CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
Obama is clearly intent on fulfilling his foolish promise to close Gitmo. He is controlling who gets released. By eventually releasing all the prisoners he will remove the objections to closing Gitmo by default. All that remain are the worst of the worst, but they will be released to rejoin the fight and to kill more Americas, so that he can appease his lefty supporters.
Several things you've said (in multiple posts) need to be corrected.
All that remain are the worst of the worst
Of the 122 prisoners still there, about half (57) have been cleared for release by the Department of Justice, the Department of State, the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Joint Chiefs of Staff. (ref)
they will be released to rejoin the fight
Or, they would be moved to SuperMax prisons (from which no one has ever escaped.)
build a place to incarcerate them
Several SuperMax prisons already exist.
on American soil, where they would get the full benefit of our civilian legal system
Their rights don't change whether they are in Guantanamo Bay or not (see: Rasul v. Bush)
American tax payers are NOT willing to pay tens of millions of dollars to give these terrorists a day in American court.
Instead we pay tens of millions not to. SuperMax prisons cost about 3 times the average prison to run - Guantanamo costs 40+ times more per prisoner than a SuperMax prison. (ref)
Recruiters are not using Gitmo as a tool.
Yes they do. Less so now that we don't torture there, but it is still used. ref
If Gitmo NEVER existed, ISIS would still be doing what it's currently doing today.
That they would try the same thing is not to say they would be as successful.
capturing them in a foreign country on the battlefield killing our soldiers
Most Guantanamo prisoners were there because of bounties we offered. Only 5% were captured by US soldiers. Less than 10% have been categorized as Al-Qaeda fighters. (ref)
There is no reason to bring them into civilian court. They are among other things enemy combatants and are best left to the military courts.
Housing them in a US prison does not mean they must be tried in civilian court.
You are operating on the assumption that there can only be one tool used for recruitment, which makes no sense.
""[T]here are serving U.S. flag-rank officers who maintain that the first and second identifiable causes of U.S. combat deaths in Iraq -- as judged by their effectiveness in recruiting insurgent fighters into combat -- are, respectively the symbols of Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo." - Former Navy General Consul Alberto Mora.
I could go ahead and quote all of the military officials that have said the same thing under anonymity, but something tells me you wouldn't believe that. Regardless, pointing out that Islam is used as a tool to recruit does not, in any way, dismiss or counter the fact that GitMo is also used as a tool, particularly in conjunction with radical Islam.
Islam is the common denominator, the hook, the main tool to begin the recruiting process. All this other shit is of far less importance. You are correct. You can quote all day and it wont change the fact that Islam is by far the number one tool.
When interrogators on the ground, the Direct of the CIA and a major Army general all disagree with you on the significance of GitMo, you may want to rethink your position.
Jihadiology------ that's going to be your source? Really
Using lies about Gitmo is not the fault of Gitmo. They lie about the motives of the Great Satan in every conceivable way ---- you gota do better than that.
Military officials are people with opinions. Many officials think of their pension, before crossing Obama.
The process:
Step #1. Find Muslims to recruit
Step #2. Use Islam to begin to tell prospects about the Great Satan who is attacking Islam.
Step #3. Create lies to build hatred.
If not Gitmo, then simply another subject to lie about.
Without Gitmo, we would not have found OBL in the way we did. This fact alone justifies its existence.
You have not shown any reason to release more scumbags back into the fight, just so no mo Gitmo.
Jihadiology------ that's going to be your source? Really
Ad hominem does you no good. If you are going to question a source, provide actual arguments that undermine its credibility. Do you have any arguments as to how those particular links I gave you are illegitimate, or no?
Using lies about Gitmo is not the fault of Gitmo. They lie about the motives of the Great Satan in every conceivable way ---- you gota do better than that. Military officials are people with opinions. Many officials think of their pension, before crossing Obama.
Oh come ON. You discredit authorities on the matter based entirely on partisan speculation. These are not simply people with opinions, these are high ranking members of the military (in two cases) and people who have been on the ground personally (in one case), and are therefore far more authoritative on this matter than either you or I.
