It's Been 16 Months

[First]

He's a politician like anyone else, though a pragmatic one unlike most. Which is welcome. At least he didn't make promises everyone knew from day one he couldn't possibly keep, like ending the Fed, CIA and Dept. of Education.

 

[Zebo]

Obama is basically Bush with a little sex appeal, jive, intelligence and personality. I've made 'the list' before and don't feel like again but search your soul you will see this.

 

[waggy]

LOL i get a kick out of you guys that really think Obama is much different then Bush. I also get a kick out of you hypocrites that bashed bush but now defend Obama for the same shit.

 

[dmcowen674]

Quote:
Originally Posted by dmcowen674
Your heroes Palin and McCain lost, get over it.

So you're fine with electing another lying politician, you're content with the status quo. Well, that fits for somebody voting for Bush.

Starting false wars for oil 404 not found

 

[Yeem]

It's obvious that they're looking for the Holy Grail or Excalibur or something. Why else would they be there?

 

[MotF Bane]

Quote:
Originally Posted by dmcowen674
Your heroes Palin and McCain lost, get over it.



Starting false wars for oil 404 not found

Continuing wars... found!

 

[dmcowen674]

Quote:
Originally Posted by dmcowen674
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmcowen674
Your heroes Palin and McCain lost, get over it.



Starting false wars for oil 404 not found

Continuing wars... found!

Continuing =! Start

 

[nick1985]

Dave why do you always fail at quoting

 

[Genx87]

The only people who were fooled would have been those who believe a campaign promise is an ironclad guarantee that the politician in question would do exactly what he said, on exactly the timetable he laid out, irrespective of other concerns. When I hear a campaign promise, I think in terms of what the candidate's plans are, what they would LIKE to do if elected.

When Obama said he'd close Gitmo, I admired his desire to do something about it and hoped he could get it done. When it turned out that there was incredibly viscous opposition in Congress and real security issues brought up by the military and intel communities, I didn't feel like I was "fooled" when Obama didn't immediately close Gitmo. Because while he didn't get it done as fast as I would have liked, at least he wants to do it and probably still plans to...which gets him points with me considering the guy he ran against didn't even go that far.

That's pretty much my objection to this kind of political point scoring. Based on threads like this, politicians are better off having no plans and promising nothing.

Bush wanted to close Gitmo years ago but couldnt because of logistical issues. I am sure your oipinion of Bush on this matter is a 180 from Obama. Obama had to overcome those same issues. Obama knew that before signing his executive order. We all knew that before he even signed it. Go back to the thread about his order and I will be talking about how it wont happen for the same reason it didnt happen under Bush. We have prisoners in there which no country will take and we cant convict them either.

 

[MotF Bane]

Dave why do you always fail at quoting

He fails at everything else; why should quoting be any different?

 

[heyheybooboo]

I think it's a valid question. But I don't think it's relevant here. Oh I'm sure there are excuses why we're still there, but in the end, it's not surprising to those who knew we would still be there.

The American people were fooled. Again.

We'll be out of Iraq in 16 months. No mandated health insurance. Rein in Wall Street. We'll close Guantanamo. Blah, blah, blah.

The current U.S.–Iraq Status of Forces Agreement which sets the 'timetable' for withdrawal was approved after Obama was elected, and before he took office. As tenuous as our presence in Iraq exists, reopening the agreement for 're-negotiation' could easily cause more harm than good. I'm a bit more concerned about our ultimate 'footprint' when our combat troops are 'fully' removed in 2011. Do we really want 30-50k 'advisers' in Iraq?

With regard to the contractors in Iraq, here is everything you wish to know (pdf) from the CBO in 2008. More so than anything what leaped out at me was that ""Professional, Administrative, and Management Support"" represents 30% of our costs for 'contractors'.

There is also another CBO report floating around (which I'm too lazy to snag) that looks in-depth at contractor 'personnel' in Iraq. IIRC in the 2008 it was a bit over 100k, with around 11k actual US citizens.

Close gitmo and put the prisoners where? Gitmo is a perfectly good prison for these people, why close it?

Hell the best thing obama could have done is renamed gitmo, put it under management and caledl it a day.

The are a minimum 52 Federal SuperMax facilities in the United States. The Colorado prison (which holds the 'Worst of the Worst') is completely dedicated to the supermax standard.

The others have special 'SHU' wings .....

" ... In SHU, prisoners are generally allowed out of their cells for only one hour a day; often they are kept in solitary confinement. They receive their meals through ports, also known as "chuck holes," in the doors of their cells. When supermax inmates are allowed to exercise, this may take place in a small, enclosed area where the prisoner will exercise alone.

