Petraeus Backs Closing Gitmo

[Redskins Diehard]

I'm surprised it's that low.

Some of them probably were terrorists, and others who were borderline likely became more radicalized by their confinement (which they would view as unfair and arbitrary).

Are you making the argument that of the 14% only some "were" terrorists when we got them...and we made the others terrorists?

[Larry]

Are you making the argument that of the 14% only some "were" terrorists when we got them...and we made the others terrorists?

When we put them in, we claimed that 100% of them were terrorists.

When we let them out, we claimed that they were no longer dangerous.

But we claim that after we release them, 14% became dangerous again?

[Predicto]

Are you making the argument that of the 14% only some "were" terrorists when we got them...and we made the others terrorists?

I have no idea, and I suspect that there is no way ever to know.

I'm pretty sure that some of the people we grabbed were not terrorists when we grabbed them - because we have already openly admitted that they weren't (not to mention let them go). That's all I can say, really.

I would imagine that being grabbed and sent to Gitmo and interrogated for a few months, then dumped back out on the street in Mosul... yes, I would imagine that this might radicalize a few people. :whoknows:

I am surprised that the number is as low as 14 percent, overall. Aren't you?

[Predicto]

I expected you to go in this direction. Growing up the son of an attorney prepares you for things like this.

I said I understand what Petraeus is saying and his hopes in closing GitMo would do. I disagree with his assessment.

I did not suggest that every human being in the Middle East has an irrational mindset. What I did suggest is that this is a two part symbolic gesture.

First: The closing would be aimed at the world saying we won't "torture", even after Obama said point blank that we wouldn't. We would basically be sacrificing GitMo at the altar of world opinion in hopes they will believe us.

Second: It's closure is supposed to calm moderate Muslims and not turn them extremists. Not exactly sure how the mere thought of GitMo will turn you radical, but that's another topic. So closing GitMo will keep these people moderate but locking these prisoners up in SuperMax will also not inflame them? I'm lost here.

So in the end we are screwing ourselves out of a perfectly good offshore facility, sending dangerous terror suspects to ConUS, housing them in overcrowded Fed SuperMax's all in the hope that the world likes us better and the hopes that the Muslim communities in Afghanistan and Iraq won't realize that these people would be better off in Cuba.

Sorry this reeks of stupidity and ideology versus practicality.

That is a reasonable analysis. I disagree, because I think that Gitmo has become a much greater negative symbol in world opinion than you apparently do.

I usually don't think of Petraeus as being motivated by stupidity and ideology, and I generally taken him at his word, especially after he proved to be so correct about the Surge. I also think he is a man of integrity. I think if Petraeus opposed the closing of Gitmo, he would not publicly lie about it and say that he supported the closure. He would just shut up about ithe subject and do his job.

[Oldskool]

That is a reasonable analysis. I disagree, because I think that Gitmo has become a much greater negative symbol in world opinion than you apparently do.

I usually don't think of Petraeus as being motivated by stupidity and ideology, and I generally taken him at his word, especially after he proved to be so correct about the Surge. I also think he is a man of integrity. I think if Petraeus opposed the closing of Gitmo, he would not publicly lie about it and say that he supported the closure. He would just shut up about the subject and do his job.

Fair enough. I have a feeling that Petraeus may be getting pressure from on high (read: Commander in Chief) to tow the party line on this one. Just my speculation.

[Larry]

Fair enough. I have a feeling that Petraeus may be getting pressure from on high (read: Commander in Chief) to tow the party line on this one. Just my speculation.

Or he was under pressure from the previous one to Keep His Mouth Shut.

[Oldskool]

Or he was under pressure from the previous one to Keep His Mouth Shut.

Either way, politics is either afoot or has been. I have a feeling that its this admin more than the previous one.

[Larry]

Either way, politics is either afoot or has been. I have a feeling that its this admin more than the previous one.

Because the previous one had such a reputation for never, ever, demanding total obedience from all subordinates (meaning, everybody) on all political issues (meaning, all issues)?

