Submit your comments on this article | ||
Europe | ||
EU fails to offer alternatives to Guantanamo | ||
2007-06-08 | ||
![]()
He also said that the US was taking steps aimed at closing down Guantanamo by prosecuting terror suspects and by trying to return others back to their home countries. But for the final closure of the camp, ‘the premise to that is that we could snap our fingers and it could be closed down tomorrow and everyone would go back to their countries,’ Bellinger said. However, there were countries ‘willing to take their nationals back, but unwilling to give us human rights assurances,’ he said, adding that the US was currently negotiating rights guarantees for the resettlement of 80 Guantanamo detainees.
| ||
Posted by:Steve White |
#18 How to empty Gitmo: 1) chum the bay 2) set up the catapult 3) start flinging |
Posted by: mojo 2007-06-08 15:11 |
#17 We gotta have some place where we can water board 'em and fit their heads for panties. |
Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305 2007-06-08 14:50 |
#16 Personally, I think they should all be transferred to Martha's Vineyard. |
Posted by: ed 2007-06-08 14:08 |
#15 If No Guantanamo -- then taking no prisoners. Phrased as a conditional statement, your position makes perfect sense, twobyfour. However, JohnQC, has the global view that suits me best. They hate the U.S.A. and they hate Europe. They want to kill us. They consider us inferior to them. Let's stop pussyfooting around and give them some real reason to hate us if there are any of them left. Give them money are they grateful? No, they're spiteful and they're hateful ... |
Posted by: Zenster 2007-06-08 13:57 |
#14 JohnQC: They seem to prefer hating us close up. We need Muslim immigrants like we need the AIDS virus. |
Posted by: McZoid 2007-06-08 12:00 |
#13 They hate the U.S.A. and they hate Europe. They want to kill us. They consider us inferior to them. Let's stop pussyfooting around and give them some real reason to hate us if there are any of them left. |
Posted by: JohnQC 2007-06-08 11:04 |
#12 As I understand it, there are some human sized industrial shredders available in Iraq. They haven't been used much lately. |
Posted by: Rambler 2007-06-08 10:37 |
#11 I say we house the Gitmo Gang in the Eurocrat's personal homes. Right next to their young daughters. |
Posted by: DarthVader 2007-06-08 09:25 |
#10 How about a big, giant blender? Maybe Krupps or Gagganau can build it? |
Posted by: tu3031 2007-06-08 08:26 |
#9 Check out this typical Muslim opinion on the terrorist animals: http://www.albawabaforums.com/read.php3?f=3&i=229179&t=229179 |
Posted by: McZoid 2007-06-08 08:18 |
#8 There is little or no reportage of the efforts of every home country of the Gitmo terrorists, to pressure for defeat of justice. Muslims view enemy combatants in Afghanistan as jihadi champions. The only issue for Muslims, is: who should they attack? Most want all jihad activity directed at Israel, until the Muslim ummah has enough fire power to force final jihad on the disbeliever enemy. We should have launched total war against jihadism, on Sept. 12, 2001. |
Posted by: McZoid 2007-06-08 08:13 |
#7 They'd prefer us to simply let them go. It seems to me that criminals in europe get 5 years for truly heinous crimes, we have inmates going on 5 years in Gitmo. They feel sorry for them and feel that their debt to us is paid. They don't want them transfered anywhere, they just want them turned loose. |
Posted by: Elmineng de Medici7641 2007-06-08 07:56 |
#6 I think you are missing the point. Detainees remain in Gitmo, because it is the most humanitarian alternative available. The Euros aren't nuts enough (yet) to offer asylum and resettlement to these 'gentlemen'. |
Posted by: phil_b 2007-06-08 05:30 |
#5 Zen, I sometimes write in shorthand... If No Guantanamo -- then taking no prisoners. From that follows that political niveau wouldn't be conductive to proper interrogation under auspices of military with all sorts of nosy oversighters around grinden their axen. IOW, necessity is sometimes a mother of outsourcing (location, location, location). I know it is being done on ocassion, but not well enough if we know about it. |
Posted by: twobyfour 2007-06-08 05:24 |
#4 While I largely agree with you twobyfour, there will always be high value prisoners that we will want taken alive. Yes, our ROE should be a lot more lethal if we want to make the gains that are so badly needed. I feel inclined to dispute whether we should farm out interrogation. Our military forms a closed chain of evidence. A mole in such a private operation could do devastating damage. We've already had military ops penetrated at Gitmo, so I'm inclined to trust our soldiers on this one. Yes, they deserve a lot more latitude with interrogation methods being used, but they should have the front row seats. |
Posted by: Zenster 2007-06-08 04:45 |
#3 Actually, Zen, I would favor another approach: No Guantanamo--taking no prisoners. Would also hire some private off shore security outlet, quietly, to take a care of perchance captured prisoners that need to be squeezed through juicer for intel purposes. |
Posted by: twobyfour 2007-06-08 03:57 |
#2 EU fails to offer alternatives to Guantanamo Perish the thought that a total absence of viable suggestions might constrain the Europeans' criticism for even a moment. He also said that the US was taking steps aimed at closing down Guantanamo by prosecuting terror suspects and by trying to return others back to their home countries. HUGE MISTAKE. Unless there are plans in the works to glass over the entire MME (Muslim Middle East), then there is still a massive customer base waiting their turn for some TLC Guantanamo-style. It is vital to America's security that we maintain a confinement facility offshore from the continental United States. Considering Washington's current spate of flaccidity, the MME conflict has many years to play out, that is, barring some unexpected Islamic blitzkreig. It would pose a massive risk to have high value Islamic terrorists held anywhere on shore. There is an added bonus to Guantanamo as well. It has earned a well-deserved reputation for being a hell hole of captivity. The prospect of ending up there, if not ending one's life there must surely have at least a remotely disincentive effect upon prospective jihadis. Guantanamo is far too valuable to the Global War on Terrorism to even consider closing it down. Until we begin to kill jihadists in the six-figures per year (or, preferably, Islam's clerical elite), there will be a need for this vital facility. |
Posted by: Zenster 2007-06-08 01:08 |
#1 'no easy alternativesÂ’ to the controversial prison camp. Yes there is; implement a 'Take No Prisoners' ROE and then provide tall stools, short ropes and 24/7 Elton John piped into the cells; the problem will go away. |
Posted by: USN, ret. 2007-06-08 00:34 |