Obama draft order calls for closing Guantanamo Bay

happy jack wrote:

Damn I'm sick of these terrorist sympathizers.

That's a good quote

happy jack wrote:

Face wrote:

Ohhmana, how is closing Gitmo all of a sudden an idea that becomes or is labeled as a terrorist sympathizer?

I think Ohhmama and I both were referring to Artie.

Actually I was referring to those who feel that these terrorists deserve the same rights as you or I. They aren't Americans and don't deserve the rights we have. They don't appear to fall under the Geneva convention rules as enemy combatants because from what I understand it was meant for "uniformed" enemy combatants. So we have a bunch of militants and yes, something needs to be done with them. Rules need to be set up and punishments need to be set forth for those found guilty. Do I think they need to be in our prisons- hell no. Is six years sitting in a prison without a trial too long, probably. So what will be done with them? Just putting an order out to close Gitmo for good PR & without a plan doesn't sound like a great idea to me.

Ohhmama wrote:

Actually I was referring to those who feel that these terrorists deserve the same rights as you or I. They aren't Americans and don't deserve the rights we have.

Fisrt of all, if my memory is correct, there was at least one US Citizen in Gitmo, since he was labeled an enemy combatant, he was not allowed to have due process. Hate him if you will, we still have a constitution for all citizens of the United States of America.

Ohhmama wrote:

They don't appear to fall under the Geneva convention rules as enemy combatants because from what I understand it was meant for "uniformed" enemy combatants. So we have a bunch of militants and yes, something needs to be done with them. Rules need to be set up and punishments need to be set forth for those found guilty.

I don't know the Geneva convention rules, but I think for the United States to stand on higher ground on this thing would be better than rolling in the mud with them if you know what I mean. What the hell is wrong with affording them the rights of the Geneva convention? I see nothing with that at all. We all scream bloody hell when our men aren't treated in accord with the Geneva convention, so we need to set the example.

Ohhmama wrote:

Do I think they need to be in our prisons- hell no. Is six years sitting in a prison without a trial too long, probably. So what will be done with them? Just putting an order out to close Gitmo for good PR & without a plan doesn't sound like a great idea to me.

Closing Gitmo wasn't Obama's idea at all. He just had the willingness to sign the order to do so. GWB thought the same thing. This isn't a P R campagne, just a hard thought out idea with many reprocussions (sp) I am sure. Closing Gitmo and the "seceret prisons" is the right thing to do if we want to still be the leaders of the free world.

Face wrote:

Ohhmama wrote:

Actually I was referring to those who feel that these terrorists deserve the same rights as you or I. They aren't Americans and don't deserve the rights we have.

Fisrt of all, if my memory is correct, there was at least one US Citizen in Gitmo, since he was labeled an enemy combatant, he was not allowed to have due process. Hate him if you will, we still have a constitution for all citizens of the United States of America.

Agreed

Ohhmama wrote:

They don't appear to fall under the Geneva convention rules as enemy combatants because from what I understand it was meant for "uniformed" enemy combatants. So we have a bunch of militants and yes, something needs to be done with them. Rules need to be set up and punishments need to be set forth for those found guilty.

Face wrote:

I don't know the Geneva convention rules, but I think for the United States to stand on higher ground on this thing would be better than rolling in the mud with them if you know what I mean. What the hell is wrong with affording them the rights of the Geneva convention? I see nothing with that at all. We all scream bloody hell when our men aren't treated in accord with the Geneva convention, so we need to set the example.

But the difference is our men are uniformed, and I admit, I have to go back and re-read it, but I think there is something in it about enemy combatants in uniform. That way if joe-shmoe is walking around a foreign country in civilian clothes he could be considered a spy and tried accordingly, it was a protection for those men or women serving in wars.

Ohhmama wrote:

Do I think they need to be in our prisons- hell no. Is six years sitting in a prison without a trial too long, probably. So what will be done with them? Just putting an order out to close Gitmo for good PR & without a plan doesn't sound like a great idea to me.

Face wrote:

Closing Gitmo wasn't Obama's idea at all. He just had the willingness to sign the order to do so. GWB thought the same thing. This isn't a P R campagne, just a hard thought out idea with many reprocussions (sp) I am sure. Closing Gitmo and the "seceret prisons" is the right thing to do if we want to still be the leaders of the free world.

Seems to me that he should have waited to figure all things out before signing an executive order closing Gitmo, IMO.

http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/promise/177/close-the-guantanamo-bay-detention-center/




According to the White House, "The Order sets up an immediate review to determine whether it is possible to transfer detainees to third countries, consistent with national security. If transfer is not approved, a second review will determine whether prosecution is possible and in what forum. The preference is for prosecution in Article III courts or under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), but military commissions, perhaps with revised authorities, would remain an option. If there are detainees who cannot be transferred or prosecuted, the review will examine the lawful options for dealing with them. The Attorney General will coordinate the review and the Secretaries of Defense, State, and Homeland Security as well as the DNI and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff will participate."