Step #1. Find Muslims to recruit
Step #2. Use Islam to begin to tell prospects about the Great Satan who is attacking Islam.
Step #3. Create lies to build hatred.
But that's the point: With GitMo, they don't even have to use lies! They have an actual, real world example that they can (and do) use to convince people.
If not Gitmo, then simply another subject to lie about.
Like what? Give me more than pure speculation.
Without Gitmo, we would not have found OBL in the way we did. This fact along justifies its existence.
Citation needed.
You have not shown any reason to release more scumbags back into the fight, just so no mo Gitmo.
That is the worst strawman you have employed yet. I never claimed that they should be released, despite the fact that over 80 people in GitMo have been cleared for release. Please try to respond to what I am actually saying.
Discredited because they view us and ANY other "infidel" as their enemy. Discredited because they support excuses for barbarism.
As I have said before, tools like these give them some semblance of legitimacy when making these claims against us, and they use it.
I discredit authorities based on there willingness to bow to Obama. Some did not, and are now gone......
Again, it is ridiculous, if not downright pathetic, to accuse them of "bowing to Obama" because they have stated opinions that differ from yours. You have completely prevented any legitimate conversation on the topic.
The lies of mistreatment are false. Dis-proven.
And how were they disproven, exactly?
The prisoners in Gitmo can be dealt with in only three ways:
Leave them there - Move them(Congress won't) - let them go
The only practical option is -------Leave Them There -----
That is not only defeatist, but disingenuous considering you oppose moving them regardless of Congress' opinion on the matter.
Many of the military officials called for it to be closed before Obama became President and/or made their statements after they had retired, so fear of Obama was not their impetus.
Do you think GW Bush, Colin Powell, John McCain, etc. were bowing to Obama before he even became President?
The lies of mistreatment are false. Dis-proven.
Can you really claim both that torture at Guantanamo worked and that we didn't torture at Guantanamo?
(Congress won't)
Just because "Congress won't" doesn't mean it isn't the better option, or isn't a practical one, or isn't at least worthy of discussion. Is the reason they won't, at least to a significant degree, partisan?
Jihadiology------ that's going to be your source? Really
Didn't make it past the first link, eh? The links marked #2, #3, and #4 link directly to a propaganda magazine created by Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula.
Without Gitmo, we would not have found OBL in the way we did.
Silliness. Presumably you mean to endorse the torture program, not that the torture had to take place at Guantanamo Bay to be effective...
release more scumbags
The same false choice you have already been called on.
Really Didn't make it past the first link, eh? The links marked #2, #3, and #4 link directly to a propaganda magazine created by Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula.
You are spouting obama's excuse, paraphrase : "If we show them respect, they'll leave us alone". Has NOT worked, will NOT work. They are coming for us because WE ARE the great Satan. End of story.......
Presumably you mean to endorse the torture program, not that the torture had to take place at Guantanamo Bay to be effective...
Yes ----- it did work and it worked offshore, away from liberal lawyers. Now your catching on.
What would your PC sensibilities prefer "radical Islamic terrorist scumbags"
Both of your responses not only ignore my statements, but seem to suggest that you understand Guantanamo not to be necessary.
How is that an argument for keeping it?
If whatever happens at Guantanamo can happen elsewhere (while I do encourage you to take up GN's challenge regarding evidence that torture worked, it isn't necessary to resolve for our discussion since, as you seem to concur, the treatment can occur outside Guantanamo) for cheaper, with less propaganda utility, without conveying any additional rights, etc., how is it beneficial?
They are coming for us because WE ARE the great Satan. End of story
If I call you the Great Satan, does that instantly provide me with an army? Or, do I need to convince people, and the more evidence I can provide, the more people I can convince, correct? Military officials and people from both parties believe it to be a net negative and endorse closure - what overriding benefits that those people did not consider are you offering in its defense?
