Somebody is upset.....:lol:[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="tagyhag"]
Americans? Running?Â
:lol:
tagyhag
Californian born and raised. :D Fat jokes are still relevant to this country.
i thought it was quite funny. :PThis topic is locked from further discussion.
Somebody is upset.....:lol:[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="tagyhag"]
Americans? Running?Â
:lol:
tagyhag
Californian born and raised. :D Fat jokes are still relevant to this country.
i thought it was quite funny. :P[QUOTE="Darthkaiser"]What is it that they keep there that they don't want to let outMaster_LiveTerrorists. i didn't know Obama and Bush are inside Gitmo.
obama turnd from a socialist into a neoconservative sadly[QUOTE="liberalus"][QUOTE="Fightingfan"]But obama said he was gonna close gitmo. Blue-Sky
turns out you can't close it without congress and a state willing to take them
Congress he had, so that shoots down that part of your argument. And what are you telling me, that even governors from Obama's own party weren't "willing to take them", why is that?I don't see why we don't just load them all on a plane, fly them over middle of the Pacific, open the bomb-bay doors and shove them out. It's not like anyone will miss them.
[QUOTE="Blue-Sky"][QUOTE="liberalus"] obama turnd from a socialist into a neoconservative sadly Master_Live
turns out you can't close it without congress and a state willing to take them
Congress he had, so that shoots down that part of your argument. And what are you telling me, that even governors from Obama's own party weren't "willing to take them", why is that?Cause he was doing other things?[QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]Because the US government doesn't have sufficient evidence to try some inmates yet believe they are to dangerous to release, so they just hold them indefinitely. This makes it seem completely rational to hold them then.I don't understant why we can't just give them a trial, then throw them into jail for life or execute them.
Master_Live
Because the US government doesn't have sufficient evidence to try some inmates yet believe they are to dangerous to release, so they just hold them indefinitely. This makes it seem completely rational to hold them then. Having no evidence that someone is a terrorist, but being "convinced" that they're dangerous anyway is rational now? You're one of the most entrenched status-quo apologists on this site, and your mental gymnastics would be impressive if it wasn't so sad.[QUOTE="Master_Live"][QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]
I don't understant why we can't just give them a trial, then throw them into jail for life or execute them.
MakeMeaSammitch
Because the US government doesn't have sufficient evidence to try some inmates yet believe they are to dangerous to release, so they just hold them indefinitely. This makes it seem completely rational to hold them then. Actually, that makes the US look like human rights violator. If they don't have the evidence to try them, too bad, then release them. What gives the US the right hold other human beings indefinitely without trial?[QUOTE="Master_Live"][QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]
I don't understant why we can't just give them a trial, then throw them into jail for life or execute them.
MakeMeaSammitch
[QUOTE="the_bi99man"]
[QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]
I don't understant why we can't just give them a trial, then throw them into jail for life or execute them.
MakeMeaSammitch
That would make way too much sense. lrn2politics, bro
Also, didn't Obama say he was closing that place like four years ago?
He tried, the republicans blocked it.He didn't do it while he had both houses of congress in pocket? Why not? Too busy pushing a trillion dollar stimulus package, full of more earmarks and slushfunds than any bill in history (immediately after claiming that he would "not sign any bill with even a single earmark")? Nice. Obama apologists... Can't believe they haven't learned anything yet.
Wow.. that's a major waste of money.. but the U.S is getting use to that though lol.. What else can we waste money on?
[QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]This makes it seem completely rational to hold them then. Having no evidence that someone is a terrorist, but being "convinced" that they're dangerous anyway is rational now? You're one of the most entrenched status-quo apologists on this site, and your mental gymnastics would be impressive if it wasn't so sad. hah[QUOTE="Master_Live"] Because the US government doesn't have sufficient evidence to try some inmates yet believe they are to dangerous to release, so they just hold them indefinitely. Rhazakna
At that price we could at least afford to give them a nicer place to stay. Not all that unreasonable seeing as how the government (applies to both the congress and president) want to see them stay their for the rest of their lives without trial.
We need to close it down, I wish that Obama could find a way to do so. AbstractRadicalwhen he wakes up and decides to do it, it will be done, sadly he is Bush raised to the next corrupt level. he is not a puppet, he is a politician, and it is insane how many blind eyes politically snared people are willing to turn in order to salvage their world view. TLDR: you have been played
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment