The discussion thus far has no meat in it since the people basso intended to solicit responses from have been avoiding the real issue that is sandwiched in a distracting thread title cocked up by poor basso. For that I am redirecting you guys to the due course: Spoiler <object width="480" height="295"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/_G9ta7AHsIU&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/_G9ta7AHsIU&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="295"></embed></object>
thank you. it would have been nice had Obama gotten the facts prior to his campaign grandstanding about torture and closing gitmo. seems the facility meets geneva standards, despite the folks being held there not qualifying for geneva protections. Obama owes Bush an apology.
Bush won't get any apologies from Obama. Obama is a product of tough as nails Chicago politics, where opponents are delegitimized in any way possible. What will be interesting to me however, is how Obama will end up solving the current Guantanemo problem that he has created. Obama is no dummy. He knows he can't just shut down the Cuban jail and treat the criminals there as POWs. If the Guantanemo detainees are set free, Americans will die (in my opinion). Obama won't take that risk, so I expect a very imaginative solution coming which maintains the detainees' status in a more politically correct location.
Would a great president believe being able to visibly see another nation from a part of her state which she has never even visited believe that was legitimate foreign policy experience? Would a great president believe that the leader of that nation flying over that state was foreign policy experience? Does Palin have an understanding of supreme court cases that a great president might have? In this economic crisis with home mortgages being front and center, does Palin have the knowledge of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae that a great president would have? Just discussing leadership of our UNITED states; Does Palin who claimed that some parts of our nation were "the real America" (implying that other parts of our nation weren't) have what it takes to lead our whole nation? This list could go on and on. Should I assume that your answer to all of these is yes?
just to make sure i'm understanding correctly, are you saying the "Guantanemo problem" was caused by Obama or Bush? in my view, there was no problem, but Obama created one by pandering to his supporters, w/o benefit of all the facts (which are clearly at odds w/ his rhetoric).
the problem is that it exists and there is no resolution. as usual you are just lumping all kinds of issues into one to make your point. obama plans on closing the prison, not because prisoners maybe tortured, but because there is no resolution to their confinement.
I fail to see the relevance of your argument. The point of the thread is that the Gitmo prisoners are not tortured, as reviewed by Pentagon contradicting the allegations we've been hearing all along in the liberal media and from typical Obama supporters. As far as resolution is concerned, there is one -- simply returning the captives to their original home countries so they can face due justices.
really, the pentagon says it isn't torturing people, shocking. my point is that basso said obama owes bush an apology for saying Gitmo is a human rights violation. the very fact the prison exists is the violation obama is refering to. so obama doesn't owe bush an apology.
Are you saying Obama has never stated that the Gitmo captives were tortured during the Bush presidency? Now that the Pentagon review disputes that, is he going to overrule his military personnel on this account?
What does Obama have to apologize to Bush for, for taking over the Bush's Admin's mess in Guantanamo? Obama's rhetoric might've gotten ahead of him but at the sametime Gitmo wouldn't be a problem if the Bush Admin. had come up with a better solution than trying to deliberately create an essentially lawless prison. If they are and were planning treating them under Geneva Convention standards they should've stated that from the begining but the fact that they tried to circumvent international and US laws by arguing that Guantanamo is stateless territory has led to many of the headaches about it.
I googled it and couldn't find any reference. anyway I don't understand your your over rule comment, the prison shouldn't exist regardless of what goes on there in the eyes of Obama. Again, the main problem is that it exists.
no, the problem w/ the prison was the perception (erroneous, as it happens) that the prison violated the Geneva conventions, and prisoners were tortured. Obama exploited both impressions during the campaign, and again in his ungracious inaugural address("false choices..."). both charges have been proven false. B-Fro owes ChimpyMcHitlerBurton an apology.
the very fact that prison exists is obama's challenge to Geneva conventions, not the treatment of the prisoners.
He clearly referenced torture, in his September 28, 2006 Senator speech: "Instead of allowing this President - or any President - to decide what does and does not constitute torture," There is no question that the captives in Gitmo were not tortured according to Bush. But Obama called him out, that's the essence of basso's "demand for apology."
Sorry, the "Guantanemo problem" to which I was referring is the one created by Obama by placing a timeline on the closure of the prison.
It isn't allegations from the liberal media. The idea that prisoners were tortured comes from members of Bush's own staff and military judges. This is someone who is an Army judge. http://www.cleveland.com/world/index.ssf/2008/10/gitmo_judge_tosses_out_confess.html This Judge is from the Bush administration, and a lifelong Republican. http://edition.cnn.com/2009/US/01/15/guantanamo.torture/index.html Again Crawford is an official Bush appointee. Is it surprising that the Pentagon who wants evidence gathered via torture to be admitted would publish a report that there wasn't torture? Look at the sources coming out with information. It isn't the liberal media.
dude, you're smarter than this. Bush allowed for torture. that's indisputable. obama ending the torture policy and closing gitmo are two separate issues. your quote says nothing of Gitmo
What you and I think is quite immaterial here, the question is whether Obama agrees with the Pentagon review.
