Housing Detainees in the US

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by abijnk, May 25, 2009.

?

Should detainees be held in the US?

  1. Yes

    34 vote(s)
    82.9%
  2. No

    7 vote(s)
    17.1%
  1. abijnk macrumors 68040

    abijnk

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2007
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    #1
    Just wondering what people on here think about housing detainees (such as those from Gitmo) in the United States. Conditions aside, would you even entertain the idea, or is it out of the question?
     
  2. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #2
    I don't see what the big fracking deal is. They would be held in maximum security prisons, likely in solitary confinement. It's not like we're going to send them to a white collar, minimum security resort and give them conjugal visits. They'd be going to a federal PMITA prison

    And yes, apparently you can legitimately put an Office Space reference in just about any conversation :D
     
  3. abijnk thread starter macrumors 68040

    abijnk

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2007
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    #3
    It was beautiful, too. You brought a tear to my eye. :D
     
  4. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #4
    More Republican fear-mongering. We've held terrorists, mass murderers, spree killers, sadistic torturers, even Muslim terrorists who attacked the World Trade Center in supermax facilities for decades with no problem. No prison population has been radicalized, no one has escaped, none have done anything in a US prison that would have been any safer if held in Guantanamo.

    It's just a fear-up type political ploy from a party with not much else going for them. If you ask me, it's pretty disrespectful to the thousands of prison guards who are being told they just aren't good enough for the task of holding these guys.
     
  5. Andrew Henry macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    #5
    I personally think they should just stay where they already are. But that's just me!
     
  6. Peace macrumors P6

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    #6
    You can add a lot of Democrats to that too. It's really stupid but elections are coming so.
     
  7. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #7
    Well sure, but it seems like many of them -- such as Harry Reid -- are facing tough re-election fights; and are trying to innoculate themselves against Republican criticism. Personally, I'd like to see Reid go down in flames, so we can get an effective, and hopefully progressive, Senate leader. Something that has been sorely lacking these past few years.
     
  8. zap2 macrumors 604

    zap2

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Location:
    Washington D.C
    #8
    Lock 'em up, give them a fair trial, I'm fine is some stay in the US.


    A while on the Daily Show, John Steward was talking about this, he gave an example of a man who killed someone, then eat that person's brain. It was a funny story, but also stresses the facts our prison system could handle keeping terrorist lock inside.(since they're handling brain eater)
     
  9. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #9
    Yup, there are far more dangerous people in some supermax facilities than at Gitmo.

    Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols, who are terrorists (even though the republicans would have you believe that only brown people with funny names can be terrorists) was/is held in supermax prisons.

    ADX Florence in Colorado holds such fine, upstanding (yes, sarcasm) individuals such as the shoe bomber, Eric Rudolph, the unabomber, the conspirators of the 1993 WTC bombing, the conspirators of the 1998 embassy bombings and Zacarias Moussaoui
     
  10. ucfgrad93 macrumors P6

    ucfgrad93

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Colorado
    #10
    I don't see any reason why they shouldn't be held in the U.S.
     
  11. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #11
    I dont really see the problem people have with this. Its like any other prisoner really, they arent super powered and walking the streets somehow. But hey, if your afraid of everything I guess you'd be afraid of this too :rolleyes:
     
  12. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #12
    I don't get it either. If you listened to the republicans, you'd think we were going to set them free in the US, give them free housing, citizenship and put them on welfare. :rolleyes:
     
  13. Teh Don Ditty macrumors G4

    Teh Don Ditty

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Location:
    Maryland
    #13
    ^Well, the already get better healthcare then we do.

    As you referenced earlier (brilliantly, I might add) put them in Federal PMITA Prison.
     
  14. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    the faraway towns
    #14
    Hey, I just heard on the radio that the men held at Gitmo are nuclear-powered supermen who would turn the other prisoners into zombies and then unleash a radioactive undead army to destroy Middle-America.

    If it's on the radio, it must be true.

    That's Plan B.
     
  15. zap2 macrumors 604

    zap2

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Location:
    Washington D.C
    #15
    Why? I think leaving Gitmo would do use a lot of good

    First off, it now has an image tied to it, and the legality of what happens there will be in question. Bring them to the US(or other countries who will take them) and we can deal with them legally.

    Secondly, once we are done at Gitmo, we can use it in our talks with the Cubans in order to push for freedoms..as in return it, after they take some steps towards these freedoms(while we break up our empire!)
     
  16. KingYaba macrumors 68040

    KingYaba

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2005
    Location:
    Up the irons
    #16
    I would shut Gitmo down as well. The "enemy combatants" can stay in Colorado for the time being.
     
  17. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #17
    I want them to receive some form of due process or else be released -- I don't believe in holding them inside or outside the US without an appropriate trial. They can be tried as war criminals if the government can establish evidence that this is appropriate; otherwise, they should be tried as civilian criminals or released.

    However, to the extent that they're held in the interim, I think if the US is responsible for them, they should be held inside the US and according to US standards for holding individuals who have not yet been committed of a crime, unless the case is made for them to be military prisoners, in which case they should be held according to US Military policy in military jails / prisons.

    Enough of this, "They're too dangerous to ever be let go, but we have no intention of trying them for any crime" nonsense. That's not the American way.
     
  18. Shivetya macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    #18
    put them back in the countries they were taken from.
     
  19. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #19
    So the innocent ones can be killed?
     
  20. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #20
    Even the ones who are guilty of terrorism?
     
  21. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #21
    I'll house them in the US as long as they go into a blue state, the reds need some seats come election time anyways.
     
  22. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #22
    Your grasp of this situation continues to astound me. Did you know that there are red states who do want them, because their economies are suffering and the extra money for imprisoning them would help them? Or that Gen Petraeus is suggesting we shut Gitmo down? Or that some are actually saying we should house them here because it would actually be safer to keep them in the better prisons we have here?

    What would actually happen is nothing, which would prove the right wrong, again.
     
  23. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #23
    I saw a story about a little town in the middle of nowhere Montana (about as red as you can get) that has a brand new state of the art prison with no inmates in it at all and all the guards and prison workers were laid off. This particular town is one of the poorest in the state, if not the country, and they have said they want the detainees to be sent to that prison, as it would create many jobs and boost their economy.
     

Share This Page