“Pansy side”? Again? How pathetic.
And I doubt that you are “surprised at the lack of outrage” since it’s a lack that exists only in your imagination.
What more do you expect, assassins? The “pansy side” is enraged and contemptuous towards Obama. Unlike the grovelers of the tough guy side that obsessively toadied to their chosen one Bush.
Three “pansy” references from the OP and we’re only on page 2. This is getting to be like Le Jacquelope and his obsession with balls.
No doubt the bed-wetting references are next.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I recall the wikileaks release showed that Obama had been actively trying to find places to send these people, even up to the point of trying to bribe other countries to take them.
It seems that Obama has put forth a good faith effort to keep his promise. I’m still disappointed that he didn’t get it done, but comparing him to Bush is ludicrous.
Yeah, that’s what I thought too when I saw this. Funny how desperate that looks, isn’t it?
Sort of reminds me of when people make a post like:
“Can you give an example of X?
<crickets>
HA! I thought not!”
as if somehow people can reply to the question before it’s even done being written, let alone submitted.
Oh, and if it makes the OP feel any better, consider me outraged. Well, as outraged as I can be when something I dislike greatly happens that doesn’t surprise me much.
Obama is still in my “disappointing friend” category and not in the “deadly enemy” column with the GOP, so he’ll likely still get my vote.
Oh, please. Pirating people into a country against the will of the established government isn’t the solution. Mullah Omar isn’t part of the Pakistan government.
Well, sorry to disappoint you. Like most of us said… we weren’t naive enough to think he’d be able to snap his fingers and make the world a better place.
So the Chinese Uyghurs who have been determined to be not enemy combatants , and whose detention Judge Ricardo Urbina declared as unlawful and ordered to set them free in the United States… We should send these men to Pakistan?
You really have judged them guilty haven’t you? A trial is just too inconvenient foe you hmmmm?
Projection. Republicans idealize and idolize their leaders, and cannot admit they do anything wrong. They then expect the same should be true of Democrats.
Now see here, Mr BedWetter-associator 
: There is a distinct lack of outrage, is there not?
From John Mace, e.g.:
“Politician promised to do something he can’t. News at 11.
Like most of us said… we weren’t naive enough to think he’d be able to snap his fingers and make the world a better place.”
As to taking offense at my “pansy” slur, may I suggest that I broadly divide the two extremes in US politics into the “Shoot first, and then see if there is any left to ask questions” gun-toting low-IQ goobers, and the “Let us not judge our fellow man; perhaps his terrorism and piracy are from a misspent youth or unfortunate circumstance” hand-wringing over-thinking pansies.
I’m all for ridiculing the right wing. It’s just not the target here. Perhaps the problem is that pansies don’t know how to express outrage or something. On this issue, John Mace being exhibit A for a pitiful response, they’ve just rolled over and lost their zeal. “News at 11,” indeed.
Some people call 'em like they see 'em. I call 'em as they are. Except the “bedwetting” thing. That was a joke in reference to Little Nemo’s complaint above. As a past bedwetter, I’m deeply hurt by the use of that clinical condition as a slur. I’m off to HR right now to report it.
Apparently, a trial for some of them is too inconvenient for Mr Obama. Which is the point you keep missing. As to where they should go: Perhaps they should stay at Gitmo, which is why Mr Obama should not have issued an executive order to close it within a year, or promised anything at all about it. On the other hand, if a Uyghur finds himself in a lawless area of Afghanistan or Pakhtunkwa, sure; I’d send him back to wherever I found him if I had taken the position that he can’t be at Gitmo, and we must give him due process. If that’s my position and I can’t give him due process, off he goes to wherever the jeep picked him up.
But of course I didn’t promise to close Gitmo nor give due process to warriors for any cause. I think I’m OK with indefinitely holding certain enemy combatants at Gitmo with occasional reviews. Not the point of this OP, obviously. The point of the OP is to wonder why there isn’t more outrage at Mr Obama over crapping out on what I thought was a fairly passionately-held marker for Change.
Gee-another “promise” by Obama broken?
Do you see a pattern here?:eek:
Yes. The right wing exclaiming “Broken Promises!” as every partisan has screeched since Washington was elected.
Sigh…see; I don’t think there is a good solution, although the parts of Pakistan where the Taliban hang out aren’t all that governed. Another story. I think I sorta lean to Gitmo and some sort of half-assed indefinite detention with occasional reviews and no real due process of the kind that would get you off. Cuz even if due process gets you off, if there was no where to go before, there’s still no where to go, right?
But–follow me here–: I did not promise to close Gitmo to the cheers and votes of my pansy-side friends sweeping me in to bring Change.
I am not debating my crappy solutions. I am wondering why there is so little outrage from the pansies at Mr Obama crapping out on his (more or less) ironclad guarantee to close Gitmo within a year.
Okay, now you’re just doing it to wind me up.
The question’s been answered. Why are you still wondering?
There’s nothing “pansy” about wanting to close Gitmo, btw. Most of us who wanted it closed, still do, and for good reason. We should never have done things that way in the first place.
If you want some outrage from liberals, wait until the next election. If we’re still fighting in Afghanistan then the way we are now, the shit is going to hit the fan.
Because for someone to self-declare as a liberal instantly and forever makes them a liar and a hypocrite, of course. But why do you even care? The outcome (keeping the Guantanamo prison open in perpetuity) apparently is what you want, so what difference does a lack of outrage by what you insist on calling ‘pansies’ make to you?
This. I don’t really give a shit about the prisoners. The ones that are left are generally going to be treated far worse by their own governments if they’re sent back then they are at Gitmo.
What irritates me is the hysteria of the people who don’t want Gitmo closed - and that includes the Democratic congresscritters who voted against the closure.
What the fuck do you think will happen if we stick them in regular American jails? That they’ll spread the message of radical Islam throughout the prison system? Hell, it might cure America’s drug problem.
The appropriations bill that prevents the DoD from transferring detainees into the US expires in a few months (Sep. 30). Write your representative and tell them that you are wholly against any restrictions that prevent Guantanamo detainees from being transferred to the US and/or tried in US federal courts. Be civil, but outraged. Get your friends to write, too. Get the whole board to write.
They will be shanked? Or they will be held in isolation…like they are now.
Technically speaking, I don’t have a representative. I’m not a US citizen. Plus, “my” congresscritter is one of the Tea Party freshmen.
Or you could vote in some more conservative goobers and give me a chance to make fun of them and their supporters for a bit. I really miss ridiculing Mr Bush and his various wars on things, be it terrists or the unedumacable left behind.