Closing Guantanamo Bay: Uh, How Is This Going To Transpire?

[Richard_Parker]

@ElvisL1ves

Early skirmishing, still no trial other than the kangaroo type, so not yet the case although it’s in the right direction. But thanks for the link anyway.

No, that’s still incorrect.

First, the case directly contradicts your claim about the ownership status of Gitmo affecting the reach of American law. Second, detainees have been released by normal Article III courts under the habeas corpus hearings guaranteed by that case.

[vison]

@ElvisL1ves

Right, just the prison camp itself.

Since you mention it, the US has never claimed the land as its own anyway, so it can’t give it back - it’s still Cuban territory, on lease. That little fact very conveniently puts anyone held there beyond the reach of any law other than US executive say-so.

The US goes through the annual charade of sending a rent check to Havana via an intermediary, and Havana annually rejects it on the ground that they refused to extend the lease long ago and the US is now squatting there.

I thought it was illegal for Americans to do business with Cuba.
Omar Khadr is a Canadian who was captured in Afghanistan when he was 15 years old, has been accused of being a “war criminal” and has been in Gitmo for 7 years. How the hell can a 15 year old boy, no matter what family he belongs to, be charged with “war crimes”?

This whole thing stinks and has stunk for so long it’s a wonder we can’t smell it here in BC.

Try them or release them.

[BwanaBob]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

My answer to the OP is that if there’s any evidence to try them for anything, they should be tried under normal criminal proceedings (with their time at Guantanamo accredited as time served if they’re convicted), if not, they should be returned to their home countries or the countries of their choice. If their home countries won’t take them, they should be given asylum in the US. They should also receive reparations and formal apologies.

I think they should be returned to the country where they were apprehended (if “innocent”).

[ElvisL1ves]

@vison

How the hell can a 15 year old boy, no matter what family he belongs to, be charged with “war crimes”?

Khadr is specifically charged with throwing a grenade that killed an American soldier. If that’s true, then he’s a murderer however you look at it, even per the International Criminal Court definition of war crimes (no, the US is not a signatory, but ftr Canada is). The fuller story.

The problem is how to charge and try him in a way that meets conventional standards of civilization. But why are US (or, for that matter, Afghan) criminal courts not suited to the task? Hamlet?

[flickster]

So, after the Senate vote of 90-6 to kill the funding for closing Guantanamo Bay…what’s the Administrations next move?
Was this a vote orchestrated by the Administration to give the President an out (at least while workable plans are ironed out)? As in, “Well I tried, I carried through with my promise to close it, but the evil old Senate wouldn’t let me”

[Der_Trihs]

@flickster

So, after the Senate vote of 90-6 to kill the funding for closing Guantanamo Bay…what’s the Administrations next move?

What Democrats always do; cave in to the Republicans.

@flickster

Was this a vote orchestrated by the Administration to give the President an out (at least while workable plans are ironed out)? As in, “Well I tried, I carried through with my promise to close it, but the evil old Senate wouldn’t let me”

I expect it’s the combination of a President addicted to attempting to compromise with his enemies the Republicans ( who DON’T compromise ), and the Democratic terror of being called soft.

[flickster]

There is no need to compromise with the Republicans, the Administration does not needs their votes in order to pass anything (at least for another 18 months).

[Der_Trihs]

@flickster

There is no need to compromise with the Republicans, the Administration does not needs their votes in order to pass anything (at least for another 18 months).

No, there’s no need. But Obama will try anyway. The Republicans know that if they are rigid enough that Obama will “compromise” with them; since they don’t move their own positions that’s effectively a cave in by Obama and the Democrats.

[Krumhorn]

@Der_Trihs

No, there’s no need. But Obama will try anyway. The Republicans know that if they are rigid enough that Obama will “compromise” with them; since they don’t move their own positions that’s effectively a cave in by Obama and the Democrats.

I must have missed the part where he has ever made any attempt at working with the Republicans. What I think is desired is that the Republicans just roll over and go along with the program. That would make nice little Republican puppies out of them and give the libruls plenty of political cover for policies that the American people aren’t going to like very much.

Isn’t that a more fair assessment?

…

[Der_Trihs]

@Krumhorn

I must have missed the part where he has ever made any attempt at working with the Republicans.

From the beginning. From before the beginning, with inviting a homophobe to make a speech at his inauguration.

@Krumhorn

What I think is desired is that the Republicans just roll over and go along with the program. That would make nice little Republican puppies out of them and give the libruls plenty of political cover for policies that the American people aren’t going to like very much.

Isn’t that a more fair assessment?

No, it’s not. Obama is a compromiser who can’t seem to grasp that the majority of the Republicans are his implacable enemies.

[flickster]

Funny…

According to most conservatives, GW’s insistence on trying to “reach across the isle” and work with the Dems was one of the traits that pissed us off so much at him.