American Hero.

Seems like a no-brainer to me.

This is all about opinion and perspective and even if they're not heroes, that doesn't mean they can't be right.

I think we should keep it. I know I don't want those people in a prison near me.

 

[bruno]

Except that The President has hired these people that I mentioned to advise him. He takes his lead from them. That is how it is supposed to work. He is not the person who lied to the American people and got us into a war under false pretenses. He inherited this mess and now must follow expert advice to get us out of it.

Bottom Line - If you can't trust President Obama on this issue then you can't trust Gates, Mullen, Jones or Petraeus.
As for McCain - why not trust him?

It's always good to be so certain- "lied to the American People" . You have to love folks who see things in such black and white shades and can reduce complex decisions to campaign slogans (it didn't turn out the way he said it could- so he "lied"). Perhaps they made those decisions because they trusted the intel that scared them the most and felt that it was better to eliminate the potential and uncertain threat than ignore it because some best case intel analysis didn't jibe with the worst case intell that they chose to believe. Gotta wonder what a sloganeer would have said if it turned out that they ignored intel and then something did happen- Like for example Clinton did with Al Qaeda which led to 9-11 to begin with and the whole "never again" approach to threat analysis. (And make no mistake-the critical failures that led to 9-11 are absolutely on Clinton's doorstep far more than on Bush. Clinton failed to act decisively on intel that could have eliminated Al Qaeda because they didn't really believe it was that risky not act. Instead they symbollically shot a couple of tomahawk missiles into the mountains in Afghanistan and a milk plant in Sudan and called it a day- and they got away with that because they weren't around for the second act. )

As far as the President "taking his lead" from his advisors ??? You have that seriously backwards. They absolutely "take their lead" from him and THAT is exactly how it is supposed to work.

As far as those advisors being in favor of closing Gitmo- what I have read is that they all think that Guantanamo should be closed because its symbolism has been working against us - but they all CAVEAT that with "but you have to have some plan before you do this to identify how the people in the place will be dealt with." How do we bring people into the US and then in perpetuity deny them writs of habeus corpus? Who will try them ? Are we just going to let them go when we decide that there is no way to try and convict them using inadmissable evidence? You don't seriously think that the ACLU etc... are going to allow military tribunals on US Soil without a huge fight do you? Details - details. Rush Limbaugh may be peddling garbage - he usually is- but there are real and deep problems with the President's hand wave of a solution without addressing the fundamental question of WHAT DO WE DO WITH THEM? The administration has been pretty quiet on what they are going to do- which is why even the Democratic Senate hasn't supported them to date with funds on this. Since you are quoting John McCain- read what he says:
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2009/05/10/McCain-criticizes-Guantanamo-plan/UPI-12281241983150/
" What should have taken place, in my view, was the announcement of the closing and an announcement of exactly how we are going to put these people on trial," McCain said. "That is a terrible mistake."
McCain reiterated his support for closing Guantanamo Bay, but said Obama is doing so without a clear plan."I'm for closing Guantanamo," McCain said. "And I said I was for closing it. But I'm for a comprehensive solution of all the issues surrounding Guantanamo, which now obviously are facing serious roadblocks in Congress because the announcement was made without addressing serious underlying problems."

Or McCain and Lindsey Graham in the WSJ:
"The country must move on from debates about the past, because pressing questions about U.S. detention policy in the war on terror requires us to make difficult choices -- and to make them soon.
In January, the president announced via executive order that the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay will close within a year. The announcement was easy -- but it left unanswered the hardest questions about detainee policy for the future.
How do we prosecute detainees suspected of committing war crimes now that military commissions have been suspended? How should we handle those detainees who cannot be tried, but who are too dangerous to release?"

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124157680630090517.html

 

[packermatt7]

JAM, I'm sorry, but your post seems to be completely biased and way off target.

Dick Cheney is NOT upset that there hasn't been an attack on American soil. How can one say that? I think that's completely unfair to say because:
1. He's never said that, and you can't just assume what he thinks
2. He's an American and doesn't want to see Americans die
3. The reasons you stated for this are ignorant at best. I'd say no other attack since 9/11 is a job well done by an administration.


You list 2 people who want GITMO to stay open. I guess that's true, along with the majority of Americans.

 

[Just_A_Mom]

As far as the President "taking his lead" from his advisors ??? You have that seriously backwards. They absolutely "take their lead" from him and THAT is exactly how it is supposed to work.

Ummmmm Not quite. Not at this level. If that were the case then why doesn't he hire Privates to advise him?
With Mullen and Jones in the situation room with President Obama - don't you think he looks to them for advice? If they think he is heading in the wrond direction then it's their job to tell him. If not then why have them?

Petraeus could retire and wash his hands of this mess any day.
Mullen too. Neither needs the paycheck.
General Jones is retired and took this job because he supports Obama - if he didn't agree with Obama's stance then why would he take the job?

We now have Gen McCrystal telling Congress that he is pledging not to torture.
http://www.military.com/news/article/mcchrystal-pledges-no-torture.html

McChrystal told the committee that he was “uncomfortable” with interrogation techniques that had the official sanction of the Bush administration.

My goodness.

Bruno - these gentlemen are not low ranking military officers, they are not Majors and Colonel's who need to tow the line. These are high ranking, well educated men who are formulating their own opinions, ideas and thoughts into US policy.

