US to transfer dozen Guantanamo inmates to at least two countries

[webfact]

US to transfer dozen Guantanamo inmates to at least two countries

WASHINGTON, DC: -- The Pentagon plans to move roughly a dozen inmates from the US military prison at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba to at least two countries.

The transfers come as the Obama administration takes steps to close the controversial facility, which has been called a recruiting tool for jihadists.

The prisoners are expected to leave Guantanamo in the coming weeks.

Full story: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-35931559


-- BBC 2016-03-31

[SgtRock]

Rickety plane, suicide pilot, problem solved.

[craigt3365]

It's a sad day when criminals who are jailed become recruiting tools for other criminals.

[Credo]

Is one of those countries Belgium, by chance?

[Pimay1]

Is one of those countries Belgium, by chance?

That would be par for the course for the Obama administration.

[stillbornagain]

What this is really down to is the cowardice of Americans. I remember when the administration proposed giving some of these people trials in the USA. All the right wing started whining about it was too dangerous. That the risk of provoking some terrorist attack during the trial was too great. So the administration backed down. That showed the world what a punk nation America is. And must have made terrorists feel pretty good about themselves. Spain, the UK, France all held terrorist trials in their capital cities. They showed the terrorists that they weren't afraid. This despite their greater exposure to danger. Of course, this is all of a piece with Americans cringing at the danger of terrorism. This is a factoid worth repeating: in 2015 more Americans were killed by gun toting toddlers than were killed by terrorists.

[dexterm]

The hypocrisy of Guantanamo with its torture, imprisonment without fair trial or charge will for decades to come undermine US credibility re its promotion of democracy in other nations. I would certainly prefer to live in the USA than many other undemocratic countries in this world. But Guantanamo has been a blot on the US character.

The sooner it is closed the better.

Edited March 31, 2016 by dexterm

[hawker9000]

The hypocrisy of Guantanamo with its torture, imprisonment without fair trial or charge will for decades to come undermine US credibility re its promotion of democracy in other nations. I would certainly prefer to live in the USA than many other undemocratic countries in this world. But Guantanamo has been a blot on the US character.

The sooner it is closed the better.

Oh horsefeathers. Did we put German POWs on "trial" during WW I or WWII or the Korean War? Did any other country? Of course not. They're not "criminals", unless you want to talk about war crimes, which no civilian court in the U.S. has jurisdiction to deal with. They're combatants, enemy combatants. If you don't believe me, pay a visit to a military hospital and have a chat with any of our men & women who've lost an arm or a leg, or been otherwise maimed and wounded by them. Or talk to the survivors of those killed by them. No. Wingnuts aren't gonna' do that. That's not their thing. Newsflash: these prisoners were captured on the "battlefield", such as it is (meaning, such as they've made it), engaged in combat with our own troops. "Combatants". Not "criminals", COMBATANTS!! Frankly, I'm not even sure they're entitled to the protections of POWs, as so far as I know the vast majority (if not all) were captured out of uniform and often responsible for what amounts to sabotage. If there's to be any trial, it should be "summary" in nature... (And I'm not talking about fines and community service here boys & girls!) Since a civilian trial for "crimes committed" is irrelevant, that makes Gitmo as good a place as any for them. They can stay there as POWs (which they should consider a major concession...) until their "war" is over, which I expect will be a very long time... If you wanted to build POW camps in the U.S. for them, as we did in past wars, that could work - but of course the left isn't gonna' have any part of that!

This is all common sense stuff which completely escapes the comprehension of the kool aid-sodden, snake-oil addicted, America-hating, pass-the-propaganda-please, wingnuts.

Edited April 1, 2016 by hawker9000

[stillbornagain]

The hypocrisy of Guantanamo with its torture, imprisonment without fair trial or charge will for decades to come undermine US credibility re its promotion of democracy in other nations. I would certainly prefer to live in the USA than many other undemocratic countries in this world. But Guantanamo has been a blot on the US character.

The sooner it is closed the better.

Oh horsefeathers. Did we put German POWs on "trial" during WW I or WWII or the Korean War? Did any other country? Of course not. They're not "criminals", unless you want to talk about war crimes, which no civilian court in the U.S. has jurisdiction to deal with. They're combatants, enemy combatants. If you don't believe me, pay a visit to a military hospital and have a chat with any of our men & women who've lost an arm or a leg, or been otherwise maimed and wounded by them. Or talk to the survivors of those killed by them. No. Wingnuts aren't gonna' do that. That's not their thing. Newsflash: these prisoners were captured on the "battlefield", such as it is (meaning, such as they've made it), engaged in combat with our own troops. "Combatants". Not "criminals", COMBATANTS!! Frankly, I'm not even sure they're entitled to the protections of POWs, as so far as I know the vast majority (if not all) were captured out of uniform and often responsible for what amounts to sabotage. If there's to be any trial, it should be "summary" in nature... (And I'm not talking about fines and community service here boys & girls!) Since a civilian trial for "crimes committed" is irrelevant, that makes Gitmo as good a place as any for them. They can stay there as POWs (which they should consider a major concession...) until their "war" is over, which I expect will be a very long time... If you wanted to build POW camps in the U.S. for them, as we did in past wars, that could work - but of course the left isn't gonna' have any part of that!

