Guantanamo Bay

[Irving]

Can we talk about Guantanamo Bay a bit?

I have never understood this controversy over Guantanamo Bay. Of all the issues out there that I could waste my time pondering about, Guantanamo Bay comes in even below global climate change.

What exactly is the big deal anyway? I hear that now they are moving people from Guantanamo to Iowa or some where. What is the difference? Prison is prison. Can someone explain to me why anything relating to Guantanamo is even news worthy? Every time I hear the president even mention Guantanamo, I think that he might as well be reporting on his efforts to close a local McDonalds, because I care about that much about Guantanamo Bay.

[Irving]

I just feel like there are literally 100's of other government programs that could be ended that would have a more positive and tangible effect on the American people than Guantanamo Bay.

[Irving]

That's pretty much what I thought, but I don't even understand what the people who follow this news want. I get that people want it closed, but why?

[BigBear]

Some people want Guantanamo closed because there have been reports of prisoner abuse, and that could ruin our "image" in the worlds' eye. No mention is made of why they are prisoners or how many American's they have killed, but I guess the details are too much for some.

My personal opinion. Guantanemo holds the bad of the bad off of CONUS American soil. It's costs over $100K PER INAMTE a year (medical, food, etc). A Bullet costs 2 cents... a baseball bat is free... you do the math.

Same thing for people on welfare. Get rid of welfare and save BILLIONS of dollars a year. If they turn to crime, kill 'em. If they "can't" find a job, then they deserve to starve until they do. (Don't get me wrong, I'm all for the different charities out there, there is no reason for someone to starve in America, it just takes a little motivation). People wouldn't complain that immigrants are taking all the jobs that Americans won't work, etc... Dear lord, don't get me started.... grrr

[Hoosier]

The problem is that events in Guantanamo fall in a legal loop hole. It's sovereign territory of a communist nation with which we have no direct diplomatic ties. Things that happen there (torture) wouldn't automatically fall under the laws of the United States. This is why the military set up the base there... it was built in just a few weeks out of chain link, plywood, and razor wire.

When taken to the extreme, the debate comes down to" do you believe the US is better served by taking any action to safeguard it's citizens in the short term (torture, assassinate, invade); or take the moral "high road" and be seen as justified in the eyes of the wider world.

I think the real problem is that too many people deal in absolutes. A population of 350m people living in a free society cannot be entirely free of the threat of terrorism (or other crimes). You have to make smart choices that mitigate it -- to operate in the grey between these absolutes.

[Irving]

I first heard about Guantanamo Bay during the whole Patriot Act uproar a few years ago. Is that about right? I assume the G Bay has been around for a while, but it was largely under the radar until 9/11 and the Patriot Act stuff?

[jason303]

It's what Obama calls a "win-win". Starts to deliver on a campaign promise and kisses ass of the leaders of our enemies.

[Irving]

Thanks for all the replies. It sounds like I pretty much had the gist of it, but I wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something.

I am a little confused about us having and using property in Cuba though. What kind of message does that send that we can't trade with them, but we like them enough store our trash at their house.

[TFOGGER]

I first heard about Guantanamo Bay during the whole Patriot Act uproar a few years ago. Is that about right? I assume the G Bay has been around for a while, but it was largely under the radar until 9/11 and the Patriot Act stuff?
A little history:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/guantanamo-bay.htm

GTMO has a lot of people concerned for some of the reasons above:

Prisoners at GTMO are effectively outside the normal criminal and military justice systems, hence vulnerable in a number of ways to abuses. It highlights the loss of rights in the rush to pass the Patriot Act. The detainees are being held, in many cases without being charged with a crime, yet not being classified as prisoners of war, so the .gov claims they are not bound by the Geneva Conventions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conventions), since the detainees are not signatories. Essentially, the liberals feel that GTMO is an embarrassment to the US. I, on the other hand, see it as en effective way to segregate these potentially dangerous individuals from the US mainland, provided they eventually either charge and try them, or determine that they pose no threat and release them. Holding people indefinitely without charge smacks of totalitarianism.

[Ranger353]

Prisoners at GTMO are effectively outside the normal criminal and military justice systems, hence vulnerable in a number of ways to abuses. It highlights the loss of rights in the rush to pass the Patriot Act. The detainees are being held, in many cases without being charged with a crime, yet not being classified as prisoners of war, so the .gov claims they are not bound by the Geneva Conventions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conventions), since the detainees are not signatories. Essentially, the liberals feel that GTMO is an embarrassment to the US. I, on the other hand, see it as en effective way to segregate these potentially dangerous individuals from the US mainland, provided they eventually either charge and try them, or determine that they pose no threat and release them. Holding people indefinitely without charge smacks of totalitarianism.

I agree but, I do not buy into the argument that the camp in GITMO will lead to an erosion of U.S. standing globally, hell they hated us before 9/11 and nothing we do is going to change that. To believe that we have some higher moral obligation to continue to turn the other cheek is just stupid liberal ideology. They believe that we can somehow effect change with passive actions. It's all passive liberal BS. Most of those people (and I used that term loosely) have killed Americans, or planned to kill Americans in battle, and if let loose will kill Americans globally. No sugar on that fact, it is what it is. The GITMO camp represents decisions of the prior administration and therefore it must be flawed and bad in the eyes of liberal politicians and citizens, who the majority of have never served their country in uniform.

