6
   

9/11 Families Outraged

 
 
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Thu 22 Jan, 2009 09:21 pm
Quote:
Anti Amaerican Left


Classic tag.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  2  
Reply Fri 23 Jan, 2009 04:19 am
@H2O MAN,
H2O MAN wrote:
I have no use for what Obama is doing to minimize our nations effectiveness in the GWOT.


Just because he is closing Guantanamo doesn't necessarily mean he is going to set the detainees free. Let's see what he actually does with them.

Yes, if Obama frees all the captured enemy fighters, there is a problem (a problem that our soldiers will quickly solve by no longer catching anyone alive).

But maybe Obama wants to start holding captured enemy soldiers in prison along with ordinary criminals, instead of in a dedicated POW camp.

I'm sure our inmate population will give them all a nice warm welcome if that is the case.
H2O MAN
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jan, 2009 04:52 am
@oralloy,
There is something about your post that's a little Déjà vu for me...



You never, ever want to mix enemy prisoners with a civilian prison population - never.
Intrepid
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jan, 2009 05:13 am
@JTT,
JTT wrote:

Quote:
Ouch!


Penetration?

Nope. Hit the wall.
0 Replies
 
Montana
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jan, 2009 05:15 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
I hate to do this to you Finn, but I have to agree with this post.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jan, 2009 07:33 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:
I'm all for spirited and even barbed debate, but the only thing more ridiculous than you question is your insistence that it should be answered.

There is a rule now that one has to explain one's reasoning for starting a topic.


I think there is one thing more ridiculous....and that is suggesting that any question is ridiculous.

Inless, of course, there is a rule that certain questions ought not to be asked.

0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  2  
Reply Fri 23 Jan, 2009 11:17 am
@H2O MAN,
H2O MAN wrote:
There is something about your post that's a little Déjà vu for me...

You never, ever want to mix enemy prisoners with a civilian prison population - never.


We could have the military start slaughtering the enemy as they try to surrender.

(Which is exactly what the military will start doing if Obama starts setting captured enemy fighters free, even if they don't admit it.)
parados
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jan, 2009 11:34 am
@oralloy,
Quick question for you oralloy. What percentage of those at Gitmo were actually captured by the military during combat?
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jan, 2009 11:59 am
@parados,
parados wrote:
Quick question for you oralloy. What percentage of those at Gitmo were actually captured by the military during combat?


"During" combat? Not sure. I'd guess about 50 (but that's a guess).

That Canadian teenager Khadr was captured in combat I believe.

About 180 of them count as captured enemy fighters. But some of them were captured unawares, and not in combat.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jan, 2009 12:13 pm
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:

parados wrote:
Quick question for you oralloy. What percentage of those at Gitmo were actually captured by the military during combat?


"During" combat? Not sure. I'd guess about 50 (but that's a guess).

That Canadian teenager Khadr was captured in combat I believe.

About 180 of them count as captured enemy fighters. But some of them were captured unawares, and not in combat.


Try less than 10%. The vast majority were turned in by other groups for bounty or captured by our CIA or other agencies off of the battlefield.

Cycloptichorn
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jan, 2009 01:51 pm
@oralloy,
Quote:
We could have the military start slaughtering the enemy as they try to surrender.


What do you mean by 'start'? They've been doing it forever.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Mon 2 Mar, 2009 12:36 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:
oralloy wrote:
parados wrote:
Quick question for you oralloy. What percentage of those at Gitmo were actually captured by the military during combat?


"During" combat? Not sure. I'd guess about 50 (but that's a guess).

That Canadian teenager Khadr was captured in combat I believe.

About 180 of them count as captured enemy fighters. But some of them were captured unawares, and not in combat.


Try less than 10%. The vast majority were turned in by other groups for bounty or captured by our CIA or other agencies off of the battlefield.

Cycloptichorn


Less than 10% of what number? There have been more than 500 current and past Guantanamo detainees, so my guess of "50" could be compatible with "less than 10%".
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 May, 2009 11:07 am
@H2O MAN,
H2O MAN wrote:
There is something about your post that's a little Déjà vu for me...



You never, ever want to mix enemy prisoners with a civilian prison population - never.


Looks like Obama disagrees.

Of course, he sort of painted himself into a corner with all his cheap demagogy against Guantanamo during the campaign, and now has little room to maneuver.

Hope the precedent doesn't come back to bite us next time our guys are captured.
0 Replies
 
portlandradical911
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 15 Jan, 2011 05:07 pm
@H2O MAN,
the families should be completely outraged, it's a true shame that teh large majority were conned into taking a check witha gag order attached to it.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

The Story of Jumah al Dossari - Discussion by Diest TKO
Shame on Obama for not closing Gitmo - Discussion by Olivier5
A Gitmo what if - Discussion by H2O MAN
Guantanamo suicides confirmed - Discussion by msolga
Sigh, more lies about abuses - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 03/24/2019 at 02:40:17