by Derek Viger

Created on: May 25, 2009   Last Updated: May 28, 2009

When President Obama announced he would close the detention center at Guantanamo the reactions from liberals and conservatives were exactly what anyone could have expected. The left cheered it as a civil rights win, while the right jeered it as a blow to the war on terror. It quickly became evident things would not be so black and white. With Obama announcing a continuation of the Gitmo detention without trial policy, "

indefinite detention", is Mr. President just re-naming Bush's unpopular policy or is this the beginning of a new direction?

At this point, the terror suspects at Gitmo can't just be turned loose. We have told the world these people had to be locked up, they are dangerous. If we turned them loose the world who knows these guys have done bad things will think we're idiots. The terror suspects harbor malicious feelings toward the US. If they didn't when they entered Gitmo they do now. Releasing these terror suspects after giving them time to fester would put them right back into the terror network to continue horrid acts against America and it's allies.

Due civil process will just send some of the terror suspects right back out, as many of the cases against them wouldn't hold up in a normal court of law. Sorry ACLU, philosophically we'd like to give everyone due process. Thanks to Bush, it's too late for that. We've sown the seeds for a terrorist farm at Gitmo.

There is no choice at this point but bring Gitmo detainees to US prisons. The GOP reacted adversely to this, launching an ad campaignstating Gitmo detainees in the US will pretty much result in the complete collapse of life as we know it. Moderate heads don't buy that hogwash.

From The Moderate Voice:

OK. I'll take the bait. And while I'm at it, I'll turn the video's concluding question How does closing Guantanamo Bay make us safer back to the GOP and ask: How does the act of keeping these prisoners at Guantanamo Bay make us safer?

Other than miles of ocean, what distinguishes the Gitmo facility from military prisons on U.S. soil? Does the GOP believe the U.S. military is not competent enough to keep terrorists locked up in any facility other than Gitmo? Are we such cowards that we must house our enemies anywhere but here?

Seriously: I'm willing to be convinced. But rather than lowest-common-denominator tactics, could we please engage in an intelligent, fact-driven discussion of the merits of Gitmo versus all other facilities under U.S. control?

On top of all the questions raised by that

• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next Page >>