Jophiel wrote:
I would have no problem with a military prison on US soil. The consensus opinion seems to be that that's unworkable for whatever reasons (security? terrorist threats? beats me).
I thought you were smarter than that. So you're supporting something because it's a "consensus opinion"? By whom? For what reason? You don't know, but you support it anyway just because some people say we need to? What happened to using your damn brain? And you accuse *me* of just blindly following my political "side"?
You're being used. The reason why your liberal overlords want them held on US soil is so that they can then claim that they fall under the jurisdiction of a State government rather than the Federal government (and it's even better if it's a civilian facility rather than military of course). That opens up a half dozen levels of legal system, largely inundated with decades of liberal bench appointments, in which they can argue any of a zillion different things. Most of which have no purpose other than to make their trial lawyer buddies happy, while pleasing the "military is bad" arm of the Left, and giving the spin doctors in the media years of trials and decisions and what not to use to attack politicians and pundits on the right.
Quote:
I mainly have an objection to the "special" status Gitmo holds as not really being US soil; likewise for the secret Czech republic prisons on lease to the CIA or whatever.
It's not special at all. It's a military prison on foreign soil. We've done this during every single war we've ever fought on foreign soil. Where do you think we held POWs during WW2, and Korea, and Vietnam, and Gulf1? What do you think we did with Soviet spies during the cold war (a more comparable situation)? Did we charge them with crimes and send them to civilian prisons in the US?
This is not "new". It's not "special". The entire position you're taking is an argument from a position of ignorance. It relies on the fact that since most people don't know what is 'normal', that this must not be it. They're wrong. And you are wrong.
Quote:
Thomson has the advantage of already being built to maximum security standards and being largely empty and ready to go.
Gitmo is even more ready to go though, isn't it? You can't be this stupid...
Edited, Apr 9th 2010 3:16pm by gbaji 
