What should we do with the people held at Gitmo without due process? Can we, with good conscience, hold people forever?

MAJ Bryan Zeski — Tue, 03 Jan 2017 17:25:51 -0500

Response by SSG Shavonde Chase made Jan 3 at 2017 5:27 PM

SSG Shavonde Chase — Tue, 03 Jan 2017 17:27:52 -0500

I think this goes against our principles. People should not be held without cause.

Response by Cpl Joshua Caldwell made Jan 3 at 2017 5:32 PM

Cpl Joshua Caldwell — Tue, 03 Jan 2017 17:32:35 -0500

Well they aren't representing any nation, or fighting while in uniform. We could keep them forever or we could execute them. They are too dangerous to set free and their belief system doesn't make reform likely. So letting them back onto the battlefield is irresponsible. What would you say to the family of the soldier who gets killed by one of these guys, who some politician set free?

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Jan 3 at 2017 5:35 PM

CPT Jack Durish — Tue, 03 Jan 2017 17:35:49 -0500

A helluva good question. I appreciate others who contend that incarcerating someone indefinitely "goes against our principles" but to be fair, our principles don't cover this situation. We are not at war in the traditional sense, thus the rules of war are not directly applicable. We are not dealing with criminals, as we traditionally define criminality, thus criminal law is not directly applicable. Fundamental principles of human decency are completely off the board because terrorists do not resemble human beings and their behavior does not resemble human behavior. If anything, they are the opposite of those things. They are like demons. They lurk in the shadows like boogeymen imagined in that primitive reptilian part of our brain. Yes, we need to face this and figure it out. Until then, I can't think of anything better to do than kill them if we must, incarcerate them if we can, and keep them on ice until we develop some new principles and dispose of the issue.

Response by LTC Kevin B. made Jan 3 at 2017 5:37 PM

LTC Kevin B. — Tue, 03 Jan 2017 17:37:41 -0500

I don't like the idea of indefinitely imprisoning someone without their being charged and tried. I think that goes against one of the main ideas upon which this country was founded. With that being said, I do realize they're not US citizens, and that they're not entitled to the same legal rights of US citizens. However, I don't think that really changes how we can and should treat other humans. Even if the charges result in their eventual conviction and execution, then let's get the process rolling.

Response by SFC Pete Kain made Jan 3 at 2017 5:41 PM

SFC Pete Kain — Tue, 03 Jan 2017 17:41:06 -0500

Well those folks are not there for being Boy Scouts. Keep em or execute em. I am ok with either option.

Response by Lt Col Scott Shuttleworth made Jan 3 at 2017 5:43 PM

Lt Col Scott Shuttleworth — Tue, 03 Jan 2017 17:43:18 -0500

We need to try them and convict then hold them forever. If we captured them on the battlefield then we must have had a reason to ship them to Guantanamo. I am not for releasing anyone right now. because our track record of releases and those going back to fight against us is not good. There are several that have been part of actual attacks or planning them after we released them to "friendly" countries where they can never leave.

Response by SFC George Smith made Jan 3 at 2017 5:47 PM

SFC George Smith — Tue, 03 Jan 2017 17:47:54 -0500

It boils Down to ...how many More terrorist Fighters and terrorist Leaders and trainers do you want back on the battle Field...
Intel reports say as the as many as 1/3 to 1/2 have already been killed in combat operations and another 1/3 to 1/2 have been seen in areas either plotting or Leading the terrorist or training them...
If PETA would Not come and Protest in my front yard i feed them to the sharks... but that would be "Cruel and unusual Punishment" ...because the Sharks have done nothing to US...

Response by SSG Steven Mangus made Jan 3 at 2017 6:08 PM

SSG Steven Mangus — Tue, 03 Jan 2017 18:08:25 -0500

In the case of terrorists, they should not have the luxury of our justice system and should be held indefinitely or fed to the pigs. All others, shall have their fate determined in a case by case basis..

Response by PO3 John Wagner made Jan 3 at 2017 6:19 PM

PO3 John Wagner — Tue, 03 Jan 2017 18:19:38 -0500

Yes. With good conscience and extreme prejudice...but let them write home once in awhile..let everyone know how it's goin for em

Response by LTC Trent Klug made Jan 3 at 2017 6:44 PM

LTC Trent Klug — Tue, 03 Jan 2017 18:44:42 -0500

Granted I haven't worked at GTMO on 12 years, but does anyone else want to have to capture these turds a second time? Or explain to a parent or spouse that they were killed or wounded by someone we had in custody, but because we're humane, we got to face them again? I don't.

