Obama creates indefinite detention system for prisoners at Guantanamo Bay

[Xiahou]

Obama creates indefinite detention system for prisoners at Guantanamo Bay

President Obama signed an executive order Monday that will create a formal system of indefinite detention for those held at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, who continue to pose a significant threat to national security. The administration also said it will start new military commission trials for detainees there.

So uh, I guess all that talk about indefinite detentions "shredding the Constitution" was just campaign pillow talk? Once again, Obama ends up adopting Bush administration policies that he slammed as a candidate.

[Strike For The South]

The more things change

[PanzerJaeger]

Fascist.

[HoreTore]

No word more suitable for this, PJ.

Release the prisoners, apologize, give them a ton of money and let them live where they want to. Until that happens, the US President will be a soulless fascist.

[Sarmatian]

Exactly. A disgrace to Obama.

[rory_20_uk]

He's a politician. What do you expect?

By doing this there's one less thing the Republicans can get him on. To expect him or any other career politician to have values that aren't relative rather than absolute is frankly a pipe dream.

[Hosakawa Tito]

Hehehe, no countries would step up and accept to take in any of these innocents? Imagine that...

[Husar]

Finally, it was about time this scum would be locked away forever.
A lava cave far below the earth, where they would be laid in enchanted chains, sealed by a magic spell and defended by undead guardians, only reachable by climbing over a gaping hole and activating a lot of levers in a labyrinth would have been preferable but until that thing is prepared, gitmo will have to do I guess.

And this.

[Centurion1]

gitmo isnt as clear cut an issue as people like to make it seem. I imagine that once Obama saw what the situation is really like, a situation we like to pretend we know all about he had to adjust his politics. I really don't think it's about pandering to the right rather he probably thinks he's making the right decision for the nation as a whole. Obama really hasn't proved to change American foreign policy that much. Sure it may be more friendly on the outside but overall he hasn't changed our situations that much from Bush.

[PanzerJaeger]

No word more suitable for this, PJ.

Release the prisoners, apologize, give them a ton of money and let them live where they want to. Until that happens, the US President will be a soulless fascist.

Are you aware of the recidivism rate of the ones we have released?

[rory_20_uk]

Are you aware of the recidivism rate of the ones we have released?

And?

Put a control group of people through what they've been through and I doubt they'll be well adjusted pro-Americans by the time they're let out. If they disliked America before this, now they're zealots.

[Lemur]

Facepalm. Although President 44 is hardly alone in perpetrating this farce; congress has done its bit, and then some.

[PanzerJaeger]

And?

Put a control group of people through what they've been through and I doubt they'll be well adjusted pro-Americans by the time they're let out. If they disliked America before this, now they're zealots.

And... why would we want to allow our POWs back in the field? The war is not over until Osama or Obama declare it so.

Anyway, that's one of those statements that kind of makes sense on the surface, but not really when you think about it. Spending time in Gitmo might make a supposedly innocent man an activist, and probably a plaintiff as well, but I highly doubt it would turn him into a terrorist. In fact, I would think years of allegedly unwarranted detainment would make someone try their best to avoid a similar fate.

[HoreTore]

Are you aware of the recidivism rate of the ones we have released?

Do I care?

[rory_20_uk]

And... why would we want to allow our POWs back in the field? The war is not over until Osama or Obama declare it so.

Anyway, that's one of those statements that kind of makes sense on the surface, but not really when you think about it. Spending time in Gitmo might make a supposedly innocent man an activist, and probably a plaintiff as well, but I highly doubt it would turn him into a terrorist. In fact, I would think years of allegedly unwarranted detainment would make someone try their best to avoid a similar fate.

POWs are they? I think that you've breached dozens of laws if that is the case.

Detainment for that long will probably not merely instill the thought "oh I better not annoy America lest I get sent back here".

[PanzerJaeger]

Do I care?

If you're actually interested in the facts surrounding the situation and not simply throwing around rhetoric, then you should.

[PanzerJaeger]

POWs are they? I think that you've breached dozens of laws if that is the case.

Oh, I don't doubt that. Such laws weren't designed for a conflict of this nature.

[edyzmedieval]

I thought Obama promised he would close Guantanamo Bay...?