Makes me angry when I read the blind, no facts arguments of many that do not know what the hell they are talking about. [Rant1]

[jake]

If you buy the official statistics for how many of those released have gone on to 'reoffend', it's only about 4% of the total. There were some people held there who we accepted were innocent, but if were repatriated (to China in this case) would face persecution from the authorities there, so essentially were kept incarcerated because there was nowhere else for them to go. It's cases like that which irk a lot of people, I think.

[Jumpstart]

Thanks for all the replies. It sounds like I pretty much had the gist of it, but I wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something.

I am a little confused about us having and using property in Cuba though. What kind of message does that send that we can't trade with them, but we like them enough store our trash at their house.


Guantanamo IS OUR house. Better store our garbage there than in the heartland of America.

[Irving]

I think if Cuba opened a prison any where on the mainland in the US, you wouldn't just shrug your shoulders and say, "Oh well, that's CUBA's house."

[Jumpstart]

I think if Cuba opened a prison any where on the mainland in the US, you wouldn't just shrug your shoulders and say, "Oh well, that's CUBA's house."
If your aunt had balls she'd be your uncle.

[Irving]

Exactly. :)

[Hoosier]

I, on the other hand, see it as en effective way to segregate these potentially dangerous individuals from the US mainland

See this I just don't agree with. These people are no worse than the ones already in ADX Florence. There's no reason they couldn't safely be brought here. They aren't super human. Their terrorist buddies would have a much better chance getting into cuba, and assualting that hastily made prison than they would getting into the US. The Senate acted shamefully with that "Not In My Backyard" crap. No they didn't put them in Cuba to protect us from them. They put them there to prevent our laws from applying.

[newracer]

See this I just don't agree with. These people are no worse than the ones already in ADX Florence. There's no reason they couldn't safely be brought here. They aren't super human. Their terrorist buddies would have a much better chance getting into cuba, and assualting that hastily made prison than they would getting into the US. The Senate acted shamefully with that "Not In My Backyard" crap. No they didn't put them in Cuba to protect us from them. They put them there to prevent our laws from applying.

No way. Guantanamo Bay is secured by a military force. Any prison in the US would be easier to get into. And getting into the US isn't very hard either.

Even if they were here our laws shouldn't apply. They were captured in other countries and are not US citizens.

[Ranger353]

See this I just don't agree with. These people are no worse than the ones already in ADX Florence. There's no reason they couldn't safely be brought here. They aren't super human. Their terrorist buddies would have a much better chance getting into cuba, and assualting that hastily made prison than they would getting into the US. The Senate acted shamefully with that "Not In My Backyard" crap. No they didn't put them in Cuba to protect us from them. They put them there to prevent our laws from applying.

I agree that they are no worse a threat while incarcerated then the trash in Florence, but if they are brought into the U.S. they will have rights and an expectation of due process and that's wrong. They are enemy combatants, soldiers without a country that in wartime are not considered criminals but ENEMY SOLDIERS, they don't get the luxury of protection from the constitution, they are not in the U.S.

As for the security of GITMO, remember that GITMO is an active U.S. Naval Station with a battalion (-) of U.S. Marines stationed there that protect the base from intruders both from the water and along 12 miles of fence line. Our Marines walk there posts shadowing armed Cuban soldiers. Is Cuba a threat to the U.S.? No, not really, but they are a real threat to GITMO.

[Irving]

How many people are even in GITMO? Of all the ways this country wastes money and lists it under something else in the books, you'd think we'd be able to keep something like GITMO under the wraps. Perhaps all the extra terrestrial BS about Area 51 is a clever ruse to keep all the pussies in the dark about a super max prison where we can torture people just for fun. That sounds more realistic anyway.

Yes, I know what I just said is stupid. Don't take it too seriously.

[Troublco]

UNLAWFUL ENEMY COMBATANTS. That's what the trash in Guantanamo are. I believe I've already vented my spleen on this one, but what they should be getting is NOT a civilian trial where they all get open forum to bash us even more. They did what they did, and they admit it, and we should grace them with a bullet and call it a day. You know, I'd personally send a check to the DoD to cover the cost of the ammo to do it. This whole farce would never have happened if all the apologetic socialist whiners hadn't been listened to. The GITMO contents should have been interrogated, faced a military tribunal, and then been executed. Period. Half-plus of the world hates us because we are who we are, and nothing's going to change that. Being a bunch of whiney, tail-tucking apologists isn't going to get us anything but more of what we've already gotten. Part of the Marine Hymn talks of the Shores of Tripoli. That was back when we dealt with the Barbary Pirates. (Marines can be a boastful, arrogant bunch sometimes but they know how to kick a$$ and take names! Gotta hand it to them for that. When it absolutely, positively has to be destroyed overnight!!) I'd wager that if Jefferson was President today and he was dealing with the Somali Pirates, the gloves would have been off by now. Not that this is what you're saying, Sturtle, but I'm tired of all the people who have forgotten 9/11! Getting rid of Saddam was a public service. Same with the Taliban. It makes the world a better place, for us as well as everyone else. The only thing that the Taliban, the insurgents, Al Qaeda, and all their associated ilk understand is absolute, overwhelming force used directly on them until they cease to exist. If they're so excited about going to see Allah, I vote with Schwartzkopf. We shouldn't judge them, we should arrange the meeting! Expeditiously![M2]

[newracer]

I thought this was a very good video about Guantanamo Bay.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtrzcBMbVXs

[Ranger353]

I thought this was a very good video about Guantanamo Bay.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtrzcBMbVXs

Outstanding video. If you want to know the truth about the detainee camp at GITMO then watch this video.
[Alrigh]