HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Non-Sports > Political Discussion - "on-topic & unmoderated"
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Political Discussion - "on-topic & unmoderated" Rated PG13, unmoderated but threads must stay on topic - that means you can flame each other all you want as long as it's legal

Are we ever going to close Guantanamo?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-03-2013, 07:05 PM
  #26
jarmoismyhero
Registered User
 
jarmoismyhero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: St. Louis
Country: United States
Posts: 2,568
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kadri43 View Post
What was his stance on the NDAA and the Patriot Act? I thought he signed to reinstate those two acts. If he did, than I would not give him any excuse with respect for human rights and Guatanamo.
He did reinstate the PA but he did make some provisions however I am not giving him a pass on that. I am talking strictly about Gitmo. Do I think he should have fraught to end the PA yes I do. As to drone strike they are a necessary evil in some cases, do I like them? No, just like I don't like any innocent people being killed but this is the world we like in. And didn't the last combat troops leave Iraq on December, 15th, 2011?

jarmoismyhero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 07:12 PM
  #27
Kadri43
Registered User
 
Kadri43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: noneofyourbusiness
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,807
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sevanston View Post
You seem to be confused "conservative" with "Republican"

Lately there's a pretty big difference.
I do not quite know what you mean. When people say Republicans do they not also mean conservatives? I refer to conservatives as people like Ron Paul, Justin Amash, Mike Lee and Rand Paul. I refer to Neo-cons as people pretty much everyone else.
I acknowledge that neo-cons are terrible but conservatives have a great stance on a lot of issues. Obviously not everything they believe in is great but are fantastic with respect to civil liberties and wars.

Kadri43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 07:12 PM
  #28
Sevanston
Registered User
 
Sevanston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 12,405
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FootKnight View Post
Has he really been trying though? I'm kind of surprised anyone believed he was actually going to just up and close Gitmo.
He was trying back in 2009 when he signed an executive order (three days after his inauguration) saying to close it by the end of the year. Obviously that didn't take though, otherwise we wouldn't even be talking about it today.

He's keeps running into obstacles from other branches of government, and he's not really fighting them.

Sevanston is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 07:14 PM
  #29
Ilkka Sinisalo
Amazing American
 
Ilkka Sinisalo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Perth, W.A.
Country: Australia
Posts: 12,777
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kadri43 View Post
Um the traditional conservatives fight tooth and nail for your civil liberties while many democrats do nothing. How about the conservatives (like Ron Paul) that are trying to save the US by voicing the anti-war movement. What about Rand Paul and Mike Lee that vote oppose the Patriot Act and the NDAA. What about other conservatives that would love to end the war on drugs. You and everyone on these boards should acknowledge that about 3-4 percent of them are great for America on certain issues while the other 96 percent suck.
Why are you focusing on two or three Republicans who voted against NDAA? Here was the House vote on NDAA in 2012:

Quote:
The House released the official vote tally on its website and it shows that 190 Republicans voted for the bill and 43 voted against it, while 93 Democratic representatives voted for and 93 voted against it.
Oh look! The vast majority of Republicans supported yet and only half of Democrats supported it, plus you've got that last post where 90% of Democrats voted to end indefinite detention, only to have the amendment fail in the face of massive Republican opposition. Plus here's the vote on the Senate Feinstein amendment stating, "To clarify that an authorization to use military force, a declaration of war, or any similar authority shall not authorize the detention without charge or trial of a citizen or lawful permanent resident of the United States."

Republican: 20 Yea, 25 Nay
Democrat: 46 Yea, 3 Nay (three conservative Democrats voted Nay - Manchin, Nelson, Pryor)
Independent: 1 Yea (Sanders - VT), 1 Nay (Lieberman - CT)


Your argument that Democrats are "just as bad" is a miserable failure.

Ilkka Sinisalo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 07:17 PM
  #30
Kadri43
Registered User
 
Kadri43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: noneofyourbusiness
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,807
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jarmoismyhero View Post
He did reinstate the PA but he did make some provisions however I am not giving him a pass on that. I am talking strictly about Gitmo. Do I think he should have fraught to end the PA yes I do. As to drone strike they are a necessary evil in some cases, do I like them? No, just like I don't like any innocent people being killed but this is the world we like in. And didn't the last combat troops leave Iraq on December, 15th, 2011?
Ya and he moved alot of the troops into Afghanistan to support the continuous military industrial complex. I like many people thought they should have left a lot earlier as well. I edited my post right after becaue I meant afghanistan not Iraq.
I might be exaggerating when I say he is not better than Bush but he has not done nearly enough and at least people questioned Bush and knew he was evil. The hopes I had for him in 07 and 08 were enormous. However, I like many others believe he has not done nearly enough.

