Obama has been photographed repeatedly

[Rockstar]

Originally Posted by vienna

On the Gitmo question: Some in the Far Right GOP recently have been gloating about Obama not being able to complete his campaign promise to close Gitmo and they have been somewhat successful in casting it as a failure by Obama; however, it is closer to the truth Obama's failure to close the prison was in great part due to GOP Congressional members actively blocking any attempts to completely close the facilities. So, yes, Obama failed to close Gitmo, but mainly due to GOP interference, interference for which, oddly, they have not been extensively called to task by the "left-biased mainstream press". I would post a link, but there are so many; just Google "GOP block Gitmo closure"; the whole history is there...



<O>

Mainly due to GOP interference huh?. I suppose that's exactly what you'll link too when select for your search parameter "GOP block GITMO closure".

But if you select for a search the likes of "why isn't GITMO closed" it's not as cut and dry as the usin' s agin them'ins, politics of the day.

[Catfish]

One of the problems is that some are not even being accused, they were just brought there accidentally, wrong place at the wrong time (see this taxi driver). Since they are not accused (and maybe never will) they just stay where they are.

[vienna]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Mainly due to GOP interference huh?. I suppose that's exactly what you'll link too when select for your search parameter "GOP block GITMO closure".

But if you select for a search the likes of "why isn't GITMO closed" it's not as cut and dry as the usin' s agin them'ins, politics of the day.

Ya know, I did put "why isn't GITMO closed" into the Google search box and got, as the very first link, a CNN article that contained the following:

Obama outlined a blueprint that involves transferring the bulk of remaining detainees to other countries and moving the rest -- who can't be transferred abroad because they're deemed too dangerous -- to an as-yet-undetermined detention facility in the United States.

But Republicans in Congress wasted no time in voicing their opposition to the administration's proposal.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/23/politi...-closure-plan/

Well, this couldn't be; I was told that using the suggested search parameters I would find an entirely different story where the GOP in Congress were not blocking closure of Gitmo, so I looked further and in link after link reference is made to the GOP in Congress taking action after action to block the closure of Gitmo, even to the point of the GOP-controlled Congress passing a law specifically forbidding the closure. Here is the second link in the Google results:

5 Reasons President Obama Hasn't Been Able to Close Guantanamo Bay:

http://time.com/4179278/state-of-the...esident-obama/

The next several links I sampled yielded similar results; I did, however, do as you suggested but I'm not really finding any real evidence, other than the GOP actually passing a prohibitive law, which would actually require "an act of Congress" to repeal, that there is any other major reason why Gitmo couldn't be closed...

For the GOP to blame Obama for the failure to keep his promise to close Gitmo is akin a card shark using a marked deck blaming the other guy's poker losses on poor playing ability...



<O>

[Oberon]

Ah, but CNN and Time.com are part of the lugenpresse don't forget, therefore anything they say is automatically invalid.

[Rockstar]

I wouldn't say invalid most of which I agree with especially the Time and NPR articles. I don't see what the problem is keeping GITMO open. I think congress did well by keeping it.

[Rockstar]

Hey Vienna (or Oberon) lets pretend you're a congressman what would you do with GITMO, how would you do it and why?

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Hey Vienna (or Oberon) lets pretend you're a congressman what would you do with GITMO, how would you do it and why?

Honestly? Close it, it's too famous to be particularly useful any more, and its closure would bring a good bit of positive publicity amongst my presumed voter base (in this case Democrat). If the need arose for another GITMO, I'm sure there are plenty of places that one can be made on the quiet.
Heck, you could probably make a nice super-max prison on one of the Bering islands or somewhere in Alaska where you could put the GITMO detainees if congress hadn't blocked that.
GITMO is like Groom Lake research facility, too famous to be useful any more.
Plus the whole imprisonment without trial thing, really slippery slope to leave open there. Too easy to be abused, far too easy.

Keep the military base though, be daft to close that.

[Rockstar]

Originally Posted by Oberon

Honestly? Close it, it's too famous to be particularly useful any more, and its closure would bring a good bit of positive publicity amongst my presumed voter base (in this case Democrat). If the need arose for another GITMO, I'm sure there are plenty of places that one can be made on the quiet.
Heck, you could probably make a nice super-max prison on one of the Bering islands or somewhere in Alaska where you could put the GITMO detainees if congress hadn't blocked that.
GITMO is like Groom Lake research facility, too famous to be useful any more.
Plus the whole imprisonment without trial thing, really slippery slope to leave open there. Too easy to be abused, far too easy.

Keep the military base though, be daft to close that.

Prisoners are a problem, some countries dont want them back others will take them but the prison fears for his life and doesnt want to go. Bring them here and its endless litigation, lawyers making money off it demanding to know about things the government doesnt want to tell, it would be one helluva circus. We could covertly drop them off in the Chicago they'd blend right in

Im not even sure the military base needs to stay. I was there in the early 80's and it was a very very busy Feet Training Group. Ships, people were every where, families, golf courses, post exchange, bowling ally, the famous cattle car. Went back in late nineties and the place looked desolate, hardly the hustle and bustle base it once was. Just a place to drop off illegal immigrants until they could be repatriated to Haiti.

Personally I could care less about that place. Other than it being used in the national interest as leverage for a future deal with Cuba I see little use for it.

[vienna]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Hey Vienna (or Oberon) lets pretend you're a congressman what would you do with GITMO, how would you do it and why?

If I were a Congressman, I would have to get all the facts from all the available sources including those not open to the general public or the press; then, and only then, would I make a decision; that's how proper due diligence works: find out all the facts, evaluate all the options and their possible good and/or bad effects, then make the best choice; oh, and, if asked by any of my constituents why Gitmo was not closed a long time ago, I'd say "Ask the GOP congressmen: they passed the law..."...

My actual original post on this matter did not deal with the question of whether or not Gitmo should be closed, it dealt with the inaccurate portrayal of the failure to close as being solely a failure of Obama and not, as is the fact, an impossibility once the GOP Congress passed the law. All I was doing was pointing out a fact...



<O>

[Rockstar]

So you would have gotton your facts together before you opened your mouth and said you were going to do something? Hmmmm, Guess the president should have got his facts straight before he said he was gonna close GITMO then. Since he wasnt able to follow through with his promise it seems to me he is the who failed.

Congress made no such promise.



"No new taxes"