White House: We Can Keep You At Gitmo "For 100 Years" With No Trial

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Southern Guardian


Actually the Guantanamo Bay (GITMO) prison isn't the only place. Terrorists can be held 100 years anywhere America chooses to, and is allowed to.

As enemy combatants.
You are correct.

a reply to: highvein

No where.

Exactly. Moving on.

Wasn't one of Obama's campaign promises the closing of Gitmo? Why yes SG, I believe it was.

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: Dr UAE

could you remind me who took it upon him self to shut down this place and was one of his promises to the people in his campaign

Where in the OP did I claim he promised to close it? Just because Trump campaigned to load the place up with 'bad guys' (I recall him specifically saying this) doesn't make it right or justifiable. It's apparent you have no issue with people being held there without trial or hearing indefinately. It's A-Ok!

I do believe that was not the Trump Admin. That was the Obama executive order that did away with Habeas Corpus for droning US citizens anywhere in the world without due process.

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: Lumenari

They are enemy combatants.

Oh really? Which courts ruled that they were guilty of the charges laid upon them? Is this not the point of the OP?

Most Guantanamo detainees are innocent: ex-Bush official

There's something called innocent until proven guilty sweetheart. I'm sure you've heard of it.

Innocent until proven guilty is a part of our legal system, of course. It is also not in our Constitution.

It also does not apply to enemy combatants.

The Geneva convention is something you can bring up, of course.

Which applies to lawful combatants.

There is no court needed to levy charges on them because they are enemy combatants.

Told you that you didn't understand the word.

Enemy Combatant

Captured fighter in a war who is not entitled to prisoner of war status because he or she does not meet the definition of a lawful combatant as established by the geneva convention; a saboteur.

So they have no rights, either by our Constitution, our laws or under the Geneva convention.

They should be happy to be alive, because by law we can kill them in battle and keep going.

Hope that helps your misconceptions on reality, sweety.

a reply to: Lumenari

Many detainees locked up in Guantanamo Bay were innocent men swept up by U.S. forces unable to distinguish enemies from noncombatants, a former Bush administration official said Thursday.

"There are still innocent people there," Republican Lawrence B. Wilkerson, former chief of staff to then-secretary of state Colin Powell, told the Associated Press.

Source

And I ask you again, what are they guilty of if they have not faced a fair trial? Given the above as well?

This is America sweety, not North Korea. We're better than that and I'm sure you can be too. Being on a different side of this issure will to compromise your ideology I assure you!.

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: highvein

Yeah. Don't you wish Obama would have closed it now, when he had Congress? That should tell you something.

I wished it was closed under Obama, I wished it was closed under Bush, yet it remains. I never gave a pass to any of those administrations and just because they continued it doesn't justify it's use to this day.

Are you fine with holding people in detention, in holding, without trial or defense for the rest of their lives?

If they were captured in the field, using women and children as shields and mules, and not covered under the Geneva conventions, yup.

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: Lumenari

Many detainees locked up in Guantanamo Bay were innocent men swept up by U.S. forces unable to distinguish enemies from noncombatants, a former Bush administration official said Thursday.

"There are still innocent people there," Republican Lawrence B. Wilkerson, former chief of staff to then-secretary of state Colin Powell, told the Associated Press.

Source

And I ask you again, what are they guilty of if they have not faced a fair trial? Given the above as well?

This is America sweety, not North Korea. We're better than that and I'm sure you can be too. Being on a different side of this issure will to compromise your ideology I assure you!.

many of the 48 remaining had been released and were caught again trying to blow people up. most are from yemen and pakistan because thse governments refuse to take responsibility for them. So you have a problem you release them and they try to kill people like the guy that was arrested after release trying to plot a terrorist attack on London. These people are terrorists and bomb makers who market their skills to terrorists.

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
held, jailed, without trial? Without a proper defense? for the rest of your life.

The USA can NEVER call itself land of the free providing this monstrosity stands.

And before some derp for brain comes along and says "they are just terrorist derp derp derp" I will ask them to look at the dozen or so cases when the Central LACK of intelligence agency picked up the wrong people in mistaken identity accidents.

It’s a dirty war as most are. When extracting info from a captive Gitmo is a very powerful tool to use in the interview process. As in, Work with me or I’ll send you to Gitmo for a Hundred years. It’s not an idle threat, and it gets results.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

Last I checked we are still at war with terrorists. Detention without charges during a war and dealing with enemy prisoners is allowed.

Seems the usual suspects forgot just exactly who it was that gave the world the NDAA.

WASHINGTON – President Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) into law today. The statute contains a sweeping worldwide indefinite detention provision.

www.aclu.org...

Bad Trump!

Bad,Bad, BAD!

I could care less about terrorists, but with the NDAA provision and places like Gitmo how long till we start seeing American citizens in these locations?

After the passion of the moment I grew to dislike the entire situation, trump is in the catbird seat now so when he keeps it in play it will be his fault as well.

Truthfully its the fault of congress, but we know republican or democrat they do not give back authority they have taken.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Southern Guardian

Last I checked we are still at war with terrorists. Detention without charges during a war and dealing with enemy prisoners is allowed.

Oh you mean that war that allows america to invade whatever country it decides has terrorists with impunity, overthrow those country's governments and instate proxy governments that help further American military and business interests and have left a large chunk of the world destabilized.

Hmmm that war that really if anything just seems to have increased terrorism in the world drastically

warontherocks.com...



That war where the people fighting the 'terrorists' use remote drones and guided weapons to kill people from hundreds of miles away from the comfort of their armchairs.

www.npr.org...

The war where the 'good guys' have no problem slaughtering civilians or the press in their war on terror.

a reply to: dug88

Last I checked we are still at war with terrorists. Detention without charges during a war and dealing with enemy prisoners is allowed.

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
I wished it was closed under Obama, I wished it was closed under Bush, yet it remains. I never gave a pass to any of those administrations and just because they continued it doesn't justify it's use to this day.

I believe you are being sincere that you dont think this is simply a Trump issue and that a few different administrations/Congresses are responsible and that neither the GOP or DNC has been able, or wanted, to change it... Plenty of complicaity to go around.

So let's take the conversation past that petty point.

In detail what is your argument that the happenings at GITMO are wrong?

Why do you think your opinion of GITMO is more valid than that of the GOP and DNC leaders who keep it going?

If indeed your opinion is more valid than theirs; how would you over come the logistical problems closing GITMO would cause?

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: Lumenari

They are enemy combatants.

Oh really? Which courts ruled that they were guilty of the charges laid upon them? Is this not the point of the OP?

Most Guantanamo detainees are innocent: ex-Bush official

There's something called innocent until proven guilty sweetheart. I'm sure you've heard of it.

Innocent until proven guilty?

Tell that to anyone who has had their life ruined because some psycho chick decided to jump on the "MeToo" bandwagon.

Ahhh...

The smell of desperation early in the morning is priceless.

Yup. Gitmo.

That's where your friends are going to pretty soon.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: dug88

Last I checked we are still at war with terrorists. Detention without charges during a war and dealing with enemy prisoners is allowed.

And when the Central LACK of intelligence agency picks someone up by mistake? What then? Because that has happened.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

Have you even served in the infantry?! Clearly you don’t know what you’re talking about. Out on patrols we go into compounds that we are taking rounds from and whoever isn’t killed upon entry, or already dead, gets grabbed. That’s what happens. If they toss their ak away from them before we get in the room and they surrender we still have to grab them. You don’t get to GITMO unless you are POS and our guys think your worth the time to take there.