Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That indicates some return to assist terror groups, I don't question that some actually do just the number. Holding someone for 11 years because they might have been involved with Al Queda is rather punitive don.t you think. I don't question the conditions are pretty good at Guantanamo.
That indicates some return to assist terror groups, I don't question that some actually do just the number. Holding someone for 11 years because they might have been involved with Al Queda is rather punitive don.t you think. I don't question the conditions are pretty good at Guantanamo.
Ever stop to think there might be a very good reason those people are held? First, everyone complained it was Bush holding these people. The left up in arms about it. Complaining he was a war criminal, etc.
Obama said on his FIRST day in office he was going to close it. He didn't. He didn't even come close. Funny how the left is fairly silent on this issue and NO ONE is calling Obama a war criminal. However, I digress.
Obama gets into office and is briefed by his advisors as to why Gitmo CANNOT be closed. There are serious security concerns with shutting it down and releasing some of those persons. And yes, like it or not, YOU DON'T have the need to know, nor the right to know what those security concerns are (even though Obama said you did and was going to have a transparent government).
Here is a simple, get used to it fact: For THIS or any other government, no matter who is running it, there are issues, secrets, etc the general population is no privy too, nor should they be. Gitmo is a perfect example. Those "people" are there for a reason and belong there. If they want to starve themselves to death, let them.
I agree, and even started a thread on this earlier today (no takers as of yet).
But I say that Guantanamo should be handed back to Cuba seeing as it's their territory anyway.
Seems like neo-colonialism to me.
Gee Ken- That is an interesting statement toward a nation that ejected the Japanese from your country. Now how do you think you would be doing today, had the US simply allowed the Japanese to continue thier occupation of the Phillipines? Did Battan and Manilla show you nothing?
Obama said he was going to close it, then he found out all the facts about the people being held there and decided not to close it after all. That, more than anything, tells me it needs to remain in opporation. I could care less if they refuse to eat, their choice.
Ever stop to think there might be a very good reason those people are held? First, everyone complained it was Bush holding these people. The left up in arms about it. Complaining he was a war criminal, etc.
Obama said on his FIRST day in office he was going to close it. He didn't. He didn't even come close. Funny how the left is fairly silent on this issue and NO ONE is calling Obama a war criminal. However, I digress.
Obama gets into office and is briefed by his advisors as to why Gitmo CANNOT be closed. There are serious security concerns with shutting it down and releasing some of those persons. And yes, like it or not, YOU DON'T have the need to know, nor the right to know what those security concerns are (even though Obama said you did and was going to have a transparent government).
Here is a simple, get used to it fact: For THIS or any other government, no matter who is running it, there are issues, secrets, etc the general population is no privy too, nor should they be. Gitmo is a perfect example. Those "people" are there for a reason and belong there. If they want to starve themselves to death, let them.
If there is a good reason to keep them incarcerated then let's have it, make it public instead of hiding behind a secret veil. We know more about Ben Laden's capture and the people involved than the reason an individual was arrested years ago.
Guantanamo cannot be closed without funding and congress would not provide the money, they are afraid of backlash from their constituents if these individuals were moved to federal prisons stateside. History will look back on this as a travesty, same as when the Japanese citizens were stripped of their possessions and placed in camps
Obama said he was going to close it, then he found out all the facts about the people being held there and decided not to close it after all. That, more than anything, tells me it needs to remain in opporation. I could care less if they refuse to eat, their choice.
Obama wants it closed but congress wouldn't allocate funds to close it. That's the fact.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Did Battan and Manilla show you nothing?
