Obama and Terrorist Rights

[Harlan Huckleby]

was a terrorist orchestrated prison break there once, and theoretically, it could happen again. MAYBE we LET that break happen, then gun down all 245 of them--thereby solving the problem

you definitely get points for thinking outside the box.

come to think of it, the OBVIOUS solution to GITMO is to ship the bastards to Afghanistan for a more rustic internment experience. But that won't happen, it would draw too much attention to the far worse condition there.

I don't like the willfull dishonesty of this cave-in to world-wide opinion. The pretending to be chastened. But we need to be a little humble and wonder if it won't work out to be a smart choice that brings benefits.

World-wide opinion matters a great deal. Gulf War I went smoothly because we had amazing international cooperation. In Gulf War II, MANY Iraqi and American lives were lost because of the long-term consequences of our ally Turkey working against us. The U.S. needs allies.

[mraynrand]

World-wide opinion matters a great deal. Gulf War I went smoothly because we had amazing international cooperation. In Gulf War II, MANY Iraqi and American lives were lost because of the long-term consequences of our ally Turkey working against us. The U.S. needs allies.

I agree. But sometimes you have to go on even in the face of negative worldwide opinion, because you know the world's opinion is wrong. In the cases of Abu Grahib and Gitmo, the word on the street was far more damaging. At Abu Grahib, the people held there were released and told their stories to their friends and neighbors - that was probably the single most damaging event, PR-wise. Not because of the bad press, but because of the actual experiences being told friend to friend. Michael Yon reported on this and a buddy of mine who was in the military hospital there, said the same thing - many of the Iraqis they operated on and saved were shocked at the great treatment they received because they thought they would be treated like the prisoners at Abu. I suspect there is a similar effect from Gitmo - but to a lesser extent. It's a dicey situation, because you know you have the worst of the worst side by side with innocents.

[texaspackerbacker]

was a terrorist orchestrated prison break there once, and theoretically, it could happen again. MAYBE we LET that break happen, then gun down all 245 of them--thereby solving the problem

you definitely get points for thinking outside the box.

come to think of it, the OBVIOUS solution to GITMO is to ship the bastards to Afghanistan for a more rustic internment experience. But that won't happen, it would draw too much attention to the far worse condition there.

I don't like the willfull dishonesty of this cave-in to world-wide opinion. The pretending to be chastened. But we need to be a little humble and wonder if it won't work out to be a smart choice that brings benefits.

World-wide opinion matters a great deal. Gulf War I went smoothly because we had amazing international cooperation. In Gulf War II, MANY Iraqi and American lives were lost because of the long-term consequences of our ally Turkey working against us. The U.S. needs allies.

Harlan, what you see as thinking outside the box I see as merely reflecting the normal viewpoints of normal people.

It could and should be done--the shipping off to Afghanistan--without public knowledge. There again, that would be the Bush way--Obama has his damn transparency thing--SELECTIVE transparency, only when it harms America.

I HATE the idea of caving to world opinion a thousand times as much as you. We are the United States of America, the dominant military force in the world, and the ONLY force for good in the world--and WE should care what the assholic cowards of Europe or the embracers of EVIL in the Muslim world or the just plain irrelevant third worlders think? Give me a break!

As for your little flawed comparison of the Gulf Wars, the military portion in BOTH cases went incredibly smooth--perhaps you recall the smooth sailing to and through the fall of Baghdad, even well after--the capture of Saddam, etc. Things only turned to shit when al Qaeda made a supreme effort to stir up sectarian violence--starting with bombing that Shi'ite mosque--and as I have stated repeatedly, doing that probably diminished al Qaeda's ability to hit us at home. Perhaps you also recall after the first Gulf War the ill-fated UN mission in Iraq--what happens when we leave things to shitheads from foreign countries to manage. Perhaps you also recall that Afghanistan was just fine for years until we turned over a lot of the responsibility to NATO--the worthless Euro-trash. Then things deteriorated to the point where now 20,000 additional Americans are going back to set things right.

Time was lost, not lives due to the treachery of the Turks in the second Gulf War. The 82nd Airborne secured the northern oil facilities and the al Qaeda training camp early on--the main mission the troops coming in from Turkey would have had.

We need allies? Bullshit! The trash "allies" need us!

Without the protection of America, the whole civilized world would have fallen prey to the forces of evil a long time ago--Nazism, Communism, radical Islam--tell me that isn't 100% true.

[mraynrand]

We need allies? Bullshit! The trash "allies" need us!

Without the protection of America, the whole civilized world would have fallen prey to the forces of evil a long time ago--Nazism, Communism, radical Islam--tell me that isn't 100% true.

That's dead-on balls right.

[Freak Out]

We need allies? Bullshit! The trash "allies" need us!

Without the protection of America, the whole civilized world would have fallen prey to the forces of evil a long time ago--Nazism, Communism, radical Islam--tell me that isn't 100% true.

That's dead-on balls right.

We need each other.

[arcilite]

To say we don't need allies is foolish. Of course we need allies.

It is a global economy and we depend on other countries and can not afford to be isolationists.

[mraynrand]

To say we don't need allies is foolish. Of course we need allies.

It is a global economy and we depend on other countries and can not afford to be isolationists.

If we were isolationists, they wouldn't exist as they are today. In some ways, you could make the argument that it's a bad thing - for example, old Europe doesn't protect itself much anymore.

[bobblehead]

We need allies? Bullshit! The trash "allies" need us!

Without the protection of America, the whole civilized world would have fallen prey to the forces of evil a long time ago--Nazism, Communism, radical Islam--tell me that isn't 100% true.

That's dead-on balls right.

We need each other.

Yes, if they didn't steal our medical advances and technologies they couldn't put up a National Health Care program that libs here could use to prove how terrible it is in america.

[texaspackerbacker]

And What exactly do we need from THEM--whoever the hell THEM might be--that we couldn't just take, if we were of a mind to? But no, for better or worse, we handicap ourselves in dealing with THEM--whether the THEM is enemies or "allies".

I have spoken in the past of nuclear intimidation. Sure, it won't ever happen, because we are GOOD--the GOOD that America-hating leftists deny exists--along with the other half of GOOD VERSUS EVIL. If we were--as I said--of a mind to, we could dominate as no empire in human history ever has. For whatever reason, God has seen fit not to empower those of us in this country who would exercise our power. Oh well, it's the world's loss that America doesn't dominate and rid the world of evil. I guess God reserves that for Himself.

You know what I don't understand? How could atheists--which I would assume statistically, the great majority of America-hating leftists are--not insist that America use its might to dominate the world? Why? Either to do good--because God doesn't exist for us to count on Him, or because without God, there is no good and evil, only possess or not possess--take your pick.

[Kiwon]

Apparently, Mr. al-Ajmi was not "tortured" enough with rice pilaf and glazed chicken at Gitmo to change his worldview.

.................................................. .................................

As President Obama pushes for the closure of Guantanamo Bay prison, the debate over where to house the terror detainees being held there is heating up.

An exclusive video of a former Gitmo detainee's martyrdom tape, obtained by FOX News, is a reminder of the concerns that terror suspects — who have been held but released from Guantanamo Bay — are increasingly returning to the fight against the United States and its allies.

Abdallah Ali al-Ajmi was transferred back to his home country of Kuwait after his release from Guantanamo in 2005. Last April he blew himself up in a homicide attack that killed 12 people in Mosul, Iraq.

Al-Ajmi, known in Guantanamo as Detainee 220, made his martyrdom tape before the attack.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,483764,00.html

[Freak Out]

No quarter.