This is all common sense stuff which completely escapes the comprehension of the kool aid-sodden, snake-oil addicted, America-hating, pass-the-propaganda-please, wingnuts.

If you wanted to build POW camps in the U.S. for them, as we did in past wars, that could work - but of course the left isn't gonna' have any part of that!

You couldn't be more wrong. It's the right that has consistenty opposed bringing the prisoners into America. Because they are afraid of what the big bad friends of these prisoners might do. Remember the plan to put them on trial in New York? The right went ballistic over that. Ballistic with fear. Spain, France, the UK all managed to put terrorists on trial in their capital cities. But not the big, bad USA.

As for these prisoners. And while I'm sure you believe you have expertise in this field and a slam dunk case, there's the little matter of the supreme court of the united states disagreeing with you.

https://www.asil.org/insights/volume/12/issue/13/supreme-court-holds-noncitizens-detained-guantanamo-have-constitutional

Another poster who gets his facts from oppositeland.

[craigt3365]

What this is really down to is the cowardice of Americans. I remember when the administration proposed giving some of these people trials in the USA. All the right wing started whining about it was too dangerous. That the risk of provoking some terrorist attack during the trial was too great. So the administration backed down. That showed the world what a punk nation America is. And must have made terrorists feel pretty good about themselves. Spain, the UK, France all held terrorist trials in their capital cities. They showed the terrorists that they weren't afraid. This despite their greater exposure to danger. Of course, this is all of a piece with Americans cringing at the danger of terrorism. This is a factoid worth repeating: in 2015 more Americans were killed by gun toting toddlers than were killed by terrorists.

Why give these war criminals a trial? I'm NO fan of Guantanamo, but also NO fan of people caught on the battlefield killing others.

It's a huge mess, is a black eye on the US. But to say Americans are cowards is going overboard....and against forum rules.

[ilostmypassword]

What this is really down to is the cowardice of Americans. I remember when the administration proposed giving some of these people trials in the USA. All the right wing started whining about it was too dangerous. That the risk of provoking some terrorist attack during the trial was too great. So the administration backed down. That showed the world what a punk nation America is. And must have made terrorists feel pretty good about themselves. Spain, the UK, France all held terrorist trials in their capital cities. They showed the terrorists that they weren't afraid. This despite their greater exposure to danger. Of course, this is all of a piece with Americans cringing at the danger of terrorism. This is a factoid worth repeating: in 2015 more Americans were killed by gun toting toddlers than were killed by terrorists.

Why give these war criminals a trial? I'm NO fan of Guantanamo, but also NO fan of people caught on the battlefield killing others.

It's a huge mess, is a black eye on the US. But to say Americans are cowards is going overboard....and against forum rules.

"Why give these war criminals a trial?" I think that some of the best comedians are to be found posting on thaivisa.com.

[willyumiii]

It's a sad day when criminals who are jailed become recruiting tools for other criminals.

When they are denied any sort of trial and held indefinitely with no conviction,

it is a sad day for America and what it claims to stand for.

Just how popular does that make us in the rest of the world?

If they were my countrymen, I would probably be recruited as well.

Another smart move by the not so smart GW.

We will be paying for his idiocy for decades to come.

[hawker9000]

The hypocrisy of Guantanamo with its torture, imprisonment without fair trial or charge will for decades to come undermine US credibility re its promotion of democracy in other nations. I would certainly prefer to live in the USA than many other undemocratic countries in this world. But Guantanamo has been a blot on the US character.

The sooner it is closed the better.

Oh horsefeathers. Did we put German POWs on "trial" during WW I or WWII or the Korean War? Did any other country? Of course not. They're not "criminals", unless you want to talk about war crimes, which no civilian court in the U.S. has jurisdiction to deal with. They're combatants, enemy combatants. If you don't believe me, pay a visit to a military hospital and have a chat with any of our men & women who've lost an arm or a leg, or been otherwise maimed and wounded by them. Or talk to the survivors of those killed by them. No. Wingnuts aren't gonna' do that. That's not their thing. Newsflash: these prisoners were captured on the "battlefield", such as it is (meaning, such as they've made it), engaged in combat with our own troops. "Combatants". Not "criminals", COMBATANTS!! Frankly, I'm not even sure they're entitled to the protections of POWs, as so far as I know the vast majority (if not all) were captured out of uniform and often responsible for what amounts to sabotage. If there's to be any trial, it should be "summary" in nature... (And I'm not talking about fines and community service here boys & girls!) Since a civilian trial for "crimes committed" is irrelevant, that makes Gitmo as good a place as any for them. They can stay there as POWs (which they should consider a major concession...) until their "war" is over, which I expect will be a very long time... If you wanted to build POW camps in the U.S. for them, as we did in past wars, that could work - but of course the left isn't gonna' have any part of that!

