PDA

View Full Version : Guantanamo bay Prison to be closed within the year



Thomas
01-22-2009, 06:24 PM
http://news.aol.com/article/obama-administration/310532

I think this was a good move on Obama's part. He's definitely instilling the sense within the public that "change" is actually going to happen and that his term is going to be very different compared to GWB's.

jacknife737
01-22-2009, 06:37 PM
I'm somewhat surprised that he's doing it this quickly. I mean, i applaud the decision, and I think it's going to go a long way in restoring credibility to Washington. That said, it's such a complicated issue (ie, what to do with the inmates), i just hope it goes smoothly.

Al Coholic
01-22-2009, 07:16 PM
Its not as difficult as people make it out to be.

There's also a lot of executive orders passed that made this administration more transprent. Anti-lobbying legislation that made it illegal for members of the admin. to lobby the white house for a couple years after leaving, among others. Unfortunate that Guantanamo will snag all the headlines, this kind of ethical reform is good stuff. Though it is something we should be able to take for granted....

jacknife737
01-22-2009, 07:37 PM
Its not as difficult as people make it out to be.

You really think so? I mean, i'm pretty sure the Bush Administration would have closed it, if they felt they could have done it properly. Obviously not every detainee deserves the type of treatment/security that they receive at GITMO, but that said, there are still some very dangerous men, and there is a risk, of them being "let go" once they enter the US judicial system.

Also, as for those who will probably be released, many of whom won't be allowed back into their "home" countries, and others will also probably face torture if they are allowed to return. Like i said, it seems very complicated.

It needed to be closed, and i'm glad it was; but i'm not convinced it's going to be smooth sailing from here on.

Al Coholic
01-22-2009, 07:51 PM
I kind of don't see the motivation the Bush administration had with Guantanamo over the last year. In a sense, maybe they didn't want to admit they were wrong and kept it open out of stubborness. Maybe it was a good distraction from more important issues. The fate of a few hundred men overshadowing shady executive orders shoved under the table. But then I sound like some kind of hippie.

And no, the legal aspects aren't that difficult. They're unclear, and there'll be some back and forth between the courts, but ultimately its a few hundred guys, they'll get tried case by case, recieve a sentence and finish it out in some kind of POW prison. Which could be in Guantanamo for all I care but for symbolism's sake they'll put em somewhere else.

metalmania
01-26-2009, 03:34 AM
who loves the guantanamo?maybe somebody loves there hehe if you love there;you can live there;) i think stupids and unnecessary people re living free and these people have to live in jails;)

Paint_It_Black
01-26-2009, 04:20 AM
there are still some very dangerous men, and there is a risk, of them being "let go" once they enter the US judicial system.

Yeah, there is a definite risk of them receiving fair trials and possibly being released due to a lack of actual evidence, that's true. Oh wait, you thought that was a bad thing, right?

Obama is right. We cannot sacrifice our values for the sake of safety. Especially when "safety" is generally an illusion anyway. Alright, truthfully I think there are situations in which we need to sacrifice our values, but they are rare, and we should at least have the decency to be ashamed of ourselves about it. Not piss on the constitution with a big grin on our faces while simultaneously ranting about freedom and waving the star spangled banner.

Anyone see the Daily Show recently? They made the point that some of what Obama has been saying does not sound entirely dissimilar to things Bush may have said. But when Obama says it you don't get the impression he really means it. It was brilliant. So very true. He's talking tough to put the rednecks at ease while simultaneously working to immediately undo as much of Bush's mistakes and crimes as possible.

I am not surprised at all by how quickly Obama is working to implement change. For one thing he needs to make the most of the current situation. He's got a lot of challenges but also a lot of opportunities, and huge amounts of support. He needs to roll with it while it's there.

I also get the feeling he was truly disgusted by a lot of what Bush did and is probably loving every second he spends undoing it. I know my hopes are too high, I really do, but for now it honestly feels like one of us is running the show. One of the good guys is in charge.

I'm actually almost happy now that Kerry lost. Obama was perhaps worth waiting for. And yes, I say again that I know I am probably being too hopeful. But fuck it, I don't get many opportunities to feel this hopeful and I'm running with it. Just listening to the man give a speech makes me feel hopeful. Doesn't even matter what he says, I just love the way he says it. Complete sentences! That make sense!

nieh
01-26-2009, 07:36 AM
Anyone see the Daily Show recently? They made the point that some of what Obama has been saying does not sound entirely dissimilar to things Bush may have said. But when Obama says it you don't get the impression he really means it. It was brilliant. So very true. He's talking tough to put the rednecks at ease while simultaneously working to immediately undo as much of Bush's mistakes and crimes as possible.

