jump to last post 1-6 of 6 discussions (23 posts)

Close Gitmo , help eliminate the guilty complex of pacifists ?

  1. ahorseback profile image46
    ahorsebackposted 2 years ago

    Because America has never truly been attacked by an outsider in an all out war ,  the far left would have us believe that it can never happen .  What is it about a bunch of  defeated  terrorist  suspects in orange jump suits that bothers them so much ?  If  It's a guilt complex , can they ever get over it ?  Help us to  evolve the anti-violence   sub- culture to a more touchy , feely of  kind people that they want to be.

    Would changing the jump suit colors  help ?

    How about more television sets?

    Maybe  free Cuban cigars ?

    1. rhamson profile image75
      rhamsonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      How about the War of 1812. Burning down the White house is something you can't recollect? You also have the French and Indian Wars. What about Pearl Harbor? Of course there was 911 but that war was one of terrorism.

      The dilemma is not one of closing the prison down but more of how do the leaders of truth and justice in the world (us) deal with international criminals? With the torture and reckless liberties with their cases how do we put them on trial knowing that any court would acquit them merely on the human rights atrocities. Gitmo is an unsolvable nightmare for us.

      1. ahorseback profile image46
        ahorsebackposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        The problem I believe is that the rest of the  World  doesn't seem able, capable or willing to help with this war on  terror  ,it's  EVERYONE"S  war . so it's  everyone's prisoners , But hey , America can take the heat  ,right ?

        1. rhamson profile image75
          rhamsonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          The problem is that the rest of the world has a problem with our semantics and behavior on the topic. On the one hand we ask for help and when either offered alternative solutions or tact we go ahead and do what we want anyway. We bulldoze into situations much like Iraq without regard to the conditions we agree to in the first place. Then you have the CIA working whatever angle that changes the whole complexion of the problem. We are not very reliable when dealing with common enemies.

  2. ahorseback profile image46
    ahorsebackposted 2 years ago

    We bulldozed into Iraq because of the phony intel of our  supposed allies ,  we take the lead as we should  in almost all  military , economic and  diplomatic situations to quell the implosion of this region of the world , WE spend our treasures while the rest of the free world sits on its asses and cries foul ,   WMD's  include  some thing's being used still in Iraq  according to intell -  ammonia  gas instead of    for  "nerve or mustard  gas " for instance .  , you won't hear that in the liberal media though ,   ISIL , ISIS  , ISAL  ,  should all be destroyed from the air at this point . 

    Of course it's all America's fault though , Right !

    1. rhamson profile image75
      rhamsonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Who cares about the liberal media when the facts show that there was no evidence to invade Iraq. Instead of removing a dictator we suspected of developing WMD's. We removed the only controlling government they had and created the conditions that now support ISIS or whatever other terrorist group of the day exists in Iraq. Hans Blix who was the chief UN investigator even stated as much.

      "Blix accused the US and British governments of dramatizing the threat of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, in order to strengthen the case for the 2003 war against the government of Saddam Hussein. Ultimately, no stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction were ever found."
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Blix

      Who WOULD you have me blame?

      1. wilderness profile image96
        wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        It's all another conspiracy then?  Our soldiers exposed and sickened from chemical weapons were actually sent to Area 51 and told to play with old gas canisters instead of finding them buried in Iraq?  Did Bush collaborate with the ETs to bury them there the same as he crawled all over the towers placing explosives?  Or did it never happen at all, no sick soldiers, just as Armstrong never walked on the moon?

        1. rhamson profile image75
          rhamsonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          We always knew the Gas was there. He used it on the Kurds. The problem was the nuclear threat that was thrown at us. They only found the following:

          50 deployed Al-Samoud 2 missiles
          Various equipment, including vehicles, engines and warheads, related to the AS2 missiles
          2 large propellant casting chambers
          14 155 mm shells filled with mustard gas, the mustard gas totaling approximately 49 litres and still at high purity
          Approximately 500 ml of thiodiglycol
          Some 122 mm chemical warheads
          Some chemical equipment
          224.6 kg of expired growth media

          Scott Ritter, a UN weapon's inspector stated, "There's no doubt Iraq hasn't fully complied with its disarmament obligations as set forth by the Security Council in its resolution. But on the other hand, since 1998 Iraq has been fundamentally disarmed: 90-95% of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction capacity has been verifiably eliminated ... We have to remember that this missing 5-10% doesn't necessarily constitute a threat ... It constitutes bits and pieces of a weapons program which in its totality doesn't amount to much, but which is still prohibited ... We can't give Iraq a clean bill of health, therefore we can't close the book on their weapons of mass destruction. But simultaneously, we can't reasonably talk about Iraqi non-compliance as representing a de-facto retention of a prohibited capacity worthy of war."

