Bush's Gitmo Vindication

[Mike (Premo)]

Obama still hasn't said where the worst terrorists will go.

Yet for all of his attacks on the Bush Administration, which he accused of making "decisions based upon fear rather than foresight," Mr. Obama stuck with his predecessor's support for military commissions, adding some procedural bells and whistles as political cover to justify his past opposition. For the record: Both the left and right, from the ACLU to Dick Cheney, now agree that the President has all but embraced the Bush policy.

Mr. Obama also pledged to release at least 50 detainees to other countries -- about one-tenth the number released under President Bush -- and added that the Administration was in "ongoing discussions" to transfer them. Good luck with that: The Europeans who were so robustly against Gitmo in the Bush years have suddenly discovered its detainees are dangerous. Meanwhile, the countries that might take them, such as Yemen, can't be trusted to prevent them from returning to the battlefield, where they can kill Americans again.

Bush's Gitmo Vindication - WSJ.com

Obammy sure thought he was all cool and self righteous sign the executive order to close GITMO just days into his presidency.

I hope he thinks he got what he desired - looking cool & smart to the rest of the world.

IMO, he looks like an inexperienced bozo (no offense to clown) here at home.

Is this man capable of making a decision that is not surrounded in controversy? Or is that part of the plan?

[Rommey]

I still fail to see why Gitmo is such a bad thing.

First of all, the enemy combatants that are there, are treated like they would be in any other civilian or military prison (maybe even better).

Second, the administration is going to try to transfer these guys to other prisons, both here and abroad. But they will still be in prison. This is nothing more than a shell game and the delta is zero.

Third, lets say that Gitmo closes and most, if not all, the detainees are sent to Federal prisons here in the US. Will they be treated any different in a Federal prison than they were in Gitmo? If so, then fix the problems at Gitmo and leave them there.

As far as I am concerned they should all be set free on some tiny, uninhabited island in the south Pacific.

[ImnoMensa]

If they close Gitmo the prisoners will just be moved to a new location which doesnt solve the problem ,but creates a lot of new ones.

[EmptyTimCup]

Originally Posted by Rommey

As far as I am concerned they should all be set free on some tiny, uninhabited island in the south Pacific.

How about the White House Basement ....

[Mike (Premo)]

Originally Posted by EmptyTimCup

How about the White House Basement ....

Well, Obammy & his henchmen are trying to downplay the terroristic nature of these dirtbags. The WH has a big fence around it. Keep them there if they are so safe that they can be released. They can help in the garden and push the kids on the swings. Maybe even clean up after Bo.

I am willing to bet, the longer we hold these eager-to-kill-American-POS's at GITMO, the more the ACLU and Hussein's media (and other America haters) will make them seem like the victims. Poor defenseless little Muslims that the big bad USSA has snatched away from their caves and tortured. Never you mind the fact that they would love to strap a bomb on and blow themselves up in your child's classroom. A firing squad would be too good for them.

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Mike

Is this man capable of making a decision that is not surrounded in controversy? Or is that part of the plan?

The short answer is 'no'. And the reason why is because, by training and by temperament, Obama is very much a lawyer. Lawyers represent their client, not their own views.

Does anyone think Obama was representing his own views on Gitmo during the campaign, that it must be closed? It's not his fault that no one ever pressed him; "Close Gitmo? Then what?" But he did know what his 'clients' wanted him to be arguing for.

Does anyone think Obama was representing his own views on Iraq? He claimed to be against it yet was not there for the vote YET voted to fund war every single time.

So, the problem he faces now, like any president, is that he's at the top and no longer representing one side or the other; he represents all of us. Now that it is up to him, that now he HAS to make choice and the results are going to be on him, he's gotta ask himself; "No Gitmo? What then?" and he's come up with, "Let's put that one off for awhile..."

[ImnoMensa]

Obama wasnt pressed on anything while he was campaigning, He got a free ride to the White House paved by the media. No amount of campaign funds , and he had tons of it, could ever pay for what he got for free.

[SamSpade]

Originally Posted by ImnoMensa

If they close Gitmo the prisoners will just be moved to a new location which doesnt solve the problem ,but creates a lot of new ones.

They made that argument on Meet the Press and it's a good one. Moving them to a new facility just makes that new facility, the new Gitmo. It changes absolutely nothing.

I hear Alcatraz is available.

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by SamSpade

They made that argument on Meet the Press and it's a good one. Moving them to a new facility just makes that new facility, the new Gitmo. It changes absolutely nothing.

I hear Alcatraz is available.

Not just the new Gitmo; the new Gitmo IN the US.

[Bean Machine]

Bring all the detainees to DC. Congress and the big O will have to s%#t or get off the pot then. Put em in their back yard and force them to deal with it...