One of the first promises broken by Obama was to close GTMO where we keep all of the bad guys. He seems to think that if he can get the number of inmates to 100 he can move them to Illinois where he already has a crony deal set up for hundreds of millions of dollars but I believe that there are still 138 inmates. Of course he did send one hardened terrorist to Kuwait this last week. Even his own review board said that this guy was no good....but that was the last review board. This new review board is made up of defense attorney's who defend terrorists so they said nothing.
Why do we even have GTMO? First it was kind of a legal dodge about it not being the United States and all. They can do things that they can't legally do in the US. That is kind of thin though. The other thing is that they have a built in guard force and isolation. A relatively small piece of land surrounding by barb wire and mines....nice place to keep bad guys.
We keep killing terrorist leaders instead of capturing them and we arrest our own homegrown terrorists and put them in prison where a lot of radical muslims are coming from so Obama is not using GTMO.
What do you think? Should we keep GTMO (the Cubans will shoot any escapees pretty damn quick) or close it and transfer the population to Illinois where the civilian guards and their families become targets to terrorism?
- JD Barleycorn
- 11-09-2014, 12:22 AM
- CuteOldGuy
- 11-09-2014, 01:41 AM
We should charge them or release them. I think it should be in a military court, not civilian. This is not a civilian matter, and ought not be subject to civilian rules. However, an independent military panel should review the evidence against them, and make appropriate recommendations.
- pyramider
- 11-09-2014, 06:44 AM
They should let all of the turds swim for it.
- LexusLover
- 11-09-2014, 09:29 AM