Obama releases 10 Gitmo-Bay detainees to Oman...?

NOVA said:
Why don't you take 'em in....you must have a couple of empty rooms at your house....

This just proves that Obama will do anything to save face with Democrats, including putting our country at risk.....

You gotta be some special kind of fool to not know they will be back trying to kill Americans at the first chance they get.
Click to expand...

I don't believe that but have you looked at the recidivism rate of American prisoners lately?

Bureau of Justice Statistics studies have found high rates of recidivism among released prisoners. One study tracked 404,638 prisoners in 30 states after their release from prison in 2005.[1] The researchers found that:

  • Within three years of release, about two-thirds (67.8 percent) of released prisoners were rearrested.
  • Within five years of release, about three-quarters (76.6 percent) of released prisoners were rearrested.
  • Of those prisoners who were rearrested, more than half (56.7 percent) were arrested by the end of the first year.
  • Property offenders were the most likely to be rearrested, with 82.1 percent of released property offenders arrested for a new crime compared with 76.9 percent of drug offenders, 73.6 percent of public order offenders and 71.3 percent of violent offenders.
http://www.nij.gov/topics/corrections/recidivism/pages/welcome.aspx
 
Rana said:
Not all return to terrorism, some return to the fight in the civil wars in their country, insurgiency, which isn't terrorism against the USA.
Click to expand...
I'd argue the vast majority are terrorists if they are picked up in the first place..

AQAP is an "insurgency" so is the Taliban -so is Boko Haram -all of which are international recognized terrorists organizations.
I'm hard pressed to think of any Gitmo detainees that aren't ?

It's not just "against the USA" either - with the exception of the Afghan Taliban - which can possibly be seen as an insurgency.
But they still support AQ, and they still link up with the TTP.

The TTP ( Pakistani) Taliban are clearly terrorists. look at the 2014 Peshawar school massacre and..
National Counter Terrorism Guide
..
ordering the November 2012 attempted assassination of education rights activist Malala Yousafzai. TTP since 2008 has repeatedly publicly threatened to attack the US homeland, and a TTP spokesman claimed responsibility for the failed vehicle-bomb attack in Times Square
Click to expand...
So I'm really not seeing anything specific to your claim.
 
annata said:
I'd argue the vast majority are terrorists if they are picked up in the first place..

AQAP is an "insurgency" so is the Taliban -so is Boko Haram -all of which are international recognized terrorists organizations.
I'm hard pressed to think of any Gitmo detainees that aren't ?

It's not just "against the USA" either - with the exception of the Afghan Taliban - which can possibly be seen as an insurgency.
But they still support AQ, and they still link up with the TTP.

The TTP ( Pakistani) Taliban are clearly terrorists. look at the 2014 Peshawar school massacre and..
National Counter Terrorism Guide
.. So I'm really not seeing anything specific to your claim.[/

We need to stay out of other countries civil wars and quit interfering, one man's insurgient is another man's patriot, just look at the discussions of our own civil war.

Again, if the remaining prisoners are so diabolical, we need to try them and send them to a prison in the US, GITMO is unConstituonal.
Click to expand...
 
christiefan915 said:
I don't believe that but have you looked at the recidivism rate of American prisoners lately?

Bureau of Justice Statistics studies have found high rates of recidivism among released prisoners. One study tracked 404,638 prisoners in 30 states after their release from prison in 2005.[1] The researchers found that:

  • Within three years of release, about two-thirds (67.8 percent) of released prisoners were rearrested.
  • Within five years of release, about three-quarters (76.6 percent) of released prisoners were rearrested.
  • Of those prisoners who were rearrested, more than half (56.7 percent) were arrested by the end of the first year.
  • Property offenders were the most likely to be rearrested, with 82.1 percent of released property offenders arrested for a new crime compared with 76.9 percent of drug offenders, 73.6 percent of public order offenders and 71.3 percent of violent offenders.
http://www.nij.gov/topics/corrections/recidivism/pages/welcome.aspx
Click to expand...

and why is this relevant when the topic is Gitmo prisoners ?

You trying to compare common criminals to Islamic terrorists ?......

Poor Christiefan
 
NOVA said:
and why is this relevant when the topic is Gitmo prisoners ?

You trying to compare common criminals to Islamic terrorists ?......

Poor Christiefan
Click to expand...
We don't even know the crimes of those held at GITMO, they have never been charged.
 
Malikhristiefan915 said:
I don't believe that but have you looked at the recidivism rate of American prisoners lately?

