<p>Because torturing the detainees has garnered us so much good will. And we are already paying for them to stay in Guantanamo, its not like Guantanamo isn't funded by tax payer dollars...</p>
<p>I have no issue with somebody being conservative. I have issues with people who want to break an international treaty. </p>
<p>And what about the people who DON'T have information? That are WRONGLY put in there? But again, we wouldn't know that because everything is secretive. What if the US government decided that they could do this to US? Nobody would be safe. </p>
<p>Besides, the people in there don't talk. How much info do you really think we've gotten from them? Whatever we have, it obviously hasn't made this war go any better. We cry outrage when other countries wrongly imprison foreigners with no trials in secret prisons, but say nothing when we ourselves do it?</p>
<p>I rather have them in GitMo than potentially down the street</p>
<p>They're not going to be potentially down the street. Most of these people, the ones who we don't want to put on trial because we have no evidence against them, were yanked out of their homes abroad, with very few, if any, connections to your "street." How would you like it if some foreign country invaded us, took your father, and sent him to a secret prison without a trial because he looked suspicious. If you say that's ok for another country, why can't it be ok for us? The conditions that we apply for a "terrorist" country can all be applied to us as well.</p>
<p>I think that Roman makes a valid point. Abercrombieindy, no one is critisizing your political views, but putting political views aside for a minute, do you not also think that if a country other than the US was creating secret prisons and ignoring international laws, that most would cry outrage. So therefore, why should the morality standards be any different for the US. After all, is every human life not of equal value.</p>
<p>actually the info we receive from detainees is very very good. If we received crappy info from them, do you think the army would still waste their time interrogating them? no they would not. That is why most of the top army officials have come out in support of Gitmo, the know things we do not, and they say that it is the best for the country.</p>
<p>^craze, that happens all the time, even the UN violates international law often. The only reason that people harp on the US is that we are the biggest kid on the block. If you want me to pull out my links, then I will, but here's the short list:</p>
<p>Oil for food scandal
Large amounts of mixed race children in African villages
Many UN peacekeepers accused of trading food for sex
Many UN peacekeepers accused of rape
Lost of racism/antisemitism</p>
<p>This is unfortunate but again this person had to do something to garner suspicion ( even if he is "innocent"). Rendition is over. Plus that example is not the majority of detainees' story. Most of them have legitimate terrorist ties. But think about the risk that would result from closing GitMo.
FYI: christians/athiest comment wasn't direct @ u</p>
<p>I know who you were referring to. </p>
<p>The fact is, we don't know how many of them are terrorists. 1 could be, all could be. But we won't know until they have a trial. The Geneva Convention was held for a reason. We must stick to the terms of it. If we don't then what is to stop other countries from capturing Americans and torturing them without a trial? If we don't stick to it, why should anyone have to? What if Iraqis decide to come over, kidnap Americans, and torture them without a trial. Well of course there would be outrage, but they could legitimately say "You did it first." </p>
<p>Again, I am not attacking you because you are a conservative. I am attacking the fact that you think that we, as Americans, are somehow above International laws. Yes, on September 11, 2001, terrorists from Afghanistan killed thousands of people. Now, we are killing innocent people who have absolutely no ties to terrorism. There is no difference between torturing an innocent Iraqi without a trial or torturing an innocent American without a trial. </p>
<p>Tboone, how would you know what the information is like coming from them? We never get to hear it.</p>
<p>Tboone: yes, you do make a valid point about the ignoral of international law by most countries and even peace-promoting agencies. That is not to say however and to quote the cliche "two wrongs don't make a right." I know, this maybe cheesy, but I strongly believe in the great sense of morality and goodwill of most Americans and I definetly agree with your statement that "US is the biggest kid on the block." So why, I ask can the US not set a moral example by the closing of Gitmo? I mean because it is claimed to be the greatest nation by most (more or less), can it not also lead on the fronteir for the promotion of morality and justice in the world when it has the power to do so?</p>
<p>[STUPID] Why would they let them out. They're proven terrorists, I don't want them to be my neighbors. Why would they release these suicide bombers.[/STUPID]</p>
<p>S-T-F-U idiots. targeting and torturing terrorists isn't going to get rid of the problem. These people hate you for a reason, torturing their family members will only make you seem like bigger ***holes. It only makes the problem worse.</p>
<p>Next war will be with Iran because of their stupid pipeline that will compete with the US's(Cheney's).</p>
<p>The terrorists aren't watching that we make a moral example- they could care less. They just have an angry radical agenda that won't be stopped by the same ol same ol tactics. And I totally agree with T-Boone. The government's first priority is to protect the people. Closing GitMo and giving trials to TERRORISTS won't be protecting the people. If the public knew about every little threat and piece of intelligence all hell would break lose sometimes things are best kept quite. This whole trial situation and "talking it over" only draws out the problem creating a even bigger mess.</p>
<p>It kills me how sometimes people actually think most terrorists cooperate. What should we do then instead of "torturing the innocent, little terrorist"?:(</p>
