I still want to know how nObama is going to move these folks from Gitmo. It is PROVEN that if we let them go, they go right back to the battle lines. Where they are at currently is about the hardest target there is currently on the planet - and also safe from the main land.
Now, as we have seen a number of times from Iran, Panama, Greneda and on and on - if there are US citizens being held, or kidnapped or what ever; the US can and will send in military troops to rescue them. What is to prevent the associates of these terrorists to start planning the same course of action on US soil if they are moved to a military or federal prison? Why not bomb a disco or two and see if they can sway public thinking about just letting one or two important figures out of the jail? How about blowing up a 747 in midair? SAM’s at Ohare?
Where these people are being held now is VERY safe for the every day US citizen…but it seems that the left is willing to take an implied risk of bringing these people here…so, have they calulated how many collateral civilian deaths are accepted in the chance that these people do have a potential plan of action for their forceful release from their cells?
Where these people are being held now is VERY safe for the every day US citizen
I always have to laugh at how far people will go under the guise of saving American lives.
This from a country with epidemic obesity problems that will kill millions (yet we do nothing to shut down fast food places, cigarette manufacturers etc), high rates of car related accidents (yet we keep making cars that go faster) etc.
Yet, in the astronomical odds that a terrorist in Gitmo may attack a single American, we are prepared to throw away all laws and the reactions from Americas borders fanaticism.
You didnt answer the question. Also, dont try to pretend that personal choice of lifestyle has ANYTHING to do with what happens in terrorist acts - that really is a pathetic analogy. So, in your eyes if someone was at McDonalds just before getting on a flight on 9/11 the act of terror is lessened?
Casey - There is a difference between allowing a person the ability to choose a lifestyle that is unhealthy and releasing dangerous terrorists (assuming they are). Second, even the hated President Bush and the democrat controlled Congress did nothing even close to throwing away all laws. It has been demonstrated time and again that the situation we face is far different from either a traditional war or a police action. The rules developed for those situations are wanting when attempting to deal with foreign terrorist threats.
Now, that said, keeping the Gitmo guys at Gitmo really does nothing to prevent their cronies from attacking mainland targets as leverage for releasing them from Gitmo. I have every confidence that we could keep them safely secured in the US or someplace other than Gitmo.
The real question and Obama does not yet have an adequate answer is what do we do with them?
**The real question and Obama does not yet have an adequate answer is what do we do with them? **
You put them on trial and if you can’t prove their guilt, you bring them back to their country and drop them off. If the country will not take them, you put a parachute on and drop them in.
It’s simple, you put them on trial and persecute if guilty and if innocent, send them back to their countries.
Also, dont try to pretend that personal choice of lifestyle has ANYTHING to do with what happens in terrorist acts - that really is a pathetic analogy.
My point was the out of proportion steps we take to prevent a terrorist attack
**So, in your eyes if someone was at McDonalds just before getting on a flight on 9/11 the act of terror is lessened? **
It’s simple, you put them on trial and persecute if guilty and if innocent, send them back to their countries.
So then, where do we send the people who dont have a country on earth willing to let them back in? This is a point that is glossed over at best by the national media. I like the idea of sending them back with a parachute…Didnt we have a place like that once? Oh yeah…Australia.
Are you worried about US murderers currently housed in prisons on American soil? What if they escape! They could blow up a 747!
Yawn…
Most of them do not have groups of people in a religious war with the US wanting us to set them free now do they? Granted the US has some serious nuts out there cooking up some terrible things (McVeigh)…but alas, I am willing to bet that it is a whole lot harder to purchase a SAM in the US than it is to purchase one in Mexico City and then smuggle it right past the Rio. These groups have taken it to the streets in France, Germany, Japan, and on and on…we are VERY luck they have not taken it to our streets before or since 9/11.
I wonder how many virgins Allah gives one for dieing in a Jihaad or attack on the infidels, while trying to garner the freedom of one of their “soldiers” from a US Federal prison?
When has a SAM been fired at a plane in France, Germany, or Japan? I don’t even think any Japanese terrorist have been related to islamic extremism. You are just an alarmist, I’m more likely to die from carpal tunnel typing this post than from a terrorist attack caused by inmates currently housed in Guantanamo.
Thats a BS arguement. These people are already in US custody, if their “buddies” are intent on swaying the US populations sentiment towards releasing one or two of these guys why don’t they just start blowing up discos now? Why/how would changing the location of these guys effect the perceived psychological effect on the american populace if they start blowing places up?
I’m more likely to die from carpal tunnel typing this post than from a terrorist attack caused by inmates currently housed in Guantanamo.
So, what your contention is - is that the friends and family of these people who are sequestered on an island, on a US military base, next to a US military live fire range will have no desire to assist in their freedom?
Record you are right asking your question. Too many folks here just don’t get it and think the detainees should be afforded the same constitutional rights as a US citizen. I guarantee you that not a single one of them were read their Miranda rights so based on some peoples views they d be released just on that alone. If we can’t find a place for them to go and remain incarcerated many will in fact end up killing or planning to kill again (see lnk). This only one of PresBo’s plans to make us more and more like Europe (see my post by DIck Morris on where we are headed. Its scary and sad).
It is a FACT that if another country, or group was holding citizens of the United States that military power would be used to garner their freedom.
It is a FACT that groups have laid claim to having the will and ability to free a number of these prisoners from any jail (ability with implied use of forse - source: Osama Bin Laden).
It is a FACT that where these people are currently held is a very hard target.
It is a FACT that no prison on the shores of the US has anywhere near the isolation, armament, military capacity nor distance from a population center of the US citizens as Gitmo has.
(note: I am not as far nuts as the post would suggest…just curious what the terror huggers think)
The prisoners at GITMO are not there for the protection of US citizens. They are there because of the legal status of that particular location. There is absolutely no reason to think there would be a significantly greater threat of terrorist attack just because they’re held in PA or KS.
“It is PROVEN that if we let them go, they go right back to the battle lines.”
It is “PROVEN” that SOME of them have been found back on the battle lines. Similarly, it has been PROVEN that when we have to let domestic criminals go for procedural errors in the criminal justice system, they also sometimes go back to lives of crime.
"Why not bomb a disco or two and see if they can sway public thinking about just letting one or two important figures out of the jail? How about blowing up a 747 in midair? SAM’s at Ohare? "
What on Earth makes you think there is any greater risk of these types of events if the prisoners are in the continental U.S. as opposed to GITMO?