[HoreTore]

If you're actually interested in the facts surrounding the situation and not simply throwing around rhetoric, then you should.

It has nothing to do with the issue.

The US tortured people. Torture is not acceptable. Thus, the US must correct its mistake and let these people go and apoologize for their crime.

If some of them wants to commit a crime in response, then the US will of course be free to arrest them again, provided they do things properly the second time.

Some US citiens may loose their lives because of the actions these people might commit because of what h happened to them. That is the consequence of torturing people.

Personal responsibility, one must live with the consequences that comes from ones actions.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

It has nothing to do with the issue.

The US tortured people. Torture is not acceptable. Thus, the US must correct its mistake and let these people go and apoologize for their crime.

If some of them wants to commit a crime in response, then the US will of course be free to arrest them again, provided they do things properly the second time.

Some US citiens may loose their lives because of the actions these people might commit because of what h happened to them. That is the consequence of torturing people.

Personal responsibility, one must live with the consequences that comes from ones actions.

The US' adminstration's first priority is to it's own people, if these prisoners represent a threat they cannot be released. One does not loose a rbaid dog in a playground.

[HoreTore]

The US' adminstration's first priority is to it's own people, if these prisoners represent a threat they cannot be released. One does not loose a rbaid dog in a playground.

Do we punish people for what they have actually done, or do we punish them for what we believe they might do?

And do we allow one group to investigate, prosecute and judge? Or do we split that responsibility among different groups? If so, what is the reason for that split?

[Rhyfelwyr]

Land of the free.

EDIT: Maybe that smilie isn't appropriate, cause this is actually pretty scary that they think its OK to do this...

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Do we punish people for what they have actually done, or do we punish them for what we believe they might do?

And do we allow one group to investigate, prosecute and judge? Or do we split that responsibility among different groups? If so, what is the reason for that split?

Most of these men are guilty, the problem is that the evidence that proves this was got at using evidence from torture - this makes the proof inadmissable. The issue is the "poisened tree" laws in the US. A legal system that allowed these men to be prosecuted would see a lot of them convicted. So actually I think that, purely with reference to the prisoners themselves, keeping them in detention is a lesser evil compared to setting them fee.

[Megas Methuselah]

Land of the free.

EDIT: Maybe that smilie isn't appropriate, cause this is actually pretty scary that they think its OK to do this...

[HoreTore]

Most of these men are guilty, the problem is that the evidence that proves this was got at using evidence from torture - this makes the proof inadmissable. The issue is the "poisened tree" laws in the US. A legal system that allowed these men to be prosecuted would see a lot of them convicted. So actually I think that, purely with reference to the prisoners themselves, keeping them in detention is a lesser evil compared to setting them fee.

Most?

So, plenty of the people there are completely innocent then? But because they're brown it's all OK?

[Centurion1]

Most?

So, plenty of the people there are completely innocent then? But because they're brown it's all OK?

your consistent use of the race card is disgusting and annoying. And no I do not want to hear about how your sisters boyfriend is black or whatever it is you say.

If anything the issue here would be their religion. The fact that they are "brown" as you so eloquently put it probably has zero impact on this decision.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Most?

So, plenty of the people there are completely innocent then? But because they're brown it's all OK?

A lot of them are about as "brown" Italians or Greeks, they're Mediteranian, but maybe that distinction is lost of you in your Northern Fastness. The issue is that we don't know what to do with them, but "just" letting them go is foolish.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Gah!


You knuckledragging paleoconservatives were right all along!

[PanzerJaeger]

Most?

So, plenty of the people there are completely innocent then? But because they're brown it's all OK?

I would wager that all are guilty at this point. What the screamers don't seem to acknowledge is that these people are not locked away in a dark cell and forgotten. Their cases were under constant review during the Bush administration, and many hundreds were released. (How do you think the US was able to record recidivism?) This process has been heavily expedited during the Obama years with many released who probably shouldn't have been in the failed effort to close the facility. At this point, they're down to the worst of the worst - those that pose such a risk that they can neither be released nor traded away to our allies for beneficial trade deals and subsidies.

[HoreTore]

So, if the Police is certain, 100% positive, that you're guilty, there's no need for a trial?

We are to trust the competence of the police officer, and accept his or her judgement when it comes to seperating the guilty from the innocent?