I saw that. I don't remember the exact quotes, but I got the vibe that he did kind of mean what he said, just not at all in the same way that Bush did when he said similar things.

wheelchairman
01-26-2009, 07:53 AM
Yeah Obama also makes me very optimistic.

Huge sweeping changes aren't gonna happen, but improvements and change in a direction that I can feel good about, will. And that's something I haven't had in the past 8 years. Something I sorely missed.

It's slightly annoying because I post on a socialist forum and they are convinced that Dem/Rep it's all part of the bourgeois machine and nothing changes.

Stupid since it shows an ignorance of the past 100 years in American politics (not to mention the previous 100 before that...)

I wouldn't be so harsh but some of them saying that are older than I am and should know better. :p

Al Coholic
01-26-2009, 10:56 AM
who loves the guantanamo?maybe somebody loves there hehe if you love there;you can live there;) i think stupids and unnecessary people re living free and these people have to live in jails;)

lol rite send Bush there hehe let stupids Bush get in guantanamo ;) he will see what is really!

jacknife737
01-26-2009, 11:14 AM
Yeah, there is a definite risk of them receiving fair trials and possibly being released due to a lack of actual evidence, that's true. Oh wait, you thought that was a bad thing, right?


There are some high profile cases in which information was obtained by interrogation techniques such as waterboarding and that would be inadmissible in a civilian federal trial. So unless the Obama administration finds a way to move them from the existing US federal court system to something else (perhaps a new creation), there is a risk of these men being released. I'm not against anyone getting a "fair trial", so spare me your self-righteousness; i just don't want these men to be released on a technicality.

wheelchairman
01-26-2009, 11:40 AM
There is a reason why torture is not considered valid evidence, and it has very little to do with human rights. Half the time you get confessions that are nothing more than what they think you want to hear.

It's actually far better to 'win them over', however that method takes longer and probably better training.

jacknife737
01-26-2009, 12:05 PM
There is a reason why torture is not considered valid evidence, and it has very little to do with human rights. Half the time you get confessions that are nothing more than what they think you want to hear.

You raise a very valid point. However, i still don't think one can simply discard 100% of all information obtained at gitmo, using harsh interrogation methods.

The whole problem with this mess, is that the gitmo system was never really designed to deal with these prisoners, like they should be dealt with, ie in a court, with regular evidence, ect. Its entire purpose was to obtain information from these men by any means necessary. That is why, as i outlined in my original post in this thread, that I feel that dealing with the gitmo problem won't be an easy job for Obama.

wheelchairman
01-26-2009, 12:12 PM
No, I don't think it will be easy either.

The difficulty however with the information is determining which is good info and which is bad.

And then if they act on the bad info they've wasted time and resources. It's all a very annoying stuff. It's annoying that they used torture in the first place, because leads to all these annoying problems.

It's like they put teenagers in power.

Durr consequences..

IamSam
01-26-2009, 12:25 PM
Why are we debating over if there are actual terrorists in Gitmo? I thought that the answer would be obvious, but I guess not.

JohnnyNemesis
01-27-2009, 07:33 PM
However, i still don't think one can simply discard 100% of all information obtained at gitmo, using harsh interrogation methods.

There's a huge difference between harsh interrogation methods and torture, my friend.

wheelchairman
01-27-2009, 07:36 PM
It's called rape you dumbfuck!

EDIT: pretend you can write in all caps.

JohnnyNemesis
01-27-2009, 07:39 PM
Holy fucking lol <3

metalmania
01-28-2009, 01:28 PM
hehe dont worry all!our world becomes the jail!;)

Paint_It_Black
01-29-2009, 02:41 AM
so spare me your self-righteousness

y so srs? :(

Yes, information gained from using torture is going to be inadmissible. Some bad guys may get off on a "technicality". There is not much that can be done about this. Blame the guys who allowed this "technicality" to exist.

Like wheelchairman said it's annoying that they used torture in the first place since it invariably leads to problems. Now we have to suffer the consequences of that.

I think the question of how to handle this situation is fairly simple. We follow the law. That's what we have to do.