Obama to issue close of Guant'anamo

[Aanica]

President-elect Barack Obama plans to issue an executive order on his first full day in office directing the closing of the http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/nationa...?inline=nyt-geo detention camp Guant'anamo Bay in Cuba, people briefed by Obama transition officials said Monday.

LINK

[Princess Serenity]

I heard that he was going to close it. And bring these people here. I'm kinda scared of the idea really. ><;

[Neognosis]

I'm not. Not many people escape from the prisons that I'm sure they will be sent to. gitmo is a blemish of shame on our country, and even though it's just symbolic of this, I'm glad it's being closed.

[Mr Honeybadger]

Tough call to make here.

They can't just be kept locked up without ever being put on trial for anything. So are they to be turned lose in the general public ? And if so, who's general public ?

[Aanica]

They are looking for other countries to take them...

[Repoman]

gitmo is a blemish of shame on our country

No it isn't. It's just a POW camp and we are at war. People like you would have been whining about the POW camps we kept germans in during WWII also.

[Aanica]

No it isn't. It's just a POW camp and we are at war. People like you would have been whining about the POW camps we kept germans in during WWII also.

I am with you Repoman, I am not ashamed of my country for anything, especially Guant'anamo!

[Fluffybunny]

No it isn't. It's just a POW camp and we are at war. People like you would have been whining about the POW camps we kept germans in during WWII also.

No, and you really shouldnt make such sweeping statements. Prisoner of War is not what these guys are; and that is what the point is. I dont think anyone here would complain about the German POW camps. That was a pretty straightforward situation, to say what you did isnt fair.

Look at the controversy; there is a reason that people are in an uproar. They are not POW's. They arent prisoners either, they end up in this never neverland without any idea who they are or what they did. If they did something bad, then screw them who cares...problem is that there are people that have come out of there after years that have done nothing. Not cool. Not how we normally operate.

It isnt like WW2 where we are dealing with uniformed soldiers; where a german was easy to tell from an italian and you knew what the rules are. Right now people are not soldiers in the typical sense, so people are getting pulled up into this that have nothing to do with it.

You probably dont care, I dont know...when I enlisted I promised an oath to the Constitution. I like the Constitution, and think it is a good rule of thumb to go by; and what happened here was some trickery to get around the constitution, which I didnt care for.

If they are POW's great, call them pow's. they are not though. If they are prisoners; try them and prosecute them accordingly if they are guilty.

This middle ground is not a good thing. Sets a bad precedent.

[stevewinn]

Obama shouldn't make this move on his first day. I've seen this before, a new leader comes to office and tries to make a statement of intent.

The shutting down of the bay is a good move and a guaranteed popularity rise in the polls, There is going to be plenty of Bad news stories coming out of the Economy this year. he should keep this ACE card up his sleeve and play it wisely.

Presidency is marathon not a sprint, He doesn't want to come out of the blocks too quickly and be huffing and puffing in the latter stages.

[Repoman]

You probably dont care

Probably shouldn't make such generalizations.

If some of the people at Gitmo were random civilians that just got randomly arrested by a random soldier - then I agree that he doesn't deserve to be there any more than you do.

But if the person was an enemy combatant and not wearing a uniform then Gitmo is doing him a big favor because he could have been summarily executed.

So I guess because it isn't impossible that there exists at least one person at gitmo that wasn't trying to kill Americans it means we should be ashamed of it and close the whole thing down?

What about the german conscripts that never fired their weapons and hated Hitler that made it to our german POW camps? You say it is cool to because he wears a uniform.

Maybe I say it is a disgrace to America and all we stand for that we would keep such a person in a prison camp with no hope for a lawyer!

FREE THEM ALL!!!!

DISBAND THE US MILITARY NOW!!!!

[Plainbob13]

Tough call to make here.

They can't just be kept locked up without ever being put on trial for anything. So are they to be turned lose in the general public ? And if so, who's general public ?