Kadri43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 07:18 PM
  #31
Ilkka Sinisalo
Amazing American
 
Ilkka Sinisalo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Perth, W.A.
Country: Australia
Posts: 12,777
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kadri43 View Post
I did not know about amendment 1127. However, what about the the NDAA bill that passed with a vote of 81 to 14 thus continuing the war on civil liberties. There should not have been one member that signed onto the bill.
I can certainly bet traditional conservatives like the Paul's would never ever vote against that amendment. Like I said I cannot stand about 95 percent of the Republicans.
That was the final bill. House Democrats and Senate Democrats voted overwhelmingly to ban indefinite detention, only to be blocked by the 92% of House Republicans who wanted to keep it in play.

Ilkka Sinisalo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 07:24 PM
  #32
Kadri43
Registered User
 
Kadri43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: noneofyourbusiness
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,807
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ilkka Sinisalo View Post
Why are you focusing on two or three Republicans who voted against NDAA? Here was the House vote on NDAA in 2012:



Oh look! The vast majority of Republicans supported yet and only half of Democrats supported it, plus you've got that last post where 90% of Democrats voted to end indefinite detention, only to have the amendment fail in the face of massive Republican opposition. Plus here's the vote on the Senate Feinstein amendment stating, "To clarify that an authorization to use military force, a declaration of war, or any similar authority shall not authorize the detention without charge or trial of a citizen or lawful permanent resident of the United States."

Republican: 20 Yea, 25 Nay
Democrat: 46 Yea, 3 Nay (three conservative Democrats voted Nay - Manchin, Nelson, Pryor)
Independent: 1 Yea (Sanders - VT), 1 Nay (Lieberman - CT)


Your argument that Democrats are "just as bad" is a miserable failure.
The end result was the NDAA getting passed, particularly so in the Senate; 81 to 14 from what I recall. You have showed the result in the house only. I refer to a handful of republicans because those are the only ones I support.


Last edited by Kadri43: 01-03-2013 at 07:24 PM. Reason: Meant to say amendment.
Kadri43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 07:28 PM
  #33
Kadri43
Registered User
 
Kadri43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: noneofyourbusiness
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,807
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ilkka Sinisalo View Post
That was the final bill. House Democrats and Senate Democrats voted overwhelmingly to ban indefinite detention, only to be blocked by the 92% of House Republicans who wanted to keep it in play.
Thank you for informing me. Why did the democrats vote for the bill though?

Kadri43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 07:28 PM
  #34
Ilkka Sinisalo
Amazing American
 
Ilkka Sinisalo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Perth, W.A.
Country: Australia
Posts: 12,777
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kadri43 View Post
The end result was the NDAA getting passed, particularly so in the Senate; 81 to 14 from what I recall. You have showed the result in the house only. I refer to a handful of republicans because those are the only ones I support.
Yes, it did pass the Senate, but only after 90% of the Democratic senators had voted to ban indefinite detention. Yes the end result sucked, but the House bill on indefinite detention had already failed. The options at that point were to pass NDAA or not have defense spending.

Ilkka Sinisalo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 07:32 PM
  #35
Kadri43
Registered User
 
Kadri43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: noneofyourbusiness
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,807
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ilkka Sinisalo View Post
Yes, it did pass the Senate, but only after 90% of the Democratic senators had voted to ban indefinite detention. Yes the end result sucked, but the House bill on indefinite detention had already failed. The options at that point were to pass NDAA or not have defense spending.
Ok. I also looked further at the language of the amendment and it still sucked, "Shall not authorize the detention without charge or trial of a citizen or lawful permanent resident of the United States apprehended in the United States, unless an Act of Congress expressly authorizes such detention.
Although it is better than nothing, the bolded part is still scary.