This is all common sense stuff which completely escapes the comprehension of the kool aid-sodden, snake-oil addicted, America-hating, pass-the-propaganda-please, wingnuts.

If you wanted to build POW camps in the U.S. for them, as we did in past wars, that could work - but of course the left isn't gonna' have any part of that!

You couldn't be more wrong. It's the right that has consistenty opposed bringing the prisoners into America. Because they are afraid of what the big bad friends of these prisoners might do. Remember the plan to put them on trial in New York? The right went ballistic over that. Ballistic with fear. Spain, France, the UK all managed to put terrorists on trial in their capital cities. But not the big, bad USA.

As for these prisoners. And while I'm sure you believe you have expertise in this field and a slam dunk case, there's the little matter of the supreme court of the united states disagreeing with you.

https://www.asil.org/insights/volume/12/issue/13/supreme-court-holds-noncitizens-detained-guantanamo-have-constitutional

Another poster who gets his facts from oppositeland.

No. What the right has consistently opposed is bringing them into America and THEN TREATING THEM LIKE COMMON CRIMINALS! Criminal courts in the U.S. have no competence or real jurisdiction to try POWs OR war criminals (no matter what a politically appointed federal judge says). The idea that POWs have "constitutional rights" under the U.S. Constitution is and always has been preposterous (sorry SCOTUS; you're just plain wrong: not everything that's ever emanated from that now-political body is actually holy writ. As a matter-of-fact, the government, in the case you're presenting, actually cited as precedent a previous Supreme Court decision which barred federal courts from hearing habeas corpus petitions from German WWII combatants, and they were actually convicted of war crimes!! So, in this case, the Supreme Court was actually reversing itself!!!). The right understands this judicial incompetence and knows that they'll perhaps end up in some prison population for awhile, depending on the whim & fancy of some judge with a political & social agenda and the competence of a court literally thousands of miles from where the "crimes" took place and with no subpoena power whatsoever in those regions and no expertise or charter to handle matters relating to foreign military engagement, and then likely be simply released at the demand of the same demented wingnuts who oppose them even being criminalized in the first place!

If alleged war crimes are involved (and I put terrorism in that category), they should be handled by military tribunals (gasp, YES!, military tribunals) there in-country, not alongside bank robberies, DUIs, and jaywalking back in the U.S.

Lots of people disagree with federal courts up to and including the Supreme Court, and have throughout their checkered histories. And as mentioned above, in this case, the Supreme Court was actually reversing itself!! Anyway, 'a whole separate discussion.

[stillbornagain]

No. What the right has consistently opposed is bringing them into America and THEN TREATING THEM LIKE COMMON CRIMINALS! Criminal courts in the U.S. have no competence or real jurisdiction to try POWs OR war criminals (no matter what a politically appointed federal judge says). The idea that POWs have "constitutional rights" under the U.S. Constitution is and always has been preposterous (sorry SCOTUS; you're just plain wrong: not everything that's ever emanated from that now-political body is actually holy writ. As a matter-of-fact, the government, in the case you're presenting, actually cited as precedent a previous Supreme Court decision which barred federal courts from hearing habeas corpus petitions from German WWII combatants, and they were actually convicted of war crimes!! So, in this case, the Supreme Court was actually reversing itself!!!). The right understands this judicial incompetence and knows that they'll perhaps end up in some prison population for awhile, depending on the whim & fancy of some judge with a political & social agenda and the competence of a court literally thousands of miles from where the "crimes" took place and with no subpoena power whatsoever in those regions and no expertise or charter to handle matters relating to foreign military engagement, and then likely be simply released at the demand of the same demented wingnuts who oppose them even being criminalized in the first place!

If alleged war crimes are involved (and I put terrorism in that category), they should be handled by military tribunals (gasp, YES!, military tribunals) there in-country, not alongside bank robberies, DUIs, and jaywalking back in the U.S.

Lots of people disagree with federal courts up to and including the Supreme Court, and have throughout their checkered histories. And as mentioned above, in this case, the Supreme Court was actually reversing itself!! Anyway, 'a whole separate discussion.

I don't know what planet you were on when this controversy was raging, but it clearly wasn't Earth. Here's a quote from Dick Cheney: "I think the President will find, upon reflection, that to bring the worst of the worst terrorists inside the United States would be cause for great danger and regret in the years to come."

www.nationalreview.com/media-blog/30708/and-winner-dick-cheney-guy-benson

He was far, far, far from alone.

[2fishin2]

Funny, I don't/didnt see other countries volunteering to lead the charge against ISIS/AQ. How many other country's special operation forces captured these criminals? How many other countries volunteered to take them to their home and keep and charge them with crimes? NONE! as usual in the world the USA leads while other countries ride the coat tail. If you are riding you dont get a say.