[RabidFan]

Well that sure puts a monkey in the Republican wrench. LOL

[GoSkins561]

Or maybe it shows that the US Government was 86% effective at getting terrorists to stop being terrorist lol :cool:...

or 100 percent of them are lucky to be alive at this point.

[Larry]

Well that sure puts a monkey in the Republican wrench. LOL

Nah.

I'm certain that within a day, The Official Line will be that everybody always knew he was a Liberal, and that this only shows why the GOP should never, ever, tolerate anybody who doesn't agree with them 100% of the time.

[Seabee1973]

(Assuming your stat is correct)

And therefore . . . ?

According to a lot of people in Tailgate, 100% of them were terrorists when they went in.

Is the official position, now, that the US Government is 100% accurate when they put people in GTMO, but that they're only 86% correct when they let them out?

But do we know what happened to the rest of them? if i realease 100 people and 14 of them get recaptured but 50 of them are still out there fighting for what we originally arrested them for then how do you figure those numbers? How many of them were executed by their own country like the guys we have holding now from China?

How come you guys are not Parroting the Bush wanted to close Gitmo down line? You probably would have been against it if Bush was for it.

[BigMike619]

http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/report_gitmo_recidivism/2009/05/21/216830.html

An unreleased Defense Department study obtained by The New York Times says almost one in seven of the 534 prisoners released from Guantanamo Bay, Cuba returned to terrorism or military activity.

assume that larry.

and the rest of what you said has already been discredited. just because only 14% went back to terrorism doesnt mean the rest of them werent to begin with. MAYBE gitmo scared them so badly that they dont ever want to go back so they decided to walk the line.

[Redskins Diehard]

Nah.

I'm certain that within a day, The Official Line will be that everybody always knew he was a Liberal, and that this only shows why the GOP should never, ever, tolerate anybody who doesn't agree with them 100% of the time.

You are losing it. I wonder if you thought he was so brilliant when he said Iraq wasn't as bad as the public was made to believe. There is only one side so far that has said his words could not be believed.

[Redskins Diehard]

I have no idea, and I suspect that there is no way ever to know.

I'm pretty sure that some of the people we grabbed were not terrorists when we grabbed them - because we have already openly admitted that they weren't (not to mention let them go). That's all I can say, really.

I would imagine that being grabbed and sent to Gitmo and interrogated for a few months, then dumped back out on the street in Mosul... yes, I would imagine that this might radicalize a few people. :whoknows:

I am surprised that the number is as low as 14 percent, overall. Aren't you?

I am not surprised at all that the number is that low. This is the percentage of people that we have released. Not the percentage of people we have captured.

It is certainly possible that there is at least one guy that was taken into custody undeservedly and became radicalized because of it. I do not think that is a common motivation for terrorists.

[Redskins Diehard]

Well that sure puts a monkey in the Republican wrench. LOL

Nothing more LOL than a poorly played cliche

[BigMike619]

I think the number is that low for 2 reasons. 1, they have only recaptured a small amount since they just started releasing them not too long ago. and 2, it is a small amount released total.

14% is still a high number to me. makes me think we werent treating them bad enough in Gitmo

[Redskins Diehard]

That is a reasonable analysis. I disagree, because I think that Gitmo has become a much greater negative symbol in world opinion than you apparently do.

I usually don't think of Petraeus as being motivated by stupidity and ideology, and I generally taken him at his word, especially after he proved to be so correct about the Surge. I also think he is a man of integrity. I think if Petraeus opposed the closing of Gitmo, he would not publicly lie about it and say that he supported the closure. He would just shut up about ithe subject and do his job.

I agree with your take on Petraeus...I also believed his testimony before Congress that some on the left(particularly the current Sec State) did not. I do not think he would lie about it. Like I said before, most of the issue about closing Gitmo falls around the part of his statement that isn't quoted "close it responsible". Well, what does that mean?

