Obama takes last chance to close [Prison at] Guantanamo Bay


#1

Guantanamo Bay

WASHINGTON — Keeping the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay open is “contrary to our values,” President Obama said Tuesday, as he released a plan that examined 13 potential sites for transferring the suspected terrorists but did not propose any specific location. [All proposed locations seem to be within US borders]

…Terrorists use Guantanamo as propaganda to recruit, and maintaining it harms U.S. national security, he said.

Will he not need to put them on trial to keep them incarcerated?


#2

For a minute there it seemed the title of this thread was “Obama takes last breath to close (Prison at) Guantanamo Bay”. Darn, it read " chance"!


#3

Terrorists don’t need Gitmo to do recruiting, that minor nuance shouldn’t enter into the decision process.


#4

The president is doing this in his last year in office, so when the enemy combatants are placed on US soil, attorneys with the ACLU will immediately file lawsuits to force a speedy trial. But Obama will be out of office by then and when the fallout and damage is done he can pretend is the next president’s fault.

Obama will pretend he never saw this coming, and pretend that he would have not allowed the trials. When these evil men, who do NOT deserve rights afforded under our Constitution, get an open trial, they will turn it into the greatest terrorist recruitment video you’ve ever seen.

We’ll see how far this gets when Congress gets to push back against this foolishness.


#5

I really get tired of Obama preaching to us “this is not who we are as a nation”.

9/11 was the worst attack since Pearl Harbor.

I do not see Gitmo as a recruiting tool - or that big of one anyway.

Obama is building his legacy his last year in office so he can feel proud of himself.


#6

To be fair, President Obama is correct in his assertion that the idea of closing GITMO isn’t new and is bipartisan. President Bush was stating he wanted to close it back as early as 2006.


#7

No terrorists imported to the US. Absolutely not.


#8

I’m still trying to figure out WHY terrorists are getting Mirandas.


#9

In my opinion, treating them as common criminals is what should have been done from the start. They aren’t soldiers, and treating them as such feeds right into the narrative they created around themselves.


#10

Yes, 9/11 was horrific but when will we begin to finally roll back the vast over reactions and over reaches taken in response?


#11

They were acting as soldiers in the guise of civilians. Shooting soldiers and bombing people are acts of war; and *in order to protect civilians, *they are supposed to wear distinguishing clothing and carry weapons openly, and not protect themselves by hiding amidst civilians.

Had they done the above, they would have been treated as POWs.

That being said, no way should we have tortured them there. I am ashamed our military did that.


#12

what VAST over reactions and over reaches? this battle is far from over and is more dangerous now than it was 15 years ago.


#13

Which may be because of the overreactions (and I’m not even talking about Iraq).


#14

For sure. That’s why I’m so upset about the Mirandas being given so freely. I wasn’t in the USAF for 12 years to give my rights to terrorists.


#15

Correct me if I am wrong, but didn’t the Congress already vote not to bring those prisoners from Gitmo to the states? But that’s no problem, Obama will just do it by executive order.


#16

One can be reasonably concerned that right after that, he’ll withdraw all the military from there and the Castro government will march right in. Might be the rest of the plan.


#17

http://www.debatepolitics.com/attachments/breaking-news-mainstream-media/67197482d1456205050-obama-unveil-guantanamo-bay-closure-plan-29supermax6-articlelarge-v3-jpg

The above image is a Federal super-max in Colorado. Many of the inmates are either notorious foreign terrorists, domestic terrorists, double agents, or traitors. What you raise are non-issues. The prisoners at Guantanamo exhausted any legal recourse they had years ago.


#18

I am ALSO sick of Obama saying “this is not who we are as a nation”. To that I would reply that keeping some of the most dangerous men in the world in a secure prison is what ANY nation would do…

I think keeping our most dangerous enemies in a place where it is IMPOSSIBLE to harm American civilians is a FABULOUS idea. Honestly, if we are unwilling to imprison our most deadly enemies in a 99.99% secure facility; there’s only one other option that guarantees that they won’t come back to harm us.

As for Guantanamo Bay being used as a recruiting tool; don’t worry Mr. President, they’ll find another recruiting tool. They had no problem recruiting the 9/11 hijackers BEFORE we opened the prison, didn’t they?

Obama should spend more time worrying about how to “neutralize” our enemies instead of trying to find ways to not offend them. I’ll be so glad when he’s gone.


#19

I was under the impression that if they were brought into the US, they would then need to be tried in order to be held. Right now their legal status is a certain way because they are outside the US?


#20

Does the base serve any real purpose other than to be belligerent to Castro? I admit that there is some psychic value there, but is it worth making our grandchildren pay the bill for?


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.