Senator Cotton absolutely blew up the liberal myth that Muslim terrorists attack us because of Guantanamo Bay. Finally a Senator with some badass attitude. He earned it too, because he is a Vet who served in Iraq.

Video here

Quote:SEN.TOM COTTON (R-ARKANSAS): OK, now I want to explore the so-called risk balance between recidivism of released terrorists and the propaganda value that terrorists get from Guantanamo Bay. How many recidivists are there at Guantanamo Bay right now?

BRIAN MCKEON, DEPUTY UNDERSECRETARY FOR DEFENSE POLICY: I'm not sure I follow the question, there are --

TOM COTTON: How many inmates at Guantanamo Bay are engaged in terrorism or anti-American incitement?

BRIAN MCKEON: There are none--

TOM COTTON: Because they are detained. They can only engage in that kind of recidivism overseas.

Now let's look at the propaganda value: How many detainees were at Guantanamo Bay on September 11, 2001?

BRIAN MCKEON: None.

TOM COTTON: How many were therein October 2000, when al-Qaeda bombed the U.S.S. Cole?

BRIAN MCKEON: Zero.

TOM COTTON: What about in 1998 when they bombed the embassies [in Kenya and Tanzania]?

BRIAN MCKEON: The facility was not open before 2002, Senator.

TOM COTTON: What about 1993 and the first World Trade Center bombing?

BRIAN MCKEON: Same answer.

TOM COTTON: And 1979 when Iran took over our embassy? Or 1983 when Hezbollah bombed our Marine Baracks in Lebanon? The answer is zero.

BRIAN MCKEON: Correct.

TOM COTTON: Islamic terrorists do not need an excuse to attack the United States, to attack us is what they do, they attack us for what we are.

It is not your decision. It is a political promise the president made on his campaign. To say [closing the base] is a security decision based propaganda value that our enemies get from it is a pretext to justify a political decision.

In my opinion the only problem with Guantanamo Bay is there are too many empty beds and cells there right now. We should be sending more terrorists there for further interrogation to keep this country safe. As far as I'm concerned every last one of them can rot in Hell, but as long as they don't do that they can rot in Guantanamo Bay.

The only problem with Gitmo is that those people are there alive instead of dead and buried.

(02-05-2015 10:07 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The only problem with Gitmo is that those people are there alive instead of dead and buried.

If there were more American deserters, we could empty out Gitmo.

Arresting and holding these people created a problem with no out. It's the legacy of some of the short-sighted **** the Bush admin. did.

(02-05-2015 10:51 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Arresting and holding these people created a problem with no out. It's the legacy of some of the short-sighted **** the Bush admin. did.

Wrong.

(02-05-2015 10:59 PM)EagleRockCafe Wrote:  

(02-05-2015 10:51 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Arresting and holding these people created a problem with no out. It's the legacy of some of the short-sighted **** the Bush admin. did.

Wrong.

As if you would know

As it stand we have them and can't let them go and can't do anything with them.

(02-05-2015 10:51 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Arresting and holding these people created a problem with no out. It's the legacy of some of the short-sighted **** the Bush admin. did.

Arresting is not really the proper term. They were prisoners of war, not criminal suspects/detainees, except that we never had a declared war, just congressional authorizations. That's sufficient to make it not an "illegal war," but muddies the legal waters quite a bit. As prisoners of war, holding them until the war is over would be entirely justified under international law.

To the extent that the war on terror has been treated as a law enforcement action, that is another major mistake.

And extending Geneva Conventions rights and privileges unilaterally was another major mistake. Those people have no standing under the Geneva Conventions, and under international common law could be shot as spies. That's what should have happened.

(02-05-2015 11:04 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-05-2015 10:51 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Arresting and holding these people created a problem with no out. It's the legacy of some of the short-sighted **** the Bush admin. did.

Arresting is not really the proper term. They were prisoners of war, not criminal suspects/detainees, except that we never had a declared war, just congressional authorizations. That's sufficient to make it not an "illegal war," but muddies the legal waters quite a bit. As prisoners of war, holding them until the war is over would be entirely justified under international law.

To the extent that the war on terror has been treated as a law enforcement action, that is another major mistake.

And extending Geneva Conventions rights and privileges unilaterally was another major mistake. Those people have no standing under the Geneva Conventions, and under international common law could be shot as spies. That's what should have happened.

You can call it whatever you want. The entire operation is a legal quagmire.

Disposal is the problem. There isn't anything positive that can be done with these people. That's the short sighted part. Now, we just have them.

That's not a solid position to be in for a nation that prides itself on the rule of law.

(02-05-2015 11:00 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  As it stand we have them and can't let them go and can't do anything with them.

Take a small cage, a 5 gallon gas can, and a few matches and we can do something with them. Use them as charcoal while we smoke a pork shoulder.

Feed them to some feral hogs.

Dump them in the ocean where the Sharks live , see if They can swim back to Iraq and Afghanistan .