Prisoners are under constant surveillance, usually with closed-circuit television cameras. Cell doors are usually opaque, while the cells may be windowless. Conditions are spartan, with poured concrete or metal furniture common. Often cell walls, and sometimes plumbing, are soundproofed to prevent communication between the inmates...."


And btw, with regard to GITMO, I give you the soon-to-be operational Thomson Correctional Center in Illinois:

Thomson Correctional Center is a safe maximum-security environment. Prison design, movement patterns and programming options will allow a strong community of order to be maintained.

Inmates will be monitored under constant armed and electronic surveillance. Education, mental health services, recreation and skilled development will be available to inmates as mandatory and or voluntary programming options. These choices, under professional guidance, are opportunities for inmates to enrich their lives with the tools necessary for successful living.

Thomson Correctional Center is a Level 1 adult male maximum-security facility comprised of 1,600 cells and eight housing units.

The facility also has a 200-bed minimum-security unit.

The facility is 146 acres and consists of 15 buildings, totaling 625,000 square feet. Construction in the cell houses is pre-cast, reinforced cement walls. The facility is enclosed by a 12-foot exterior fence and 15-foot interior fence, which includes a dual sided electric stun fence.

and ...

On December 15, 2009, President Barack Obama, via a Presidential memorandum, formally ordered the departments of Justice and Defense to arrange Federal ownership of the prison, and prepare for transfer there of both Federal prisoners and Guantanamo detainees.

According to previous press reports, the acquisition plan contemplated housing there up to 100 inmates from the camp, in addition to other federal prisoners.

The Federal Bureau of Prisons will erect a more secure perimeter fence, so its perimeter security exceeds supermax standards.

The portion of the Thomson prison that will be used to house Guantanamo detainees will be operated by the Department of Defense, while the rest of the prison will be operated by the Federal Bureau of Prisons.

CNN stated that before the decision was announced, many in the town welcomed the idea of Guantanamo prisoner housing in their town as the hopes will revitalize the town's economy and bring jobs.

Sorry about deflating this thread




--

 

[dmcowen674]

Quote:
Originally Posted by nick1985
Dave why do you always fail at quoting

He fails at everything else; why should quoting be any different?

I am awesome at having you guys jealous and infuriated :thumbsup:

 

[nick1985]

I am awesome at having you guys jealous

Are you kidding me?

 

[NoStateofMind]

The current U.S.–Iraq Status of Forces Agreement which sets the 'timetable' for withdrawal was approved after Obama was elected, and before he took office. As tenuous as our presence in Iraq exists, reopening the agreement for 're-negotiation' could easily cause more harm than good. I'm a bit more concerned about our ultimate 'footprint' when our combat troops are 'fully' removed in 2011. Do we really want 30-50k 'advisers' in Iraq?

With regard to the contractors in Iraq, here is everything you wish to know (pdf) from the CBO in 2008. More so than anything what leaped out at me was that ""Professional, Administrative, and Management Support"" represents 30% of our costs for 'contractors'.

There is also another CBO report floating around (which I'm too lazy to snag) that looks in-depth at contractor 'personnel' in Iraq. IIRC in the 2008 it was a bit over 100k, with around 11k actual US citizens.



The are a minimum 52 Federal SuperMax facilities in the United States. The Colorado prison (which holds the 'Worst of the Worst') is completely dedicated to the supermax standard.

The others have special 'SHU' wings .....

" ... In SHU, prisoners are generally allowed out of their cells for only one hour a day; often they are kept in solitary confinement. They receive their meals through ports, also known as "chuck holes," in the doors of their cells. When supermax inmates are allowed to exercise, this may take place in a small, enclosed area where the prisoner will exercise alone.

Prisoners are under constant surveillance, usually with closed-circuit television cameras. Cell doors are usually opaque, while the cells may be windowless. Conditions are spartan, with poured concrete or metal furniture common. Often cell walls, and sometimes plumbing, are soundproofed to prevent communication between the inmates...."


And btw, with regard to GITMO, I give you the soon-to-be operational Thomson Correctional Center in Illinois:



and ...





Sorry about deflating this thread




--

Just because you slap a new name on it doesn't make it "gone".

 

[MotF Bane]

Are you kidding me?

Thank god for mental illness!

 

[sciwizam]

Thomson Correctional Center, aka, Club Gitmo: North

EDIT: By the way, Gov. Quinn: Gitmo detainees in Ill. 'less likely'

 

[Jhhnn]

Pretty hypocritical- Bush Fanbois raving about how the sekrit muslim soshulist america destroying not born in america Obama seems Bush-like in some respects... except when he's not, like with Healthcare and Financial sector reform, and then he's still wrong anyway.

I suppose they'd be happier with McCain doddering in office and the Sarah! waiting in the wings for the stress to kill him...

Iraq? Gitmo? Bank bailouts? Stimulus? Sometimes it feels like you just gotta run the ball when you take the hand-off.