I do not think that Gitmo is the recruiting tool that you do. Our perceived unequal support in the Muslim-Israeli conflict is far more of a motivator in my opinion. Islamic terrorism existed LONG before Gitmo and Bush.

[Predicto]

I am not surprised at all that the number is that low. This is the percentage of people that we have released. Not the percentage of people we have captured.

As far as I know, we have released thousands and have kept only 240 or so.

It is certainly possible that there is at least one guy that was taken into custody undeservedly and became radicalized because of it. I do not think that is a common motivation for terrorists.

You are right, it probably isn't. There are a lot more radicals out there that we have never captured. Still, among the ones that we did grab, I have to think that being wrongly grabbed and interrogated for months might push some "radical jerk but not yet a terrorist" type over the edge into full fledged Che Guevera mode.

Plus, every guy who was wrongfully taken to Gitmo is telling his story all over the place, and the story is probably growing with the telling, like they always do. It's just bad news all around.

[Redskins Diehard]

I think the number is that low for 2 reasons. 1, they have only recaptured a small amount since they just started releasing them not too long ago. and 2, it is a small amount released total.

14% is still a high number to me. makes me think we werent treating them bad enough in Gitmo

Have we "recaptured" these 14%. I do not think that is the case.

[BigMike619]

Have we "recaptured" these 14%. I do not think that is the case.

thats true..i retract that statement

[Predicto]

I agree with your take on Petraeus...I also believed his testimony before Congress that some on the left(particularly the current Sec State) did not.

I admit, I thought Petraeus was wrong back then. I thought the Surge would not work. He was right and I was wrong. I didn't think he was lying, I thought he was mistaken and suffering from wishful thinking. I was wrong.

I do not think he would lie about it.

I have never seen any evidence that he ever lies about anything.

Like I said before, most of the issue about closing Gitmo falls around the part of his statement that isn't quoted "close it responsible". Well, what does that mean?

Dunno. Good question. I wonder if he will be discussing that in the longer interview that is about to be released?

I do not think that Gitmo is the recruiting tool that you do. Our perceived unequal support in the Muslim-Israeli conflict is far more of a motivator in my opinion. Islamic terrorism existed LONG before Gitmo and Bush.

Yes, it did. I do not pretend that Gitmo is even close to the biggest recruiting tool against us. However, it IS one that is totally within our control. We can't just abandon Israel (nor should we), and we can't go back and undo our invasion of Iraq that happened 7 years ago, and we can't stop being a very powerful and wealthy primarily Christian nation that dominates the world militarily.

But we can close Gitmo. That is an option easily available to us that might help a little.

[Redskins Diehard]

As far as I know, we have released thousands and have kept only 240 or so.

You are right, it probably isn't. There are a lot more radicals out there that we have never captured. Still, among the ones that we did grab, I have to think that being wrongly grabbed and interrogated for months might push some "radical jerk but not yet a terrorist" type over the edge into full fledged Che Guevera mode.

Plus, every guy who was wrongfully taken to Gitmo is telling his story all over the place, and the story is probably growing with the telling, like they always do. It's just bad news all around.

The numbers are of a much lower scale than you believe.

The 1 in 7(14%) is about 74 of 530.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25545257-26397,00.html

[Predicto]

The numbers are of a much lower scale than you believe.

The 1 in 7(14%) is about 74 of 530.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25545257-26397,00.html

Really? I stand corrected. I thought I read on this board that over 2000 people had gone through Gitmo.

So we have kept 240 or so and released 530 or so without charges.

Perhaps I was remembering people that we captured and held in places other than Gitmo? Otherwise, I have no idea where I got the ideat that we had 2000 detainees. My error.

[Destino]

So is Petraeus putting us at risk just to be friendly to terrorists? Is he no longer a patriot? Does he hate america?

I'm seeing way to much discussion of the actual issue in this thread and way too little taking lunatics to task for their irresponsible wild accusations. People tried to debate the issue during the election and were met with crazy BS. Does that crazy **** now apply to the guy that was sold to the public as our knight in red white and blue armor?