Bureau of Justice Statistics studies have found high rates of recidivism among released prisoners. One study tracked 404,638 prisoners in 30 states after their release from prison in 2005.[1] The researchers found that:

  • Within three years of release, about two-thirds (67.8 percent) of released prisoners were rearrested.
  • Within five years of release, about three-quarters (76.6 percent) of released prisoners were rearrested.
  • Of those prisoners who were rearrested, more than half (56.7 percent) were arrested by the end of the first year.
  • Property offenders were the most likely to be rearrested, with 82.1 percent of released property offenders arrested for a new crime compared with 76.9 percent of drug offenders, 73.6 percent of public order offenders and 71.3 percent of violent offenders.
http://www.nij.gov/topics/corrections/recidivism/pages/welcome.aspx
Click to expand...


So you believe in muslimes reforming themselves?

Do you have to face mecca when you post?
 
Rana said:
annata said:
I'd argue the vast majority are terrorists if they are picked up in the first place..

AQAP is an "insurgency" so is the Taliban -so is Boko Haram -all of which are international recognized terrorists organizations.
I'm hard pressed to think of any Gitmo detainees that aren't ?

It's not just "against the USA" either - with the exception of the Afghan Taliban - which can possibly be seen as an insurgency.
But they still support AQ, and they still link up with the TTP.

The TTP ( Pakistani) Taliban are clearly terrorists. look at the 2014 Peshawar school massacre and..
National Counter Terrorism Guide
.. So I'm really not seeing anything specific to your claim.[/

We need to stay out of other countries civil wars and quit interfering, one man's insurgient is another man's patriot, just look at the discussions of our own civil war.

Again, if the remaining prisoners are so diabolical, we need to try them and send them to a prison in the US, GITMO is unConstituonal.
Click to expand...

The takeover of a country by Islamic terrorism an insurgency????

Thats a stretch ..... maybe ISIS in Iraq is then an insurgency of a sort....there are certainly a number of Iraqis that are with ISIS.....

Gitmo most certainly IS NOT unconstitutional.......and not in violation of the Geneva convention....

The Gitmo detainees committed no crime in the US, they are not criminals to be tried....they are prisoners captured on the battlefield, enemy combatants,... following the September 11 attacks of 2001, fighters captured on the battlefield have been labeled “unlawful combatants” and have not been afforded protections guaranteed under the Geneva Conventions.

The Geneva Conventions apply in wars between two or more sovereign states. Article 5 of the Third Geneva Convention states that the status of a detainee may be determined by a "competent tribunal". Until such time, he must be treated as a prisoner of war. After a "competent tribunal" has determined that an individual detainee is an unlawful combatant, the "detaining power" may choose to accord the detained unlawful combatant the rights and privileges of a prisoner of war as described in the Third Geneva Convention, but is not required to do so. An unlawful combatant who is not a national of a neutral state, and who is not a national of a co-belligerent state, retains rights and privileges under the Fourth Geneva Convention so that he must be "treated with humanity and, in case of trial, shall not be deprived of the rights of fair and regular trial"
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
NOVA said:
and why is this relevant when the topic is Gitmo prisoners ?

You trying to compare common criminals to Islamic terrorists ?......

Poor Christiefan
Click to expand...


Because Malikhristiefan ALWAYS has to find false equivalence whenever she is defending some dirtbag group. It is all she knows how to do. I am sure she looked far and wide for white folk data but couldn't find it
 
Rana said:
We can not keep these men indefinitely unless we formally charge them with a crime. It is our law. We release dangerous men back into society all the time, if they are caught again, committing terrorism against the US they will either be killed in battle, killed by drone or captured and tried.

GITMO needs to be closed.
Click to expand...

We are at war with Al-Qaeda and they can be held until AQ no longer exists or decided to sign a peace treaty with us. It is not an issue of justice and law.
 
annata said:
I understand that.
It's how we got here in the first place -how "enemy combatant" status was conferred.

Which is why it's called Long War,or simply War on Terror. It is a war ,even if it's not against a recognized state.
Islamic State claims that status, in this case that works out fine. Treat it as such.

Or hold trials for those already captured..I'm not that concerned with the legal niceties, as much as stopping/checking
global terrorism.
Click to expand...

We are not at war with terror, that's stupid. There are plenty of terrorist organizations I don't give two shits about, it's not America's problem. We are at war with AQ and associated organizations exclusively.
 
I Love America said:
Because Malikhristiefan ALWAYS has to find false equivalence whenever she is defending some dirtbag group. It is all she knows how to do. I am sure she looked far and wide for white folk data but couldn't find it
Click to expand...


Deep down I kinda like Christiefan....But find totally amazing the lengths some of the lefties will do to defend their indefensible positions....is their bullheadedness just hyper-partisanship ?

Or are they really so narrow minded that they just can't comprehend facts and the truth.....they invent strawmen continually
 
Rana said:
We need to stay out of other countries civil wars and quit interfering, one man's insurgient is another man's patriot, just look at the discussions of our own civil war.

Again, if the remaining prisoners are so diabolical, we need to try them and send them to a prison in the US, GITMO is unConstituonal.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree in terms of Libya or Iraq or even the Taliban in a narrow extent.
Typically those interventions were about 'nation building', and I agree they are doomed to fail.

On the other hand AQAP in Yemen is part of the civil war, but not for sovereignty - that's happening in Current Yemen Civil War
There isn't any reason not to go after them - they really aren't an insurgency, as much as opportunists who latch on to Yemen because
Yemen is in perpetual civil war..Yemen is a mess I'll not describe it further, but surely droning AQAP targets are part of the war on terror?

What it boils down to is there is no nice and clean 'formula' to use. You have to use so called threat matrixes.
Each insurgency/terror group has it's own characteristics - that's why I said possible exception of Afghani Taliban.
If they weren't sheltering AQ to begin with pre-9-11, it wouldn't be any of our business.
But they did so it is. But only in a counter-terrorism sense (whack a mole) ,not the drawn out nation building

Some of these guys in Gitmo are so far removed (timewise) from any ability to make legal case against ;
so you have no choice to label them enemy combatants - and give them Periodic Review Board actions..
Going back to the OP..I am quite sure Obama has made up his mind to close Gitmo, and "damn the torpedoes"
that's what he's doing.
The blowback will happen after he leaves office. He's got a legacy to build now :cool:
 
FACTS said:
We are not at war with terror, that's stupid. There are plenty of terrorist organizations I don't give two shits about, it's not America's problem. We are at war with AQ and associated organizations exclusively.
Click to expand...
we are at war with international terrorism / salafi jihad for the most part -some small Shi'a groups..and really anyone that supports them
There isn't any "walls". Boko Haram pledges to Baghdadi,and we are surely at war with Islamic State.
The only question remaining is to what extent we prosecute the different theaters.
Do we dedicate anywhere near as many resources against Boko as we do IS ? Obviously not.
If we can interrupt their finances ( asymmetrical warfare) -we do it. If we have to go up against al-Shabaab (al Qaeda's affiliate in Somalia )
we do it.
The strategies and resources shift, but there is a generalized GWOT (global war on terror)..

I do believe we will be bombing I.S.Libya soon,but that's whole different discussion ,as to why it got to this point.
We created a failed terrorist state. That's on NATO/Obama/Hillary/Rice
DCJ / Libyan Civil War 2014 - Present
 
NOVA said:
and why is this relevant when the topic is Gitmo prisoners ?

You trying to compare common criminals to Islamic terrorists ?......

Poor Christiefan
Click to expand...

Since they wear no uniforms or insignia showing rank and such, maybe we just need to go back to executing them upon capture.
 
NOVA said:
They can call them anything they want....that don't change the facts.....

Just because they refuse to call Islamic terrorists Islamic terrorists. certainly don't change the fact that they are Islamic and terrorists....

You can start to call a apple a banana if thats what floats your boat.....looks like all Democrats suffer from acute denial of reality....
Click to expand...

Sigh
 
NOVA said:
and why is this relevant when the topic is Gitmo prisoners ?

You trying to compare common criminals to Islamic terrorists ?......

Poor Christiefan
Click to expand...

No, I'm talking about recidivism rates on people who were released from prison and the OP's claim that the Gitmo detainees will just go back to fighting. If I were picked up under a pretext and held for years, I'd probably want to fight against the US also.

You and I both know that everyone tossed into Gitmo wasn't a terrorist. Guantanamo is a stain on our reputation and nobody should be defending it.

"Although the Bush administration said most of the men had been captured fighting in Afghanistan, a 2006 report prepared by the Center for Policy and Research, Seton Hall University Law School reviewed DoD data for the remaining 517 men in 2005 and "established that over 80% of the prisoners were captured not by Americans on the battlefield but by Pakistanis and Afghans, often in exchange for bounty payments."[SUP][29][/SUP] The U.S. offered $5,000 per prisoner and distributed leaflets widely in the region. A perfect example would be Adel Noori, a Chinese Uighur and dissident who had been sold to the US by Pakistani bounty hunters.[SUP][30][/SUP]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top