*Guantanamo 2

To me it seems we have the choice between convicting someone who is almost certainly guilty, with the possibility of them being innocent or releasing them at which point they *could* go on to do major damage to our societies. On a purely pragmatic note, it would be best the base was closed with inmates inside.

My guess is that they will just start up this "Guantanamo 2" and name it something else and hope nobody notices. That way Obama stays true to his word and then people will just get what the media feeds them. And because the media (at least here in the US) loves Obama, they will spin it into something positive, and it will seem as though Obama did the greatest thing ever. (Maybe he should even get another Nobel Prize lol)

Unfortunately, it's become a royal flustercluck. I doubt that they're high level terrorists, or there'd be enough evidence to at least bring them to trial.

Due to the incredibly stupid policies of a previous administration, the American government has gotten itself into a catch-22. If those detainees weren't radicals before they were detained, they sure as hell will be now. About the only thing that it can do to even give the appearance of living up to principle is to release them into somewhere like Somalia where it's so chaotic, 50 more criminals running amok won't make much difference.

I'm pretty confident that they *are* all dangerous radicals though, are you honestly not?

Also your last comment is dangerously flawed. If you were to release high-profile radicals into Somalia you'd just end up radicalising many more people.

I'm sure that they are dangerous - now. I doubt that they were when they were first detained, or there would be enough evidence to bring to trial. As far as releasing them into Somalia - who are they going to radicalize? We're faced with four options - indefinite confinement for the rest of their lives without ever being charged; drumming up charges and convicting them in a kangaroo court to life in prison; having them all die "accidentally" or by "suicide" while their fates are being pondered; or finding somewhere to dump them. I'd rather go with option four, as being the least corrosive to our national moral fiber, if there is such a thing.

But dropping a load of extremists into an area already disenfranchised by the west?

brilliant!

I'm sure there are some small empty islands in some remote place they could be placed. Say one of the smaller Aleutian Islands. They would not even need guards and we could call it a *resettlement program*. Just drop off some supplies every few weeks.

Starting to sound like http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443473/ warsprite!

@Nostra: "somewhere to dump them" Unconvicted? What are you talking about?
Ok. So, if I don't happen to like your particular brand of politics and have no convincing evidence of your wrongdoing, I can still dump you on "one of the smaller Aleutian Islands" (warsprite)? No trial? No nothing? Come on!

Actually, the island and the airdrops sounds pretty cool. Can I come too?

@Nostra: "I'm sure that they are dangerous - now. I doubt that they were when they were first detained."
That is a very perceptive comment.

Fair enough. I have to say I have enough confidence in the national forces to believe they were dangerous when detained as well. Still, thats not the issue on discussion here.
Timur: what do you suggest doing?

@figle: I'd say let them go, if you don't have enough evidence to convict them. Show to the rest of the world your magnanimity and generosity of spirit.

. . . and your lack of fear/paranoia.

@figlesquidge There are a couple of other B grade movies with the same ideal. Got a few people stired up did not.

@ Timur Not dumped resettled. The choice of words is most important to be PC.

<cracks knuckles> Here we go.

Look, I'm assuming these guys have never worn a uniform in their lives and are illegal combatants, so they can rot in Gitmo for all anyone should care. If the ragheads start wearing uniforms and fight like men, then they can have all of the Geneva Convention protection they want.

@TMW: Your use of the word "raghead" just makes you seem like an ass.

@ wydend Your surprised?

a bit. I usually don't get into these forum discussions so I don't really know peoples personalities. I take it that TMW has quite a reputation then?

Oh yea. It's not that he is ultraconservative, but his statments like above even can get some conservative people irratated at him. A Beck wana be.

They should be freed.
And if not, US taken to the international war crimes tribunal... tho that wouldn't happen since the Americans have stacked that....
But seriously, anyone would confess to anything, given the tactics American soldiers and military use to gain info.

I find it funny to think that our government that is run so much on being politically correct would take prisoners and hold them indefinitely on no evidence. All you civilians who just believe your government is out to get you are idiots. If they are in Guantanamo, then they sure as hell deserved to be there. In fact, I'm pretty damned sure that they either deserved a short rope and a long fall or a blindfold and cigarette. I think we were doing them a favor by giving them 3 square meals a day, electricity, and allowing them to serve the religion, that they claimed gave them the right to try to kill us, openly.

"It's not that he is ultraconservative".
Correction: "It's not ONLY that he is ultraconservative"

As with many big debates I'm not quite sure what my actual view is, but I think that on balance I'm happy going on with the out of sight out of mind on this one. Sorry, but that's how it sits.

Pls... religion? pls- the Allies are JUST as bad, if not worse.
Especially since they claim not to allow religion to interfere, or BE the reason for the war in the Mid East.... and it's a joke.
See this link if you wish to be enlightened on just how slimy the US and its allies are when it comes to religion on the front line. Giving troops guns with biblical references on each one....
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,,26619807-952,00.html

They should also stay in Cuba. Do you really want this sort of a prison on actual American territory?

@ Invictus What's wrong with them being in the US proper? They are not going any place. When is the last time anyone has escaped from a Federal Maxium Security prison. If anyone is going to bomb us for holding them what difference does it make where they are. There is a town in Ill. that's asking for the prison.

"Obama said he'd close Guantanamo down, but how can he possibly do that without just starting up Guantamo 2?"

Right. The name and even the location of the prison is fairly irrelevant. Either way, you're going to have to have a place for terrorists to be incarcerated. Why not keep it on Communist soil and without a legal mess?

lol, especially when the US supposedly despises Communist regimes?
Sounds like the pot calling the kettle black to me!!