President Obama is in a no-win situation and is going to pay a high price for any solution he comes up with.
Although I have opposed the use to which the facilities at Guantanamo are being put for years, the plans which the Obama administration is developing to deal with the remaining terrorists held there present problems which they seem not to have considered and which may be unresolvable.…
Article comments
— go to most recent comments26 - roger nowosielski
Jeannie,
I'm certain that Ruvy is a likable person. I'm talking about his views.
27 - roger nowosielski
Thank you, Mark.
28 - Jeannie Danna
Hi Cindy, damn I got to go now because my computer scans for viruses and Big Brother every Monday at noon! :) I'll be baaaack..
29 - roger nowosielski
Are you certain it ain't the "Dave's bug"?
30 - Jeannie Danna
later roger M ark and Clavos...You all really had me going there...dintcha! :)
31 - roger nowosielski
You've gotta be able to get a sense of persons, Jeannie. A simple matter of reading people.
That's what I've been trying to impress on my nemesis, thus far to no avail.
32 - Cindy
I have yet to research this idea, but I suspect that the real reason the prisoners aren't wanted in the US is because people might start fighting for the idea that they should have rights to habeas corpus as well as other rights.
The US is intent on hiding its crimes against these human beings and bringing prisoners here will make that more difficult to do.
33 - roger nowosielski
I thought the rights to habeas corpus haven't been lifted. It's just that we try to deny them to non-US subjects.
Anyways, the trend is that we'll become subject to international, higher law. It's only a matter of time. And US violation of the spirit and intent of its own laws will only serve as a catalyst.
In fact, one way out for Obama is to relinquish the treatment and handling of the detainees to the Hague.
34 - roger nowosielski
Especially since "War on Terror" is (presumably) a global problem, why not let the international community handle the judicial aspect? If only in the interest of fairness.
35 - M a R k
Were we to empower international courts, where would that leave our own 'war criminals'? Best suggested solution so far, though.
36 - roger nowosielski
I can't answer the latter question, but I bet you that the public would not object. And in view of the Congress' indecision on this matter, they've have no leg to stand on. "Either put up or shut up" would be the message.
37 - roger nowosielski
The more I think on this, the clearer it becomes. If it is a "global problem," it should be handled accordingly. And I don't mean it from the standpoint of relinquishing our own responsibility or getting out from under the horns of the dilemma - only in terms of the logic of the situation.
Don't they have a brain trust in Washington, D.C.?
38 - Cindy
Hi Jeannie (for when you get back),
I have to say it's both difficult and comforting to see your reaction. I'm really glad you are so expressive of your feelings. It validates me and also makes me feel less alone. And I think it will do some good around here too.
Here is how I see it: I'd first see the horror that people do and would find it almost unbearable--until I saw it defended. It becomes more then, than some accidental nightmare. For me it is like being continually forced to face that ordinary everyday thinking is what makes all this possible. All of it.
In real life, one may not really have to deal with all these ideas from people one is actually communicating with. I'd probably never get to talk to many people who are here. But I have come to think that this is a reasonably good cross-section of the culture. Somehow, it's become important to learn how to handle that and deal with it constructively (still working on both).
I recognize in some way that I can't very well change the world without being able to face the world.
But, in solidarity with you, I'll cry too.
39 - M Ark
Save your tears...learn to sing the blues.
40 - Dave Nalle
Reading comprehension seems to be at an all-time low today. Perhaps it's the holiday drunkenness.
Roger: 2) if they're not US subjects, release them to the jurisdiction of their country of origin (for trial and disposition)
Did you not read the article? It's been well established that their countries will not take them back. That's one of the primary sources of this problem. People don't want their terrorists returned to them.
Jeannie: where did I ever say that they would be released on US soil and then targeted with an airstrike? You apparently just made that up. I specifically said release them in a war zone. Is the US a war zone?
Cindy: do you not read newspapers or see any kind of news? All the sunday talk shows were abuzz with the recent increase in recidivism among released GITMO prisoners. The recidivism rate had been 7% up until the last couple of months when it increased into the teens.
And yes, 59 of them may be relatively innocent, but so were the hundreds already released and about 70 of them have already returned to terrorist activity.
But for the common knowledge challenged I'll add some additional links to the article as a public service.
Dave
41 - M ark
Since when is the threat of recidivism grounds for holding someone?
42 - roger nowosielski
I don't think BC is a representative sample of the culture. [Personal attack deleted by Comments Editor]
Real-life people are amenable to new ideas and vistas - by their natural sociability, power of personal persuasion, charm, whatever other resources one has at their disposals. I could converse with regular rednecks - as rabid as can be - until we'd find a common ground and establish rapport. BC is by and large a community of social dregs, rejects and outcasts - which isn't to say all of us, of course. But for the most part, the people I'm talking about couldn't and wouldn't cut it in the context of real life, interacting with real people. That's why we find them polluting this site which, originally, I believed to hold so much promise.