I like the general idea of turning them lose to general population of half starved sharks. Feet first of course.

[Neognosis]

No it isn't. It's just a POW camp and we are at war. People like you would have been whining about the POW camps we kept germans in during WWII also.

People like me? You don't know me at all.

ONe of the foundations of our society is that we don't hold people in prison indefinitely without charges or trial. We have violated that at gitmo, and it's time to end this. I am ashamed of how we have flouted the ideals that make us unique.

Maybe I say it is a disgrace to America and all we stand for that we would keep such a person in a prison camp with no hope for a lawyer!

FREE THEM ALL!!!!

DISBAND THE US MILITARY NOW!!!!

Well, it is a disgrace that we would keep ANYONE in prison without charges. This is not a POW camp. However, disbanding the military is extreme. Are you only capable of thinking and understanding people if you paint them in dark shades of black or white?

[Repoman]

People like me? You don't know me at all.

I meant people that fit the mold of protesting the fact that, during a war, we are holding enemy combatents in a military-run prison instead of giving them a phone call with a court docket number and date.

ONe of the foundations of our society is that we don't hold people in prison indefinitely without charges or trial. We have violated that at gitmo, and it's time to end this. I am ashamed of how we have flouted the ideals that make us unique.

Then I hope they release them into your neighborhood.

Are you only capable of thinking and understanding people if you paint them in dark shades of black or white?

That is a fallacious question. In other words, "You don't know me at all".

[Neognosis]

I meant people that fit the mold of protesting the fact that, during a war, we are holding enemy combatents in a military-run prison instead of giving them a phone call with a court docket number and date.

I do protest the fact that we hold people not proven to be enemy combatants in a military run prision with no charges filed. If gitmo was being used for ONLY enemy combatants (although we've declared victory and the war is over... so why are we still holding these POWs?) it would be another story. But gitmo has been used to hold anyone suspected of terrorism or collusion with terrorists. This is not in accordance with American ideals.

Then I hope they release them into your neighborhood.

Please try to read the argument that is presented, not a cliche' version of what you think the argument says. People held in prison need to be charged and tried. Not incarcerated indefinitely with no charges or trial. That's not how the United States operates. At least it didn't used to be, and hopefully it won't be so again.

QUOTE (Neognosis @ Jan 13 2009, 04:59 PM)

Are you only capable of thinking and understanding people if you paint them in dark shades of black or white?

That is a fallacious question. In other words, "You don't know me at all".

First off, a question can't be fallacious. Second, it's pretty clear from your posts that you enjoy reading something someone says, disregarding what they actually said, and repeating back an illogical and overinflated version of it. This is called a fallacy of extension.

Straw Man (Fallacy Of Extension):

attacking an exaggerated or caricatured version of your opponent's position.

For example, the claim that "evolution means a dog giving birth to a cat."

Another example: "Senator Jones says that we should not fund the attack submarine program. I disagree entirely. I can't understand why he wants to leave us defenseless like that."

On the Internet, it is common to exaggerate the opponent's position so that a comparison can be made between the opponent and Hitler.

In your case, the example is that I would like for those put in prison to be charged and tried, and you make the fallacious extension implying that I think they should be released.

Hopefully smart people understand this and disregard your arguments.

[acidhead]

President Bush and first lady Laura Bush sat down with CNN's Larry King Live on Tuesday January 13 2009.

Here's what Bush said about the un-charged detainees at Guantanamo Bay:

• Bush said he favors closing the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, but only "under the right circumstances.

"The problem is, you've got a bunch of cold-blooded killers down there that if they ever get out they're going to come and kill Americans, and I'd hate to be the person that made that decision."

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/14...view/index.html

If they are cold blooded killers shouldn't they be charged and tried?

[Aztec Warrior]

No, and you really shouldnt make such sweeping statements. Prisoner of War is not what these guys are; and that is what the point is. I dont think anyone here would complain about the German POW camps. That was a pretty straightforward situation, to say what you did isnt fair.