As far as McCain:

" What should have taken place, in my view, was the announcement of the closing and an announcement of exactly how we are going to put these people on trial," McCain said. "That is a terrible mistake."
McCain reiterated his support for closing Guantanamo Bay, but said Obama is doing so without a clear plan."I'm for closing Guantanamo," McCain said. "And I said I was for closing it. But I'm for a comprehensive solution of all the issues surrounding Guantanamo, which now obviously are facing serious roadblocks in Congress because the announcement was made without addressing serious underlying problems."

I agree. Obama's mistake was not in pledging to close GITMO but moving forward without a plan. This doesn't mean it should be closed.

packermatt7 - I was attempting to illustrate that there are clearly intellignent, thoughtful thinking people who loves their country more than themselves, who would rather die before you would be harmed - who advocate closing GITMO.
Neither Cheney nor the self-proclaimed new head of the Republican Party Rush Limbaugh - love their country more than themselves nor would die for you. These men are looking out for themselves, not you. They are fearmongers who have captivated a number of Americans into drinking the Koolaid.

 

[Luigi59]

....He got us into Iraq under false pretenses by insisting an Al Queda connection....

**"This charge was also rejected by the Senate Intelligence Committee. Contrary to how its findings were summarized in the mainstream media, the committee's report explicitly concluded that al Qaeda did in fact have a cooperative, if informal, relationship with Iraqi agents working under Saddam.

The report of the bipartisan 9/11 commission came to the same conclusion, as did a comparably independent British investigation conducted by Lord Butler, which pointed to "meetings . . . between senior Iraqi representatives and senior al-Qaeda operatives."

Anyone who is open minded to learn the truth will enjoy the following story. Those who continue to insist that "Bush/Cheney Lied" based on the spoon-fed reports in the MSM (despite the official reports) can ignore it, as their minds have already been brainwashed.

Who Is Lying About Iraq?

**The quoted paragraph above is a C&P from the story.

 

[Viper56]

JAM....Rush Limbaugh is no longer the head of the Republican Party. He passed that title on to Colin Powell two weeks ago.

 

[Gcokeley]

I had to jump in after this one.

Fearmonger – that is Dick Cheney. He is so upset that there hasn’t been another Al Queda terrorist attack on the Homeland that he is running around spreading fear and trepidation. He got his buddy, Rush “blowhard” Limbaugh to sign on and Rush is laughing all the way to the bank.
I don’t know how anyone can trust anything Dick Cheney says. He got us into Iraq under false pretenses by insisting an Al Queda connection – finally admitting there wasn’t one after all. He spent 7 years hiding in his undisclosed location and finally emerges to protect his “legacy” by running around the talk show circuit trying to convice little old ladies that Al Queda is being relocated from GITMO to the house next door. Laughable really.]

1. I believe the fearmongers are the democrats. They are so busy fearing pissing anyone in the world off that they jump to please and enable any country they can. If 9/11 wasnt enough to prove that our country is vulnerable, then I dont know what is. I dont see what you have against rush. Yes, hes a ranting angry man, however Bill Maher is worse in my opinion and classically rants about how dumb republicans are.

2. False Pretenses? You have to be kidding me. Saddam violated the sanctions of the first gulf war by not allowing inspectors into Iraq. That alone is grounds for us invading. Also, the mass genocide and torture of the kurds plus the mass graves of random people might be a little important. Now, heres the big question, Oh No! there werent any WMDs!! Well what exactly do you use to define a WMD? I think the 16 chemical warheads plus all that mustard gas residue and old weapons we found plus the obvious intent he had of creating the big bad nuclear bomb. Now, strangely enough saddam was known for providing monetary compensation to saudi suicide bomber's families and to all those foreign fighters we see in Iraq fighting our boys over there, theres obviously no terrorist connection.

3. ANd overall that was a pretty immature argument.

Those who want to keep GITMO open:
Dick Cheney – Former Vice President, liar and narcisisst, NOT an American Hero
Rush Limbaugh – will say anything as long as his bank account grows, NOT an American Hero.

Seems like a no-brainer to me.

Bill Clinton lied and I dont see you crucifying him. Accusing someone of being a liar is pretty strong. Explain to me how he lied.


Just remember JAM. Hindsight is 20/20.

 

[Gcokeley]

JAM....Rush Limbaugh is no longer the head of the Republican Party. He passed that title on to Colin Powell two weeks ago.

Colin Powell. How bout that guy

 

[Just_A_Mom]

JAM....Rush Limbaugh is no longer the head of the Republican Party. He passed that title on to Colin Powell two weeks ago.

LOL.
I thought it was more like Rush lost the wrestling match to Colin Powell.
This actually made me rethink defecting to the Democrats.

Good ole' Rush - same guy who calls the GI Bill "welfare" and lumps it in with food stamps and afdc.

you want to discuss Bill Clinton - start a new thread.

ciao.

 

[LineInTheSand]

Wow, I thought there might have been more substance added to the debate from JAM, but unfortunately the week I was gone, nothing of value was added.

Lying is an interesting thing. I am not quite sure what you are talking about, I know you don't have all the facts and are hell bent on showing it.

On a side note, the President of the United States of American doesn't TAKE THE LEAD from his advisors. He takes into consideration their advice. I would fire some of these advisors, but I know North Korea, Iran, Russia, and China wouldn't like that...