Kadri43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 07:36 PM
  #36
thestonedkoala
Everyone! PANIC!
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 19,318
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kadri43 View Post
The amount of hate towards the only the Republicans is ridiculous. Obama and the democrats are just as bad.
And here is exhibit A on deflection. Again, where do we put these prisoners?

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/feb...sfers-20120203

Quote:
Members of Congress are reacting sharply to a plan being considered by the White House to transfer abroad five of the most dangerous prisoners from Guantanamo Bay as a gesture to the Taliban in advance of Afghanistan peace talks.

It would be the first time detainees from the "too dangerous to transfer" list have been relocated outside of U.S. control. The swift opposition from leading Republicans underscored President Obama's continuing difficulty to deliver on his promise to shut down the prison at the U.S. naval base in Cuba.
So the White House tried to move some prisoners and the Republicans howled about that.

http://voteview.com/blog/?p=687

Also there is that where they voted NOT to close down Gitmo.

So if we can't move them abroad, if we can't move them them to US, where do they go?

Out back and shoot them?

thestonedkoala is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 07:44 PM
  #37
Kadri43
Registered User
 
Kadri43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: noneofyourbusiness
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,807
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by the8bandarmadillo View Post
And here is exhibit A on deflection. Again, where do we put these prisoners?

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/feb...sfers-20120203



So the White House tried to move some prisoners and the Republicans howled about that.

http://voteview.com/blog/?p=687

Also there is that where they voted NOT to close down Gitmo.

So if we can't move them abroad, if we can't move them them to US, where do they go?

Out back and shoot them?
Did these prisoners get a trial? If not than they are far from guilty.

Kadri43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 07:45 PM
  #38
thestonedkoala
Everyone! PANIC!
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 19,318
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kadri43 View Post
Did these prisoners get a trial? If not than they are far from guilty.
They are seen as enemy combatants. They are in a quasi-state right now.

So then we release them all back into the countries?

thestonedkoala is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 07:49 PM
  #39
Kadri43
Registered User
 
Kadri43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: noneofyourbusiness
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,807
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by the8bandarmadillo View Post
They are seen as enemy combatants. They are in a quasi-state right now.

So then we release them all back into the countries?
I knew the answer, you just proved my point. If you cannot give them a trial than who is to say they did anything wrong. Habeas corpus has its origins since 1215 (the Magna Carta). They should be shipped back to their country immediately.

Kadri43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 07:59 PM
  #40
Ilkka Sinisalo
Amazing American
 
Ilkka Sinisalo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Perth, W.A.
Country: Australia
Posts: 12,777
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by the8bandarmadillo View Post
They are seen as enemy combatants. They are in a quasi-state right now.

So then we release them all back into the countries?
I think it's a difficult situation. I have little doubt that Obama wanted to close Gitmo, but the reality is that some of these people, if released, will just attempt a suicide or other terrorist attack on U.S. interests. And maybe that's what happens, but jeez, imagine the political fallout if a clearly dangerous Gitmo detainee ended up killing dozens of American citizens.

I don't know that indefinite detention is the right solution, but I also don't know that sending them back to Afghanistan or whatever is the right solution either. I'll leave it up to people who are smarter than me.

Ilkka Sinisalo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 08:01 PM
  #41
Sevanston
Registered User
 
Sevanston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 12,405
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kadri43 View Post
I do not quite know what you mean. When people say Republicans do they not also mean conservatives? I refer to conservatives as people like Ron Paul, Justin Amash, Mike Lee and Rand Paul. I refer to Neo-cons as people pretty much everyone else.
I acknowledge that neo-cons are terrible but conservatives have a great stance on a lot of issues. Obviously not everything they believe in is great but are fantastic with respect to civil liberties and wars.
Republicans include conservatives, but the two are not synonymous.

As you point out by acknowledging neo-cons (who are also included in the Republican party) as terrible.

Sevanston is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 08:05 PM
  #42
slip
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 9,581
vCash: 500
Okay, at what point do we acknowledge that there is more than one "Gitmo?"

Or is shining the light on the U.S.'s vast network of gulags spread across Europe, Africa, and Central Asia outside the scope of this specific thread?

