Obama to close down Gitmo?

[navytrooper]

http://www.navytimes.com/news/2009/0...anamo_012209w/

What are your thoughts on this? Me, I'm not really educated enough on the subject to have a reasonable opinion, but I think we should keep the prison but just submit it to closer scrutiny.

[HairyEyeball]

It may be a case of 'premptive CYA': If the 'entrance requirements' include attempting to destroy the United States, he and most of his cabinet are potentially prime candidates for permanent residence.

[Rabbit]

Totally against this. I don't want known terrorists in my backyard. They can shove Habeas Corpus where the sun doesn't shine, in this case. Although, a strengthened plan to sort out the guppies from the sharks should be put into place...just do it somewhere besides home.

[TruBlu]

Within only a few days of his presidency, PBHO has managed to come up with an idea (there is no plan, he gave himself a year for that) to close down Gitmo and by doing so decreasing our nation's security. I too am no expert, but I understand that you cannot simply close down and release suspected and confirmed terrorists. Sure there is talk of trying them under the UMCJ and even in civilian courts, but I don't see that happening, or any reason for it. There is a list of now 62 suspected or confirmed terrorists that have been released from Gitmo. In 2007, the Bush Administration released a certain Saudi who is now a confirmed (once again) terror cell in the Middle East (here's the story: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,481849,00.html).

Even I didn't believe that PBHO would do something like this, especially so soon.

[PhoenixCadet]

He closes Gitmo, and one of the likely new locations that will be used to house them is San Diego.

I don't want those sh*twads in my city!


</rant off>



-PC

[HairyEyeball]

Hell, send 'em to one of Sheriff Joe's tent camps - if they don't like it there and manage to leave, we have another name for 'em: Targets.

I don't suppose it's occurred to the incompetent in charge that if we have no viable place to put any prisoners we may take, there might just be a drop in the number we may take. That ought to sit nicely with all his friends in North Africa.

[Woody]

Gitmo was a huge mistake .A pr disaster and in the war on terror pr is important.Not sure what the answers are but its not gitmo.

[HairyEyeball]

When 'public relations' or 'how it will play in the media' becomes the primary determinant for national policy, we're already too deep in the 'hurt locker' for the government to have any claim to legitimacy. 'Public relations' is, unfortunately, a creature of the media and almost wholly dependent on sensationalism and the power of that media to form opinion (a power which has, apparently, no 'guidance' beyond itself), and the security of the nation may not be as 'press worthy', but is - and should be - just a tad bit more essential.

[Woody]

Your right PR was the wrong word to use .It was an easy goal for our enemies to use against us .Not helped by people ending up there who
shouldn't have been. Not sure what the right place to put them is.Battlefield
and covert operations are not the same as law enforcement operations so
trying them as criminals probably won't work .POW status really dosen't apply even if you stretched the boundaries still got the problem of deciding when the war is over and where do you send them back to?

[TruBlu]

Originally Posted by HairyEyeball

Hell, send 'em to one of Sheriff Joe's tent camps - if they don't like it there and manage to leave, we have another name for 'em: Targets.

LOL, that's a grand idea. And for anyone who doesn't know of the tent camps, here's a link to a story of enlightenment: http://www.cnn.com/US/9907/27/tough.sheriff/.