Look at the controversy; there is a reason that people are in an uproar. They are not POW's. They arent prisoners either, they end up in this never neverland without any idea who they are or what they did. If they did something bad, then screw them who cares...problem is that there are people that have come out of there after years that have done nothing. Not cool. Not how we normally operate.

It isnt like WW2 where we are dealing with uniformed soldiers; where a german was easy to tell from an italian and you knew what the rules are. Right now people are not soldiers in the typical sense, so people are getting pulled up into this that have nothing to do with it.

You probably dont care, I dont know...when I enlisted I promised an oath to the Constitution. I like the Constitution, and think it is a good rule of thumb to go by; and what happened here was some trickery to get around the constitution, which I didnt care for.

If they are POW's great, call them pow's. they are not though. If they are prisoners; try them and prosecute them accordingly if they are guilty.

This middle ground is not a good thing. Sets a bad precedent.

While not officially POW's, these guys were not baking cookies in London. How can anyone sane person say, "they were doing nothing?" No, they were captured as participants on the battlefield and many of those already released have returned to their terrorist activities.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Pentagon said on Tuesday that 61 former detainees from its military prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, appear to have returned to terrorism since their release from custody. Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said 18 former detainees are confirmed as "returning to the fight" and 43 are suspected of having done in a report issued late in December by the Defense Intelligence Agency. Morrell said the latest figures, current through December 24, showed an 11 percent recidivism rate, up from 7 percent in a March 2008 report that counted 37 former detainees as suspected or confirmed active militants. Link

POW's are returned at the end of a war. Sometimes there are prisoners swaps before that. Regardless, these guys should go before a military tribunal at the end of the hostilities and then either hanged or released. To do anything before that is foolish.

People like me? You don't know me at all.

ONe of the foundations of our society is that we don't hold people in prison indefinitely without charges or trial. We have violated that at gitmo, and it's time to end this. I am ashamed of how we have flouted the ideals that make us unique.

Well, it is a disgrace that we would keep ANYONE in prison without charges. This is not a POW camp. However, disbanding the military is extreme. Are you only capable of thinking and understanding people if you paint them in dark shades of black or white?

Yes, it is a POW camp. And yes, they should be held until the end. There are not kept in prison without charges...they have been charged. They just haven't been convicted or hanged yet.

Edited January 14, 2009 by Aztec Warrior

[Repoman]

First off, a question can't be fallacious.

Sure it can - if the premise of the question is false.

In your case, the example is that I would like for those put in prison to be charged and tried, and you make the fallacious extension implying that I think they should be released.

I don't know what the formal logical term is for nit-picking a tiny detail that, while serving to deflect the literality at hand, does nothing to change the eventual outcome. In this case, we know that placing the Gitmo detainees on trial would produce verdicts of not-guilty because, first, you would have to charge them with a crime. Then you have to produce evidence. If a weapon was involved, the lawyers will demand the chain of evidence showing that the terrorist ever had a weapon. The lawyers will say that there was never a gunshot residue test conducted on the terrorist, etc. etc. etc. Because the outcome of a not-guilty verdict is to set the defendant free, you can connect the dots to see that your action would result in letting them go. Like I said, I hope they end up in your neighborhood.

Hopefully smart people understand this and disregard your arguments.

I wouldn't bet on it. There are people here that voted for Obama - and his BS was a lot more egregious than anything I have ever written.

Maybe the reason you fail to equate my "straw-man" that you so earnestly highlighted with the simple chain of events:

1. Hold a trial

2. Innocent verdict

3. Set him free

is that you know that is what will happen and you find it abhorrent.

Since wanting to put them on trial will result in not-guilty verdicts and not-guilt verdicts will result in their release, my contention that you want them released is not a straw man.

