Still think Gitmo needs to be closed?Follow

Damn you Obama, for releasing that guy in 2007....

Erm.... what?

Let me get this straight: The guy is detained & sent to Gitmo. He's held there for however long, questioned, whipped with wet noodles and beset by angry gerbils, questioned some more, goes before a military tribunal and then the US decides in 2007 to release him back into Afghanistan whereupon he rejoins the Taliban.

And this shows that Gitmo works??



I'd worry more about the failings of the tribunal system that, according to the Pentagon, released anywhere from 18 to 61 people they knew were dangerous militants back into the battlefield.

Edited, Mar 10th 2009 9:50pm by Jophiel

Yes.

Of course the Bush/Reagan administrations of the 80's should never have spent billions supporting, arming and training Islamic fundamentalists such as Osama bin Laden to fight the commies in Afghanistan in the first place.

In fact, if succesive western governments of all political persuasions wern't as completely fucking retarded as they so obviously are, they would all have learned by now, that arming to the teeth a bunch of crazy murderous b'stards with some ill-thought out attempt to get the aforementioned b'stards to do their dirty fighting for them, then perhaps you wouldn't have needed to open a sh1thole like Gitmo in the first place.

I'm sure it happens, but how about some hard news. I want a number! Just a damn number! Well with a source!

Actually....when you put it like that, it all sounds perfectly reasonable.

And who's decision was that? No, really, who decided that random people picked up from all over the world should be detained in a legal black hole without trial? Who decided they should not be tried and punished, or failing that, simply held like regular POWs?

Or is this super-ironic thread about how people erroneously blame Obama for stuff he has nothing to do with, when really it's Bush's fault we're in this mess? That was it, right?

You're seeing this the wrong way. If you're convinced they're guilty, you tail them and then when they get back to their "Squad" you take them all out.

Can they start with you?

As long as they don't burn any of the city itself.

It's easier to kill someone on the battlefield than to kill them while they're in custody.

Not only this man, but many others are returning to combat just as they were prior to being detained.

Returned, decided to start, tomato, tomahto.

In all seriousness, yes, these cases need to be adjudicated and Gitmo needs to be closed, or at most used as a temporary stop for such cases.

Nah, too much bad PR already. I imagine we'll just return to kidnapping people without charges and moving them to countries with less stringent legal systems to torture them. It's not torturing people that's the problem, it's torturing them *publicly*. Obama understands this.

Er? Who blamed Obama?

The point was that this is happening because those of those who raised a huge stink about Gitmo in the first place. This includes the ACLU, a host of Liberal political organizations (which I suppose is redundant now that I think about it), and a whole bunch of well meaning people like most of the posters on this board who fell for the simplistic calls for fair trials and accusations of torture.


The political pressure to give these people trial or release them came from those groups. This was done knowing that most of them would end out being released because the evidence against them was classified. That is exactly *why* prisoners held in this state can be denied the right to a trial, but that was ignored by those groups because their hatred for Bush and Gitmo far outweighed any sort of common sense and rational thought about the reality of the situation at hand.


I do love how it's never the fault of the guys who fought so hard to force the release of those prisoners. Nope. Blame the Republicans who got overruled on this one instead... Cause, they were in charge, right? It happened on their watch!!! Lol...