If my life was anywhere near normal (like it was before I was forced to move here from California), I wouldn't spend more than one percent of my time posting here. But it isn't, and for the time being I'm stuck. My question is, why would some of you, sane and reasonable people, even bother? It's masochism.
So forgive me for this indictment. It's not a personal attack - just my observation on the nature of things. I can think of ten people at most with whom I'd care to resume personal contact if and when the occasion would present itself. Draw your own conclusion.
43 - Cindy
I thought the rights to habeas corpus haven't been lifted. It's just that we try to deny them to non-US subjects.
I'm not suggesting they were lifted. I'm saying that if they were in the US people might demand they have these rights despite lack of citizenship , based entirely on location.
This would be a real problem for the US. The US regularly imprisons non-citizens indefinitely and without due process or habeas corpus on US soil. These are high profile people. There presence here would bring action that would reveal this state of affairs to the general population--who aren't at present even aware it. This might lead to changes in law for how the US is handling people whom it classifies as 'illegal' immigrants, as well as legal immigrants who are imprisoned for being other than white.
Immigrants are being detained without habeas corpus and with interference on the part of their jailers in ways that prevent them from getting contact with the outside world. One of these prisons is in NJ.
If ones idea of how the government operates has something to do with ideals and justice, consider that the communities where these immigrant prisoners are held have a very large stake in maintaining their imprisonment. They receive millions of dollars from the Fed to keep these people incarcerated. It is a part of their budget. They want every prison bed filled, in the same way a hotel wants to rent every room--and for the same reason. Imprisonment of people, no matter if they are innocent, is a money-making business.
Gitmo prisoners could upset this whole thing.
44 - roger nowosielski
I was talking about "conditional release," Mark, in lieu of a trial - subject therefore to negotiations (akin to plea bargaining, let's say).
But anyway, I'm becoming more and more convinced that nothing short of "international solution" would get us of this mess.
45 - roger nowosielski
Of course there's a vested interest in not upsetting the applecart.
46 - Cindy
'...which isn't to say all of us, of course.'
No, by all means, we wouldn't want to do that. It might require self-examination.
47 - roger nowosielski
"It's been well established that their countries will not take them back."
I don't buy it. They have to made to, and deal with it too, if we're talking about their own citizens. If American influence can extent to all parts of the globe in matters of war and commerce, then it had better prove its own mettle when it comes to our "presumed" allies. I regard your objection as a cop-out, not your personal cop-out, but cop-out as far as US foreign policy is concerned.
48 - roger nowosielski
Don't be silly. The next thing you're gonna try to tell me with what people I should wish to associate with and with what people not. Am I supposed to like the personages as they reveal themselves here? I don't ask for that either.
So I don't really see the point of your comment, unless of course you choose to take it personally.
49 - Arch Conervative
The same people that routinely distort the Constitution are the same people insisting that the Geneva Convention applies to terrorists. It doesn't.
It's nice to know that the possibility of a couple of terrorists getting roughed up can rouse these people to anger while they're pretty much in favor of thousands of babies needlessly being killed under the euphemistic banner "choice."
50 - roger nowosielski
Arch,
The Constitution, as grand as it may have been, is on its way out. Obviously, it can't deal with the idea of unlawful indefinite detention.
Even you must see that.
51 - Irene Wagner
I'm not sure outrage over one precludes outrage over the other, Arch Conservo.
52 - Cindy
#39
Mark,
That's in the advanced class. I'm only in intermediate world changing. :-)
53 - Dave Nalle
Roger, it's more complicated than that. With some of these prisoners we can't release them to their home countries because we think they'll be killed immediately by their governments as potential threats. And we can't send those prisoners anywhere else because no one will take them. HRW is trying to get European countries to take some of them, but IMO they'd be crazy to do it. They have more than enough problems with terrorism already.
Cindy brings up the Uighurs. If we send them back to China the Chinese will put them in a forced labor camp forever. Some of them would rather stay at GITMO.
Dave
54 - roger nowosielski
But what would you say, Arch, if one of those unborn babies were to grow into a full-fledged terrorist?
55 - Irene Wagner
If being pro-life meant caring about unborn and born babies worldwide, instead of just those in America, there'd be a lot fewer terrorists. But that's just a statement of the obvious.
Maybe people who are outraged at both get burned out twice as fast, so you don't hear from them as often.
56 - roger nowosielski
BTW, Irene. In case you wonder about my rather rabid #47 (which was a response), have no fear. You're on the list of my favorite persons. And Mark is too.
57 - Irene Wagner
LOL Cindy.
58 - Irene Wagner
I'm on my list of favorite persons, too, Roger Nowosielski. We have a lot in common.
(I'm sorry. Too much levity for a grave board like this.)
Continue.
59 - roger nowosielski
"If being pro-life meant caring about unborn and born babies worldwide, instead of just those in America ..."
