What about Guantanamo?
Asked by
oratio (
8940
)
May 20th, 2009
Obama has big problems keeping true to his promise to close the prison on Cuba. The congress doesn’t want to push money to it or put them through the american justice system, and they don’t want to release them. What should be done about this?
Who’s responsibility are they?
Should the camp stay open and the military deal with it?
Should they be put to justice in the US court system?
Should EU take the responsibility and put the through the ICC?
Should they just be released?
What’s your opinion?
link
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
31 Answers
Charge them in US court or release them. Those are the only two options.
Isn’t that the Latin translation of hit 90s comedy What about Bob?
No simple answer to this one. Some would be find released while others would be killing Americans with in a very short time.
I like it on taco’s….......... oh wait, not guacamole…..
If they want it closed they will have to look at each inmate individually, those that they think they have enough evidence to successfully prosecute in court. Possibly The International Court of Justice in The Netherlands (not where Peter Pan lives). And the rest I suppose they would have no choice but to release.
If anything is likely to groom someone to be a terrorist though it is probably that place. The US seems to have really made a rod for it’s own back there.
It was one of his easiest promises to keep and pure politics at work.
GA! ?? Sorry I don’t follow you?
oh? Good Answer??
I get it now, sorry I’m a bit slow!
That’s okay :). I can’t tell you how many times I’ve had to look up computer chat related acronyms.
@RedPowerLady
My friends mother once sent a text to someone who had just lost a loved one that read
“Hope you are okay, lol”
She thought it meant “lots of love”
I think you will hear Obama’s opinion tomorrow, suppose to be a speech about it.
America has no right occupying Cuban territory in the first place, let alone utilising Guantanamo for their nefarious practices
@mammal that base is there based on a legally-executed, written agreement. what goes on there, that’s a up to debate, but the base is there legally.
Check out the Wikipedia article on it.
@mammal you’re right. i made that whole article up. really, the US just sent like 12 packs of Coca Cola and a few subscriptions to Details, and Castro was all like “Fo Sheezy”.
you got me.
Fo shizzle my nizzle. It’s king.
@eponymoushipster it isn’t for America to decide what is legal or not….basically if America wants something it’s legal. What you are suggesting is that they may squat there indefinitely, for free…. why are people on here so indifferent to the glaringly obvious injustice, is fluther a haven for those who’s selfish gene is particularly dominant?
@mammal it was a treaty. from the early 1900s. No sign-y no treaty.
@eponymoushipster it was a treaty ratified at a time when Cuba was struggling toward a modicum of independence, from the prevailing superpowers, it was probably signed under duress or in a threatening environment in any case, Cuba as a tiny former slave colony didn’t have much in the way of bargaining power.
@mammal I guess they should give Manhattan back, too, since the Natives had ready access to their own beads and furs.
@eponymoushipster And while they’re at it, they should give Texas, California, Nevada, Utah, and parts of Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico, and Wyoming back to Mexico.
@bob_ let’s give the Louisiana Purchase back, too.
@bob_ Texas and Hawaii should go back to being their own independent countries, too.
@eponymoushipster Texas is kind of tricky. Mexico never recognized its independence. What would happen there?
@bob_ eh, whatever. it’s Texas. who cares?
Answer this question 
This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.
Composing members:
0
