You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Home Front: WoT
Obama: Guantanamo must close
2013-04-30
President Obama said Tuesday he doesn't want suspected terrorists on a hunger strike at the Guantanamo Bay to die, and he vowed to redouble his efforts to close the detention center in Cuba.

"I don't want these individuals to die," Mr. Obama said at a press conference at the White House. "Obviously, the Pentagon is trying to manage the situation as best as they can. All of us should reflect on why exactly are we doing this. Why are we doing this?"

He decried the U.S. policy of holding the suspects without trial "in a no-man's land" in perpetuity.

"That is contrary to who we are, it is contrary to our interests, and it needs to stop," the president said.
Aren't you the man to stop it? Didn't you say you would?
Many of the more than 100 detainees at Guantanamo have been refusing food for weeks, protesting conditions there and their prolonged detention. Mr. Obama campaigned on a pledge in 2008 to close the facility, but Congress has resisted his efforts, with many lawmakers uneasy about bringing the suspects to be tried and imprisoned in the mainland United States.

"I continue to believe that we've got to close Guantanamo," Mr. Obama said. "Guantanamo is not necessary to keep America safe, it is expensive, it is inefficient, it hurts us in terms of our international standing. It is a recruitment tool for extremists. It needs to be closed."

He said he is "going to go back at this" issue with Congress. The president said the U.S. has tried and convicted other terrorism suspects on U.S. soil without incident, and they are serving long terms in federal prisons.
Posted by:tipper

#15  Obozo is using the passive voice here, like he is still a senator or some outside advocate or agitator, and not the man in charge. He does that when he's just pandering to his base.

A useful insight, RandomJD. :-)
Posted by: trailing wife   2013-04-30 23:44  

#14  Suggesting a parachute drop (we're human) in the Rub al Khali. The prophet will guide them to Mecca from there.
Posted by: European Conservative   2013-04-30 22:04  

#13  tipper, I meant what was the downside of these clowns facing certain death if they returned to their home countries. I say give 'em a free ride.
Posted by: Barbara   2013-04-30 21:45  

#12  tipper, I believe this dilemma is why Obozo's initial attempts to close Gitmo during his first term fizzled out. Nowhere else to put them. Home countries don't want them back, but relocating them to US soil would cause a political/PR shitstorm. Apparently the feds were pretty close to buying a vacant prison in rural Illinois, but that fell through. Locals were very relieved.

Obozo is using the passive voice here, like he is still a senator or some outside advocate or agitator, and not the man in charge. He does that when he's just pandering to his base. They'll still worship him for his empty words and meaningless gestures, but he's stuck. He may not have to run for re-election, but congressional Democrats do. Nothing will change.
Posted by: RandomJD   2013-04-30 20:02  

#11  What's the downside, tipper?
Barbara, the downside is that Obama will go all "humanitarian and compassionate" and allow them to settle in the US instead perhaps becoming your new neighbor.
Just think of the fun it will be playing "dodge the bomb" and kill the kuffar with them.
Posted by: tipper   2013-04-30 19:24  

#10  No one truly wants to see Baby Assad deposed, no one truly wants to see Gitmo closed, everyone knows the outcvome or solution to same is potens mucho worse than the original problem, THUS OF COURSE WE hve have Have HaVe HAVE H-A-V-E
HHHAAAAAVVVVEEEEEE, D **** YOU, TO DO IT!

WHUT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG!?
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2013-04-30 19:20  

#9  "And where will the inmates go? A lot of them face certain death if they return to their own countries."

What's the downside, tipper?
Posted by: Barbara   2013-04-30 18:43  

#8  Chumming the water? ;^)

Heck I bet a lot of sports fishermen would be willing to go out and chum the waters around the leaky boat for free - won't cost a dime of Taxpayer money.
Posted by: CrazyFool   2013-04-30 17:05  

#7  And where will the inmates go? A lot of them face certain death if they return to their own countries. Maybe Obama could give them refuge in the US, say Boston.
Posted by: tipper   2013-04-30 16:35  

#6  Boston shows that America is safe to close the AlQ POW camp.
Posted by: Bright Pebbles   2013-04-30 15:41  

#5  Combine airandee and Barbara.

Release them all in a small leaky boat with only a gallon of gas. Hey, can't pay for maintenance or gas with the sequester in place.


Chumming the water? ;^)
Posted by: AlanC   2013-04-30 15:30  

#4  I hear there are some hungry sharks in the waters off Cuba. Just sayin'....
Posted by: Barbara   2013-04-30 14:57  

#3  Hang them all and close it down. Blame it on the sequestor.
Posted by: airandee   2013-04-30 14:33  

#2  SQUIRREL!!!!!
Posted by: AlanC   2013-04-30 14:29  

#1  It's been 5 years , what political panic causes this to be Broadcast NOW?
Obama CAN'T be re-elected, Again.
Posted by: Redneck Jim   2013-04-30 13:23  

00:00