Isn't that enough to make it worthwhile?
Maybe we shouldn't close Gitmo so quickly
- Thread starter Augustus
- Start date
Isn't that enough to make it worthwhile?
Thanks for giving me a few minutes before jumping the gun.
Your article link was pretty old but I do remember they were later released back Britain.
Gotta be careful of those left wing newspapers, conjuring anti-American "facts" out of thin air...
Yes, they were released, but only because the powers that be determined that they were not a threat. They had no chance to defend themselves. No rights. Stripped of all freedoms. For as long as Uncle Sam deemed fit. Care to guess how they were interrogated? Sound like something you'd care to have happen to you, or your kids?
I don't want myself or my kids pulverized in a plane as it smashes into a building.
Sometime you have to be a grownup and make the tough decisions. This is a war. Closing Gitmo just to say it's closed for political capitol is a mistake.
Making the choice to act fairly, rationally, and within accepted principles of morality and justice is a much harder choice than railroading anyone who even smells like a terrorist into a secret prison and leaving them with no way to defend themselves if in fact they're innocent.
The latter sticks of cowardice, knee-jerking, and immaturity. Liberty before safety, Gertch. Its the American way. This isn't to say we can't take steps to prevent monstrosities like what happened on 9/11 from ever happening again - just that we must not sacrifice the principles that make us great in order to do so. If we sink to the level of the third-world dictators you'd have us emulate, we'd be no better than them, and they'd win.
Saying, "We'll throw them in prison and sort it all out later" is not being a grownup; it's being a baby.
Absolutely not. How many people are being freed from prisons because DNA evidence is exonerating them even though great pains are taken by judges for fair trials?
Nothing man does is perfect. A couple of mistakes does not mean the policy is wrong. But they can learn from them to prevent more. Still, their track record is pretty good as far as we can tell now.
That's black & white thinking, JuanBolio. But Obama seems to be agreeing with you. I think he's making us more vulnerable again. Time will tell us who's right.
But we can't tell. They won't say, "Oh, by the way we totally cut this dude's balls off to make him talk and, jeez you won't believe it, he's not a terrorist. Our bad!" They'd cover it up.
Juan- thanks for the star.
You wouldn't think so if you or someone you knew and cared for was one of the victims of those repeated SNAFUs.
Also - "as far as we can tell" is right. We only have the government word at what its been doing, who its been taking, and what's been done to them. There isn't nearly enough oversight for the level of power the executive suddenly finds itself empowered with when it comes to anti-terrorism. Where you level of trust for the government comes from, I really can't begin to guess.
I want a link that has evidence we're cutting people.
Let's see, 2 of the people they've released are innocent and going about their lives. 63 others they've released have gone back to their terrorist ways. As far as we can tell they're doing pretty good.
What about the relatives of Daniel Pearl, or of the people killed on 9/11 or the other attacks?
Actually nevermind. Once again I feel there can be no agreement so we'll just have to disagree.
What about them?
What about them?
Clearly he's saying that if we threw them in Gitmo beforehand on charges of terrorism then they wouldn't have died on 9/11. It's a masterplan of epic proportions.
Do you really think terrorists are going to try that AGAIN since that's where we've dedicated 80% of our security in the past 7.5 years?
Do you really think anything the government has done since 9/11 has made the skies safer?
Sure you've got the TSA, with their new uniforms with real badges now, who are creeping their mission to include bus and metro lines.
They're real good at missing contraband when either reporters or the TSA's own tests are run.
Air cargo is not 100% screened before being loaded. Airside workers receive little to no screening, passengers undergo a shoe carnival based on bad science, and babies are being put on the no fly list - a list that doesn't even include the real baddies because of national security.
The only thing that has and will prevent another airliner being seized and used as a missile against a target are the passengers on board. If I'm sitting in 5E on my next flight, I know the guy in 5B is going to do everything he can to prevent that from happening.
Do you really think anything the government has done since 9/11 has made the skies safer?
No. But the fact thats where we've been half-assedly looking for the better part of a decade is a pretty good sign it won't happen again.
80% of "shit security" is still shit.
I predict it'll be a dirty bomb, can't really detect that before it goes boom. If someone hijacks a plane it'll be shot down before it can make it's move.
Do you really think anything the government has done since 9/11 has made the skies safer?
No. But the fact thats where we've been half-assedly looking for the better part of a decade is a pretty good sign it won't happen again.
80% of "shit security" is still shit.
I predict it'll be a dirty bomb, can't really detect that before it goes boom. If someone hijacks a plane it'll be shot down before it can make it's move.
As for the line of mine you quoted; other than being out of context I do believe it's still possible for that to be done.
As for your dirty bomb theory, I agree. Obama's picks will leave the borders at least as porous as Bush allowed them to remain. Although the perps could already be here.
Similar threads