I personally welcome the transfer of Gitmo detainees to actual US territory. Then they'll have Rights, like everybody else, and we'll find out there's no legal case that can be made against all but a few... that their kidnap and incarceration was a shameful pandering to fear and bloodlust, pure domestic political theatre... Having little or nothing to do with their actual threat to US security... A classic cock-up, but it helped repubs win the 2002 & 2004 elections, and that's all that mattered to them...

The fearmongering was so strong and effective that it still lingers in the body politic, sad to say...

 

[sciwizam]

Pretty hypocritical- Bush Fanbois raving about how the sekrit muslim soshulist america destroying not born in america Obama seems Bush-like in some respects... except when he's not, like with Healthcare and Financial sector reform, and then he's still wrong anyway.

I suppose they'd be happier with McCain doddering in office and the Sarah! waiting in the wings for the stress to kill him...

Iraq? Gitmo? Bank bailouts? Stimulus? Sometimes it feels like you just gotta run the ball when you take the hand-off.

I personally welcome the transfer of Gitmo detainees to actual US territory. Then they'll have Rights, like everybody else, and we'll find out there's no legal case that can be made against all but a few... that their kidnap and incarceration was a shameful pandering to fear and bloodlust, pure domestic political theatre... Having little or nothing to do with their actual threat to US security... A classic cock-up, but it helped repubs win the 2002 & 2004 elections, and that's all that mattered to them...

The fearmongering was so strong and effective that it still lingers in the body politic, sad to say...

You mean the same rights that Obama is depriving people detained in Bagram?

 

[bfdd]

Here's a hypothetical question that may or may not having anything to do with this topic...

If a politician makes a campaign promise, then gets elected and either the situation changes or they learn new information or just rethink their position, should they ignore this in favor of keeping their campaign promise above all else? Or is changing your mind when the facts support it a mark of an intelligent person?

I'm serious, because it seems like the issue of "flip-flopping" totally eclipses the particular issues being "flip-flopped" on. In many, if not most, cases, people who disagreed with a politician's initial position ALSO disagree with that politician if he switches sides. I feel like it's hard to hold both those positions simultaneously. It seems pretty goofy to think a candidate was wrong to hold a particular position, and is also wrong when he changes his mind.

It honestly feels like "gotcha" politics and not actual debate. Politics should be, above all, about ISSUES...and our commentary on the politicians involved should be based on their position on the issues, not negative thing we can manage to tag them with. And while their intelligence and decision making skills can also be factors, I still don't really buy the argument that changing your mind, ever, is a bad thing.

A smart person would change their position if they had new information etc etc. That's smart. The problem is Obama made all these campaign promises like he knew what the hell was really going on. Made it sound so easy "oh it's no big deal we'll just put them on boats and bring them all home." Only morons fall head over heels for politicians the way a majority of people did for Obama. So yes if you voted Obama you're a moron, not because you're stupid or anything simply because you lacked better judgement when listening to him.

 

[waggy]

Just because you slap a new name on it doesn't make it "gone".

well by your line of thinking they can't do anything with them then since its just "renamed".

 

[NoStateofMind]

well by your line of thinking they can't do anything with them then since its just "renamed".

How else is it to be seen? I await your explanation.

 

[waggy]

How else is it to be seen? I await your explanation.

what do you want doen with them? let them go or kill them. seems to be the only options then..

 

[NoStateofMind]

what do you want doen with them? let them go or kill them. seems to be the only options then..

Try them in court.

 

[Jhhnn]

You mean the same rights that Obama is depriving people detained in Bagram?

I can't argue with that. Afghanistan remains a war zone, however, due in large part to the neglect of the Bush clan and their love of corrupt yet friendly regimes everywhere. Within the context of it being a war zone, then there's some justification for holding hostiles within that war zone. The only justifications for dragging some of them to the other side of the world, flaunting them in the face of the American Justice System were purely for domestic political consumption. Some of the detainees housed at Gitmo never even were in Afghanistan, for example.

At some point or another, hopefully sooner than later, those held at Bagram will either be released or turned over to Afghan authorities, something that probably should have been done years ago, and as more prisoners were taken along the way. As it stands, we're just acting as a proxy for that govt wrt those held.

What's really happening on the domestic political front is that Repubs, having screwed the pooch nearly to death, now seek to tear down the other side, rather than re-evaluate, rebuild their own positions so as to resemble something expressing a little bit of contrition for what they've accomplished. But no, of course not- better to turn sharply to the right, slap the pedal to the metal, see if they can poison the atmosphere enough to actually regain power, as if they deserve it at all...

 

[BoberFett]

Dave why do you always fail at quoting

Dave fails at everything. Why would you expect this to be any different?