What would your PC sensibilities prefer "radical Islamic terrorist scumbags"
You are spouting obama's excuse, paraphrase : "If we show them respect, they'll leave us alone". Has NOT worked, will NOT work. They are coming for us because WE ARE the great Satan. End of story.......
No, he did not claim that at all. You are employing more and more straw men on this topic, DaveR, and it is getting ridiculous.
Yes ----- it did work and it worked offshore, away from liberal lawyers. Now your catching on.
I was going to, but I wasn't sure how to set up that quote since it was part of the way through the sentence and I didn't think about providing a direct link to the video, which was a good idea.
Obama wants to close Gitmo. His fantasy reason is that radical Islamic terrorists are using it as a recruiting tool. By following this line of reasoning, should we also leave the region so they will stop being mean to us?
IMO no concession and no appeasement and no quarter will take them from their path to our destruction. IMO Gitmo is an asset to be used against them. Bring in prisoners, interrogate them, act on that INTEL, then try them as enemies of the state.
So do many, many others, including very high ranking military and intelligence officials.
His fantasy reason is that radical Islamic terrorists are using it as a recruiting tool.
It isn't a fantasy, you have been provided that they are using it as a recruiting tool, and statements from high ranking members of the intelligence and military communities affirming that.
By following this line of reasoning, should we also leave the region so they will stop being mean to us?
That line of reasoning does not follow. We are in the region to accomplish a mission, and while being there, it makes no sense to continue something that provides no tangible benefit to us but does provide a benefit to our "enemies".
IMO no concession and no appeasement and no quarter will take them from their path to our destruction.
Closing GitMo would be neither concession, nor appeasement. We would not be releasing anyone. We would simply be taking a tool away from them.
IMO Gitmo is an asset to be used against them.
How is it an asset? What benefit has it provided that could not have been provided at another location?
Bring in prisoners, interrogate them, act on that INTEL, then try them as enemies of the state.
What aspect of that is inherent to GitMo? All of those things have been done and will continue to be done in different locations.
To a very real degree, yes. GitMo itself is used as a tool because the world sees it as a symbol. Remove that symbol and it dramatically reduces the ability to use it for propaganda purposes. Any similar method to propagandize the prisoners would be more vague, and without the power it had when using such a globally recognized symbol.
I completely disagree. IMO wherever we put these enemies of America, these avowed killers of our young men, these barbaric throwbacks to hundreds of years of religious war, they will remain as they are today.
♦ Its not Gitmo, its the prisoner's who are the symbol. ♦
Obama is currently trying to release these scumbags just so he can close Gitmo. He does not plan to move them! If he succeeds, NOTHING will be resolved
A) Al Qaeda wouldn't use Gitmo if they didn't think it was effective.
B) If it makes no difference, then why spend millions of dollars per prisoner per year housing them at Gitmo rather than under 100 thousand for imprisoning them at a SuperMax?
Obama is currently trying to release these scumbags
Bullshit. (And bullshit you've been called on multiple times.)
♦ Its not Gitmo, its the prisoner's who are the symbol. ♦
Can you provide evidence of this? Because I have provided plenty of evidence that GitMo itself is the symbol.
Obama is currently trying to release these scumbags just so he can close Gitmo. He does not plan to move them! If he succeeds, NOTHING will be resolved
Now you seriously need to provide evidence of this. Can't wait to see a source referring only to the Yemeni's.
Obama is clearly intent on fulfilling his foolish promise to close Gitmo.
And how is that foolish?
All that remain are the worst of the worst, but they will be released to rejoin the fight and to kill more Americas, so that he can appease his lefty supporters.
That is a rather blatant lie. Closing Gitmo does not mean releasing all of the prisoners. I expect better from you, DaveR, than blatant lies and fear-mongering.
Surprised that you need to ask why Gitmo needs to stay open GN, but OK here is why. Obama's option was to try them in civilian court in NY City. And to build a place to incarcerate them on American soil, where they would get the full benefit of our civilian legal system. There is no lie in these facts. He DID* make the campaign promise to the lefties in his party. These in Gitmo are not criminals and are terrorists.