An estimated 50 prisons have been used to hold detainees in 28 countries, in addition to at least 25 more prisons in Afghanistan and 20 in Iraq. It is estimated that the U.S. has also used 17 ships as floating prisons since 2001, bringing the total estimated number of prisons operated by the U.S. and/or its allies to house alleged terrorist suspects since 2001 to more than 100.
Countries that held suspects on behalf of the U.S. include Algeria, Azerbaijan, Bosnia, Djibouti, Egypt, Ethiopia, Gambia, Israel, Jordan, Kenya, Kosovo, Libya, Lithuania, Mauritania, Morocco, Pakistan, Poland, Qatar, Romania, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Somalia, South Africa, Thailand, United Kingdom, Uzbekistan, Yemen, and Zambia.[34]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_s..._CIA_prisons-8

slip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 08:08 PM
  #43
jarmoismyhero
Registered User
 
jarmoismyhero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: St. Louis
Country: United States
Posts: 2,568
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by slip View Post
Okay, at what point do we acknowledge that there is more than one "Gitmo?"

Or is shining the light on the U.S.'s vast network of gulags spread across Europe, Africa, and Central Asia outside the scope of this specific thread?
I think this is the perfect thread for it. And until the CIA is heavily restricted I don't ever see an end to that no matter who is the president or who controls congress.

jarmoismyhero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 08:10 PM
  #44
Ilkka Sinisalo
Amazing American
 
Ilkka Sinisalo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Perth, W.A.
Country: Australia
Posts: 12,777
vCash: 500
lol, the U.S. has a vast network of gulags? slip is a lunatic.

Ilkka Sinisalo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 08:13 PM
  #45
jarmoismyhero
Registered User
 
jarmoismyhero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: St. Louis
Country: United States
Posts: 2,568
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kadri43 View Post
Ya and he moved alot of the troops into Afghanistan to support the continuous military industrial complex. I like many people thought they should have left a lot earlier as well. I edited my post right after becaue I meant afghanistan not Iraq.
I might be exaggerating when I say he is not better than Bush but he has not done nearly enough and at least people questioned Bush and knew he was evil. The hopes I had for him in 07 and 08 were enormous. However, I like many others believe he has not done nearly enough.
I will disagree in that I do think he is a better president then Bush but a lot has to do with non military actions. Although even with military on the table he has still been more "successful". Granted I am not a big fan of wars. I do think he has handled the Israel vs. Iran issue fairly well in that he has not let Israel dictate US policy the way some neo-cons have and do.

jarmoismyhero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 08:21 PM
  #46
slip
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 9,581
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ilkka Sinisalo View Post
lol, the U.S. has a vast network of gulags? slip is a lunatic.
I've brought the evidence.

Where is yours?

(BTW, it's a loaded question, because everyone around here knows you don't bring evidence to the table, only insults, ad hominems, and a healthy dose of facepalms).

slip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 08:28 PM
  #47
PricePkPatch
Registered User
 
PricePkPatch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ilkka Sinisalo View Post
lol, the U.S. has a vast network of gulags? slip is a lunatic.
I don't know if we can qualify them as "gulags", but there is certainly a relatively vast network of detention centers run by the CIA.

Actually, I know we cannot qualify them as gulags. Gulags were nothing short of concentration camps for hundreds of people. These prison house much, much less people.

PricePkPatch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 08:28 PM
  #48
PricePkPatch
Registered User
 
PricePkPatch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by slip View Post
I've brought the evidence.

Where is yours?

(BTW, it's a loaded question, because everyone around here knows you don't bring evidence to the table, only insults, ad hominems, and a healthy dose of facepalms
).
Don't be snippy

PricePkPatch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 08:40 PM
  #49
Ilkka Sinisalo
Amazing American
 
Ilkka Sinisalo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Perth, W.A.
Country: Australia
Posts: 12,777
vCash: 500
When your posts are as over-the-top cynical, wild-eyed and crazy as yours, you should expect facepalms and insults. Much in the same way that I have no interest in engaging in a serious policy discussion with the mentally insane homeless man who is hurling expletives and his own feces.

Ilkka Sinisalo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 08:42 PM
  #50
Ilkka Sinisalo
Amazing American
 
Ilkka Sinisalo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Perth, W.A.
Country: Australia
Posts: 12,777
vCash: 500
Also, you do not seem to know what the gulags actually were.

Ilkka Sinisalo is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:43 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.