# Obama's New Policy on the "War on Terror" **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 24, 2013, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-new-policy-on-the-war-on-terror/659224 "2013-05-24T14:34:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2013, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-new-policy-on-the-war-on-terror/659224/61 "2013-05-28T23:39:08Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > Remind me again: when did the United States declare war and on who? In 2011. On Terror. An elusive enemy. The only way to defeat Terror is to track him to [the arctic Canadian cave he shares with Tooth Decay](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Pudding). ---
**Author:** ![Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aji_de_gallina/32/260_2.png) [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aji_de_Gallina)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2013, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-new-policy-on-the-war-on-terror/659224/62 "2013-05-28T23:51:13Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > But, in this case, how do we **tell** when the war is over? Obama says “War is over” and basically that’s it. > [@](#): > > And, if we could tell, do you really think the Guantanamo detainees would simply be released at that point? Some are charged with crimes. I don’t know, but then it’s be against humanitarian law and fully on Obama’s lap. > [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > Remind me again: when did the United States declare war and on who? [Iraq Oct 16, 2002](http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-107publ243/html/PLAW-107publ243.htm) [Afghanistan, other nations , and groups Sept 18, 2001](http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-107publ40/pdf/PLAW-107publ40.pdf) > [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Ridding the world of them one at a time, eh? Such is my burden. > [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Great. Let’s say he did so when he made the speech that started this thread. Now can we let them go? Can? Sure. > [@](#): > > Well, everybody’s from somewhere. Can Saudi Arabia refuse the repatriation of a native-born Saudi Arabian, prisoner or free? I’ve never heard of a modern state using exile-abroad\* of citizens as a punishment. Does international law even allow for it, any more? > > - Some use **internal** exile – sending a troublemaker to your country’s equivalent of Siberia is cheaper than locking him up, less controversial than killing him, and keeps him away from places he might cause trouble, including foreign countries. Unless specifically expelled I’d be surprised that they can refuse entrance, but maybe the prisoner prefers G’mo than Riyad. ---
**Author:** ![CoolHandCox](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/coolhandcox/32/16233_2.png) [@CoolHandCox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CoolHandCox)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2013, 1:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-new-policy-on-the-war-on-terror/659224/63 "2013-05-29T01:49:04Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Yes, that’s the point of repealing [the AUMF]. But the contradiction you were talking about didn’t exist. He needs the AUMF to fight the war on terror. Today. 12 years after it was passed. He’s going to be killing terrorists, related to AUMF authority, until his term is up. The speech would make you think he’s against “Bush’s global endless” wars, that he is actively perpetuating. He must be for this war because he continues to fight it - in all aspects it was previously fought. He doesn’t have to (specifically not the drone strikes in Yemen). That’s what I meant. If that’s what you understood and disagree, then I apologize for repeating myself. ---
**Author:** ![Pjen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Pjen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pjen)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2013, 9:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-new-policy-on-the-war-on-terror/659224/64 "2013-05-29T09:13:29Z")
> [@Pjen](#): > > Europeans- who would never have countenanced such illegal action in the first place! Any attempt to justify a known concentration camp like Gitmo on European territory would have been swiftly overturned by the National Courts or by the ECHR. The judicial systems in Europe are possibly somewhat more liberal and legalistic the an the US system, which is far more political and far less to do with Justice itself. There is a current example in the news. Currently mainly on the BBC as it broke this morning, but I will put up a cite. Previously UK forces had been handing arrested Afghanis over to the legal authorities in Afghanistan. A group of Human Rights Lawyers stopped this vis=a a High Court injunction that stopped the Army (and the Government) from doing so as this put them at risk of torture or killing. The Army only has the right to detain for 96 hours without disposal but has chosen to detain nearly a hundred Afghanis for months in what is being v=called a Mini Gitmo in Camp Bastion, the British Army Camp there. The group of solicitors has just filed for a further injunction against the government to force them to release these prisoners or ensure their safety within the Afghani Justice system. That’s the way to do it. Rule of Law, no language bending, no exceptions, the government and the army must follow the law without exception. So even when not on UK soil, a concentration camp is illegal. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2013, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-new-policy-on-the-war-on-terror/659224/65 "2013-05-29T14:30:32Z")
> [@CoolHandCox](#): > > He’s going to be killing terrorists, related to AUMF authority, until his term is up. Again: he doesn’t control when Congress passes a law changing the AUMF. They could do that next week if they were interested. > [@](#): > > The speech would make you think he’s against “Bush’s global endless” wars, that he is actively perpetuating. If he’s calling for bringing an end to this war, he’s not for endless war, now is he? The gist of what he’s saying is that the job is almost done and it’s time to start looking at counterterrorism in a different way. That doesn’t mean he’s obliged to stop doing everything immediately if he thinks it works. I think you’re assuming he denounced everything he’s been doing since becoming president, or tried to give the impression he was doing so. He didn’t do that. ---
**Author:** ![CoolHandCox](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/coolhandcox/32/16233_2.png) [@CoolHandCox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CoolHandCox)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2013, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-new-policy-on-the-war-on-terror/659224/66 "2013-05-29T15:15:32Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Again: he doesn’t control when Congress passes a law changing the AUMF. They could do that next week if they were interested. > > **If he’s calling for bringing an end to this war, he’s not for endless war, now is he?** The gist of what he’s saying is that the job is almost done and it’s time to start looking at counterterrorism in a different way. That doesn’t mean he’s obliged to stop doing everything immediately if he thinks it works. I think you’re assuming he denounced everything he’s been doing since becoming president, or tried to give the impression he was doing so. He didn’t do that. (I bolded part of your post). I understand what he’s saying. I understand what he’s doing. I suppose this is a true case of actions vs words. If he fights the war for both of his full terms, I’m going to assume he’s for it - regardless of what he says. For example, here’s an exchange between Sen. Graham and Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations Michael Sheehan earlier this month: > [@](#): > > GRAHAM: Do you agree with me the war against radical Islam, or terror, or whatever description you like to provide, will go on after the second term of President Obama? > > SHEEHAN: Senator, in my judgement, this is going to go on for quite awhile, yes, beyond the second term of the President. > > GRAHAM: And beyond this term of Congress? > > SHEEHAN: Yes, sir. I think it’s at least ten to twenty years. So unless he stops it, it’s going to continue…because he’s ordering it to continue. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2013, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-new-policy-on-the-war-on-terror/659224/67 "2013-05-29T15:26:33Z")
> [@CoolHandCox](#): > > If he fights the war for both of his full terms, I’m going to assume he’s for it - regardless of what he says. You’re still arguing against something he didn’t say. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-new-policy-on-the-war-on-terror/659224.md?page=3)