Obama's option was to try them in civilian court in NY City. And to build a place to incarcerate them on American soil, where they would get the full benefit of our civilian legal system.
Where we have convicted countless terrorists before. You have not indicated what the problem is.
Are you somehow NOT remembering what the people of NY thought of the idea? Are you somehow NOT remembering how Holder had to back off. The problem is obvious. American tax payers are NOT willing to pay tens of millions of dollars to give these terrorists a day in American court. The option to do it cheaply and effectively in military court is the way to go. Most Americans do not want these terrorist set free and you do not want them in federal prisons and do not want him in civilian courts there my good man is the problem.
Are you somehow NOT remembering what the people of NY thought of the idea?
You mean before or after Republicans lied and told everyone that Obama was going to be releasing terrorists into their back yards?
The problem is obvious. American tax payers are NOT willing to pay tens of millions of dollars to give these terrorists a day in American court.
But they are willing to entirely give up our sense of moral superiority and give the terrorists a wonderful recruiting tool.
The option to do it cheaply and effectively in military court is the way to go.
A very large portion of those in Gitmo haven't even gone through military court. Even if they did go through military court, they could then be transferred to SuperMax prisons.
Most Americans do not want these terrorist set free and you do not want them in federal prisons and do not want him in civilian courts there my good man is the problem.
Nobody wants to set terrorists free, and I see no problem in having more terrorists in federal SuperMax prisons. Notice I say more, because there are already quite a few there.
You mean before or after Republicans lied and told everyone that Obama was going to be releasing terrorists into their back yards? Making these exaggerations is not an honest accounting of what Obama and Holder were trying to do. The truth of my comments about courts and prisons remains as irrefutable evidence of Obama's lame attempts to fulfill a foolish and poorly informed promise to liberals.
But they are willing to entirely give up our sense of moral superiority and give the terrorists a wonderful recruiting tool.
This tortured explanation has run its course. Recruiters are not using Gitmo as a tool. Overwhelmingly the rely on radical Islam to promote hate and violence. If Gitmo NEVER existed, ISIS would still be doing what it's currently doing today.
Get Real!
I see no problem in having more terrorists in federal SuperMax prisons.
If you do not, you are in a decided minority. Most understand the distinct difference between a criminal and a radical Islamic terrorist. Viewing ISIS as simply a bunch of lawless criminals is ill defining our mortal enemy. How many bank robbers or pedophiles or murderers, for that matter want to kill us all and destroy our nation?
The honest answer is, for the most part we captured them here and tried them here as opposed to capturing them in a foreign country on the battlefield killing our soldiers
The honest answer is, for the most part we captured them here and tried them here as opposed to capturing them in a foreign country on the battlefield killing our soldiers
You are completely forgetting that there are plenty of domestic terrorists, people who commit their crimes here, who are tried, convicted, and imprisoned. We have a very solid track record of convicting terrorists. So what is wrong with the system that you are afraid of having other terrorists imprisoned in the same SuperMax prisons?
You are completely forgetting that there are plenty of domestic terrorists, people who commit their crimes here, who are tried, convicted, and imprisoned.
That's what I just said.
There is nothing wrong with our system that makes me afraid. I have presented the facts as to what most Americans think about Gitmo. There is no reason to bring them into civilian court. They are among other things enemy combatants and are best left to the military courts. Exactily what is wrong with that.
I don't think he will be able to. Congress doesn't want to cooperate any more. I think since Bush supported it they will wait for a Republican president so they can take credit.
I agree that Congress won't support it. (They haven't wanted to cooperate since the beginning, even on policies they used to support.)
The debate is referring to the idea that he is apparently looking for a way to do it without Congress.
so they can take credit.
No sure how much credit they would garner by intentionally and vociferously blocking it for a decade and then allowing it. Though the American electorate isn't very savvy, so they would likely get more credit than they would actually deserve.