That's the key, Irene. Human life is human life is human life ...
60 - roger nowosielski
Well, you ought to be. How can you love others if you despise yourself?
61 - Irene Wagner
You know I'm kidding, Roger.
62 - roger nowosielski
I've got to re-read C S Lewis' "The Four Loves."
63 - Irene Wagner
It's not ALL America's fault, Arch, of course it isn't. America could be pure as the driven snow and there'd still be Muslim fanatic loons after us. But US foreign policy has had a lot to do with providing fields white for harvest for terrorist recruitment.
64 - roger nowosielski
Well, I didn't mean to suggest you don't realize your own faults. But other than that, my statement stands.
Still, Lewis undercuts Aristotle's idea of friendship - in terms of appreciation of qualities, affinities, etc. It's a powerful idea, to be able to love so. Even the worst offenders. It's scary. Only God can truly do it.
That's why I spoke of kindness and toughness the other day.
65 - Irene Wagner
The traditional Muslim nations have had it coming at them from the American left AND right. One of the assaults, frankly, is against ideas traditional Muslims hold dear: the exportation of liberal ideas of what constitutes Family Planning. It's been easy to paint Americans as Devils when we've been associated with the exportation of abortions. And from the right, on the other hand, a what-the-hell attitude about the suffering of anyone who isn't American. "If Wombs Had Windows" is a popular pro-life slogan. Why not put the entire Middle Eastern population under something like an ultrasound scan?
66 - Irene Wagner
I just finished the Space Trilogy, btw Roger. Said I'd do it. "Til we have faces" is next on my list.
67 - roger nowosielski
I've got to refer you later to some of the Buddhist thinking - by one fellow who posted on my last thread.
In a sense, it extend the application of Christ's teachings beyond the area of person-to-person relations to a societal context. If you'll email me (my url, the navigation bar on top), I'll forward you Somik's essay.
It deal with evil in this world, and how to deal with it.
68 - Irene Wagner
Roger, I spend too much time on the boards without getting into emailing! But thanks for the suggestion. Buddhist thinking is a lot like the best of Christian thinking. Minus God. They're definitely allies with God-believers in trying to scrape out a peaceful niche in the world.
69 - Irene Wagner
And with that semi-hopeful comment, I will be off to spend a little time with the family. Enjoy yourself, Roger.
70 - roger nowosielski
I still think, Irene, that these fundamental, religious/cultural problems wouldn't present the kind of obstacle they do if we made it a point to eliminate the poverty - the breeding ground from their midst. But America is so arrogant with respect to all who either don't share or haven't been indoctrinated to her values. And we expect miracles - a kind of homage - while our aggressive policies are fully intact.
Total insanity!
71 - Dave Nalle
Irene, no one is exporting abortions or even birth control to countries like Saudi Arabia or Iran. What we ARE exporting is our "degenerate" media and entertainment output, and that is more threatening to the theocratic hypermoralistic mindset than just about anything else we could do.
Dave
72 - roger nowosielski
Well, the effect is the same.
73 - Cindy
Dave,
I don't watch TV news (unless I can convince them to change the sports channel when I'm out a dinner).
So, of say 600 people released, 70 of them returned to (possibly even embarked on, for the first time) terrorist activities.
Two points:
1) I am shocked! That seems an inordinately low number of 'recidivists' considering all of them were 'the worst of the worst'.
2) As far as this 'recidivism' rate--the people who determined that the original 'worst of the worst' were terrorists--are these the same people now deciding what constitutes recidivism? Or did they just go out and pay people $5000.00 to tell them if the ex-prisoners were engaging in terrorist activity?
I won't say who said this non-verbatim quote:
The best way to prevent terrorism is to stop engaging in it.
(p.s. Thanks for the offer to add more links, Dave.)
74 - M ark
The best way to prevent terrorism is to stop engaging in it.
graffito of the morning award to Cindy
75 - Dave Nalle
1) I am shocked! That seems an inordinately low number of 'recidivists' considering all of them were 'the worst of the worst'.
The 600 already released were not the "worst of the worst." I think we'd call them the "best of the worst." They were the ones least likely to be a problem, yet they returned to terrorism at a 14% rate. What does that suggest about the remaining 250+ if we released them?
2) As far as this 'recidivism' rate--the people who determined that the original 'worst of the worst' were terrorists--are these the same people now deciding what constitutes recidivism? Or did they just go out and pay people $5000.00 to tell them if the ex-prisoners were engaging in terrorist activity?
The numbers are based on those former prisoners either being killed or captured during fighting with terrorist groups like the Taliban. We actually have no idea how many of them have gone underground and will resurface later engaged in terrorism.
The best way to prevent terrorism is to stop engaging in it.
Deliciously ironic coming from someone who claims allegiance to a philosophy which has historically been responsible for more terrorism than any other.
Dave