<p>International treaties for the most part do not apply either because the insurgents are not alligned with any state organization, but that is another point. The reason the US cannot take a moral "higher ground" is because it will never be enough. Lets say we release all of the Gitmo terrorists tomorrow. Then the world would complain about the lack of US development in Iraqi infrastructure after we destroyed it during the invasion. Then if we repaired all of their infrastructure for free, then the world would complain about the US's lack of social responsibility regarding the schooling and health care of Iraqi children. It just goes on and on. </p>
<p>Romani: I know of no specific information, but I am friends with a colonel in the air force. He says that if they were not getting useful information, the would not be interrogating them like they do because the armed forces are very pragmatic. Do you honestly believe that commanders in the army willingly and excitedly order the torture of these combatants because they are just cruel mean hearted people who enjoy hearing both the screams of their helpless victims and the wrath of the media and America in general?</p>
<p>You're not "protecting" the people when you p*ss off the world. </p>
<p>Ok, let's be frank. The rest of the world hates us. Do you really think after this whole thing that if somebody attacks us, they're gonna help us? No. Why should they? We've broken international laws and have done nothing to rectify the situation. Only now are we beginning to. </p>
<p>And don't kid yourself into thinking that America is the only big kid on the block. We are not the only super power in the world any more, and other kids are getting growth spurts. </p>
<p>Who decides what's kept quiet and what's released? I remember this being a government for the people, by the people. Popular opinion, national law, and international law all dictate that we close Gitmo.</p>
<p>I firmly believe that compromising our principals is far worse than compromising our security. What good is it to have security to protect the freedom and liberty of this country if there is no freedom and liberty to protect?</p>
<p>Tboone: You may have a friend, I have a whole family. I am the only person in my family who is not in some stage of military life (either active or retired). Many of them are very high up. They will continue to keep them there as long as they can, for the hope that maybe they'll provide something. They will not admit that they are wrong. No, they don't commit torture because they want to, they do it because they're ordered to. In the military, you DON'T question. Period. Bush said torture them for info, you torture them for info.</p>
<p>EDIT: ambe, terrorists won't cooperate even if they're tortured. They'd die before they gave out any useful information. Their whole lives are centered around the death of the West. Do you really think they'd compromise that because of pain when they're willing to blow themselves up?</p>
<p>abercrombieindy: If that is so, considering what you are saying is true. Do you believe that such an authoritve and militative stand against these terroists is the most effective solution? Though this strong stand may have a short-term solution, the long-term possibilities that could arise as a result of such an agressive solution will be devestating in the future years, and thus will be ineffective because of their ability to stop these terrorists altogether. However, would a democratic stand be not of a much better solution? At least through this less aggressive approach the long-term problems to this future terrorism threat will at least be more likely halted by both sides coming to a more mutual understanding.</p>
<p>And Romani, you act as if the entire American public is facing the imminent threat of capture by Armed American GI's. The last time I heard, there were about 270 people in gitmo, and they were all internationals that were originally detained outside the united states. They do not care about arresting Pizza hut managers or small time weed dealers, they care about people who are firing Kalishnakovs at them. The reason gitmo was created in the first place was because the jurisdiction of enemy not state affiliated combatants was questionable. </p>
<p>In addition, Gitmo is not the reason why intls hate America, neither is GW Bush. The "world" hates America because their local culture and the world they know and love is being metaphorically paved over by global conglomerates like mcdonalds and coca cola.</p>
<p>Gitmo and the war are a huge part of it. They know we're fighting an unjust war and many other countries are suffering consequences because of our actions. And it doesn't matter how many are there. It is the principal and the standard. We should be held to the same laws that we make other countries accountable to. Btw, there are at least 520 in Gitmo according to the Pentagon.</p>
<p>Yes it is a thought that this could anger some folks but no one will ever be completely happy. much of these organizations' terrorism spawn from basic ill will and some radical religious problems. I highly doubt any of it will be solved by simple moral negotiation. We didn't win WWII by sitting down and talking with Japan and Germany. Like Hitler, many of these terrorists are driven by hateful ideology that can't be broken under gentle "democratic" solutions</p>
<p>Romani, u should watch 24 sometimes</p>
<p>Do you really think that torturing them is gonna make them stop? It's just going to infuriate them more and turn even more of them against us. There are more terrorists in Iraq now than when we invaded years ago. We would demand any other country in our situation to leave the country. And technically, we're not even in a war! We're simply invaders who are punishing a whole nation because of a few, and yeah they hate us even more for it. </p>
<p>I am not willing to compromise our nation's dignity by refusing to uphold International law because I've lost too many people close to me who have died fighting for those principals.</p>
<p>abe, I don't really watch tv. It's too fake for me.</p>