          I guess with your in for a penny in for a dollar mentality it is pertinent to Bush's allegations but hardly worth invading a country and throwing the region into more turmoil. I feel bad for the servicemen who had the mishap to stumble upon these sparsely concentrated weapons caches but with the no fly zone and restrictions in place in agreement after the war Saddam had very limited ability to use the weapons and what he did have was greatly degraded to less than WMD effective status.

          Good try but the alarmist and after the fact justifications don't wash. What does wash is Halliburton's country wide assuming of state industries and their management to sell oil on an international platform to China and other industrialized customers.

          1. wilderness profile image96
            wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Odd how WMD suddenly changed when it was found, from the gas we were looking for to nukes that we knew weren't there. 

            Anything to present a bad picture of the US, I guess.  When it turns out the information was right after all, we'll find some other reason to vilify the country and it's leaders.

            1. rhamson profile image75
              rhamsonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              And some will find reasons to justify criminal acts and escape the retribution.

              1. wilderness profile image96
                wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Or make up criminal acts when none existed...

                1. rhamson profile image75
                  rhamsonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  .....Or make up criminal acts when none existed...

                  Or make up criminal acts where none existed...

  3. innersmiff profile image78
    innersmiffposted 2 years ago

    Leftist pacifists don't have a monopoly on the closing Gitmo idea. Really, anybody who values due process, right to a speedy trial, etc. (you know, basic stuff one might value in 'The land of the free, home of the brave') should be in favour of immediate closure.

    1. ahorseback profile image46
      ahorsebackposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      But there you go ,These prisoners are not within the jurisdiction of our American  legal rights ! Read up on that !

      1. innersmiff profile image78
        innersmiffposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        I really don't care. I don't value American lives over any other.

        1. ahorseback profile image46
          ahorsebackposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Probably because of  your idealism ,   There has to be a point of  difference in the rights of any nationalized citizen compared to a soldier of another country in time of war !  That you see is the American way . Enjoy your freedoms .

          1. innersmiff profile image78
            innersmiffposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Does there?

    2. John Holden profile image60
      John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Hi Innersmiff, long time no speak.
      It's not often that I agree wholeheartedly with what you say but on this occasion you're bang on.

      1. innersmiff profile image78
        innersmiffposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Hello John, hoping you are well. It's important to find key points of agreement on important issues such as this.

  4. ahorseback profile image46
    ahorsebackposted 2 years ago

    In light of your  left's "group hug " strategy of dealing with  all conflict ? .......Yes !

  5. ahorseback profile image46
    ahorsebackposted 2 years ago

    It amazes me that so many of you  are so na├»ve  to think that because the terrorist suspects are at Gitmo , they deserve the same legal , civil  "rights "  as  those that you have .  No one outside of America is due  the same legal rights as a  US. citizen , AND my advice to you , don't go to the middle east  and break the law ,or anywhere for that matter,   and expect the same coddling that those accused of crimes get here !

    Speedy trials !  Ask someone  from the western world who's been arrested in Mexico ,   Istanbul ,  China ,  if they  got a speedy process ,  free legal representation , and  a free pass to the airport . Yet you wish this for  the terrorist enemies of the free world !  Blind  liberal or conservative  ideals   baffle me ,  You'd think you guys were educated  in Camelot . My advice , look at  the  rest of the worlds legal , civil rights , not just America's ! Guess what they aren't there !

    1. John Holden profile image60
      John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      The word you are overlooking is "suspect".
      Anti terrorism laws in both the USA and the UK are so loosely drawn that just about anything can now be considered an act of terrorism.
      If you think it fair that you should be locked up and the key thrown away for, for example, frequenting a shop that is owned by a suspected terrorist than you are quite adrift.

      You are confusing suspects with actual terrorists.

  6. ahorseback profile image46
    ahorsebackposted 2 years ago

    Unfortunately  for them John , someone engaging in  the financial   support of terrorism  is still a terrorist .     Remember G.W Bush saying , "those who support , harbor  , or otherwise  enable terrorism  are themselves the enemy of the free world  and will be dealt with accordingly " ?That   was a statement Americans had been waiting for  years !,......    And  so ,  law abiding citizenry  have no fears  in America , no chance whatsoever  of  our government  interfering  in their day to day prosperity ,  in fact  ,  we encourage  success by tax evading  through proper channels. and especially with political donations ,  however the minute  that one engages in financial  support of terror groups . Only then ,do  they deserve whatever punishment is metered out !

    In  America , one can say ANYTHING against our government ,  The minute that they DO something , is when  the line is  being crossed !  And , so be it !

 
working