[acidhead]

Yes, it is a POW camp. And yes, they should be held until the end. There are not kept in prison without charges...they have been charged. They just haven't been convicted or hanged yet.

The Obama transition office declined to comment officially on the future of the Guantanamo Bay prison. But reports that he plans to order the facility closed come just one day after Obama told ABC News that closing the prison is "complicated," and that he couldn't promise to shutter the facility within his first 100 days in office.

The order, which one adviser told The Associated Press could be issued as early as Jan. 20, would start the process of deciding what to do with the estimated 250 Al Qaeda and Taliban suspects and potential witnesses who are being held there. Most have not been charged with a crime. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/01/12...mo-week-office/

[Fluffybunny]

FREE THEM ALL!!!!

DISBAND THE US MILITARY NOW!!!!

Why are you making such outlandish statements? when you do things like that, it absolutely shuts down the discussion. You know that wasnt my point, but then you had to go there to try and offend me...

I was simply trying to make a levelheaded statement, and explain a point of view, but then you had to get sarcastic and outlandish.

Nevermind. As you were.

[Repoman]

Why are you making such outlandish statements? when you do things like that, it absolutely shuts down the discussion. You know that wasnt my point, but then you had to go there to try and offend me...

I got tired of searching for the sarcasm smiley. If you like, I will not use all caps in the future. I do agree that those angular letters with their big, old upper-case descenders hanging in the breeze do look pretty outlandish.

I was simply trying to make a levelheaded statement, and explain a point of view

Don't beat yourself up! You succeeded 100% in making a levelheaded statement and in explaining a point of view! My silly, sarcastic outlandishness did nothing to take that away from you.

I apologize.

[Neognosis]

If they are cold blooded killers shouldn't they be charged and tried?

I think so, yes.

In this case, we know that placing the Gitmo detainees on trial would produce verdicts of not-guilty because, first, you would have to charge them with a crime. Then you have to produce evidence. If a weapon was involved, the lawyers will demand the chain of evidence showing that the terrorist ever had a weapon. The lawyers will say that there was never a gunshot residue test conducted on the terrorist, etc. etc. etc. Because the outcome of a not-guilty verdict is to set the defendant free, you can connect the dots to see that your action would result in letting them go. Like I said, I hope they end up in your neighborhood.

That's mighty Russian of you. I'm relatively certain that the military courts don't have the same rules of evidence and reasonable doubt that civilian courts have.

Maybe the reason you fail to equate my "straw-man" that you so earnestly highlighted with the simple chain of events:

1. Hold a trial

2. Innocent verdict

3. Set him free

But regardless, so I understand, is your postition that we should keep people in jail without trial because they might be found not guilty? (Also, there is no such thing as an "innocent verdict."

[Repoman]

But regardless, so I understand, is your postition that we should keep people in jail without trial because they might be found not guilty? (Also, there is no such thing as an "innocent verdict."

You can't use the generic term "people" in this context. I think we should keep enemy combatents locked up until the end of hostilities.

[Neognosis]

But isn't the "mission accomplished?"

We hold Iraq, they have the US designed gov't in place, it's time to try them for terrorism of let them go home if they are conventional POWs.

[Repoman]

But isn't the "mission accomplished?"

No. That banner was referring to the aircraft carrier's mission. It was assigned to patrol the Persian Gulf for a time and was then replaced by another aircraft carrier. The aircraft carrier that hung the "Mission Accomplished" banner was talking about its own mission - which was accomplished.

We hold Iraq, they have the US designed gov't in place, it's time to try them for terrorism of let them go home if they are conventional POWs.

Iraq was only one battle in the international war on terrorism. The war isn't over yet.

[The Silver Thong]

Just look what Canada did during WWII we took 22 thousand Japanese and locked them up for no reason and to this day Canada has to carry the shame. It's a little embarasing really but at least we learned a lesson.

http://www.yesnet.yk.ca/schools/projects/c...nternment1.html

Edited January 14, 2009 by The Silver Thong