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 3 at 2017 7:00 PM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 03 Jan 2017 19:00:42 -0500

They should be tried and convicted/acquitted, let the cards fall where they may. If the governments case is strong and with merit send them to prison awaiting death. They are tried in a military court under the UCMJ. Most high crimes/capital offenses carry death as an ultimate punishment.....give it to them. I served in GITMO for 2 years guarding some of the worst, I'm tired of hearing about them and nothing about the thousands of us who had to endure some of the same isolation from our own that they were facing because we can't talk about that place. Had they not been where they were captured, then we wouldn't be talking right now....innocent, NO. Everyone there had some intel value otherwise they would have never made it to the island. Send them to Leavenworth and call it a day..... no need for Camp Delta anymore.

Response by SSgt Boyd Herrst made Jan 3 at 2017 8:08 PM

SSgt Boyd Herrst — Tue, 03 Jan 2017 20:08:15 -0500

These guys still extremely dangerous...
looks like we're stuck with them...

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 3 at 2017 8:09 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 03 Jan 2017 20:09:49 -0500

From WW1 to present how many US servicemen and women are still UNACCOUNTED for? Who are we to take the high ground, and play the "due process" card when (IMHO) we still have brothers and sisters not home or whereabouts unknown. Vietnam is a good example. I honestly believe that there are/were Servicemembers held well beyond the "end of hostilities"

Kind of hard to take the high moral ground when not all are playing by the "rules". So yes they need to sit and rot for all I care.

Again just my humble opinion.

Response by WO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 3 at 2017 8:28 PM

WO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 03 Jan 2017 20:28:52 -0500

Can we in good conscience release those who have nothing but hate and anger for the USA and knowing they will undoubtedly commits acts of violence again?

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 3 at 2017 8:32 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 03 Jan 2017 20:32:11 -0500

As illegal combatants, they have no rights or protection under international law. So yes, we can under good conscience hold them forever without due process. The international laws were written to discourage people from participating in a conflict as illegal combatants.

Response by SFC Dante Alanis made Jan 3 at 2017 8:42 PM

SFC Dante Alanis — Tue, 03 Jan 2017 20:42:38 -0500

They are part of an organization/ enemy which has not formally surrendered, therefore they don't get released until that happens. Should have thought of consequences before joining their cause. Ignorance of the law is not an excuse.

Response by MSgt Richard Randall made Jan 3 at 2017 8:45 PM

MSgt Richard Randall — Tue, 03 Jan 2017 20:45:23 -0500

There were approximately 425,000 German POWs on American soil in May 1945. How many of them received due process? They were not repatriated until hostilities ceased as per the Geneva Convention. I suppose as soon as al Qaeda and ISIS, et al, decide to hang it up we should probably keep the Gitmo folks locked up… or send them to Chicago.

Response by Cpl Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 3 at 2017 8:50 PM

Cpl Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 03 Jan 2017 20:50:38 -0500

Has a lawful request been presented to the DoD in the lawfully prescribed time table for the release of gitmo detainees as detailed in the NDAA signed into law by the current administration?

Response by SFC Domingo M. made Jan 3 at 2017 9:10 PM

SFC Domingo M. — Tue, 03 Jan 2017 21:10:33 -0500

No, we can do with them what Obama did with all the others he released....return them to the battlefront where they will be considered heroes and given positions of responsibility and allowed to lead the fight.

Response by SSG Roger Ayscue made Jan 3 at 2017 10:03 PM

SSG Roger Ayscue — Tue, 03 Jan 2017 22:03:08 -0500

Yes,
UNTIL THE WAR is OVER...That is that Muslim Extremists STOP blowing up crap across the globe, no longer pose a threat to CONUS, and they determine to live as peaceful, productive members of the global society, THEY are Prisoners of War.

If we turn them loose, they will TAKE UP ARMS against us again and take every opportunity to kill Americans. If it were up to me, I would shoot them all, but that is not the American way...NO NO NO, the CURRENT American way is to slap a hand and let them go, BUT on Jan 20th 2017 the Apologist in Chief is history and we have an AMERICAN in charge again.

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 4 at 2017 1:11 AM

COL Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 01:11:33 -0500

These detainees do not deserve due process as it only pertains to US Citizens. This is a war that we are still actively involved in. They should be treated as POWs, because they are POWs. The use of enhanced interrogation methods should resume until every finite piece of information is brought to our attention. These detainees are the enemy and should be treated as such.

Response by 1stSgt Eugene Harless made Jan 4 at 2017 4:07 AM

1stSgt Eugene Harless — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 04:07:56 -0500

It makes one very strong case. Simply take no prisoners when dealing with terrorist's groups.

Response by PO1 Michael Fullmer made Jan 4 at 2017 7:59 AM

PO1 Michael Fullmer — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 07:59:04 -0500

Sorry, this will piss off some people, but so far as I am concerned, terrorists...enemy combatants...what ever you want to call them, have NO right to our "due process". they are lucky to be alive at all. Several of these individuals have returned to the battlefield, and their old ways, only to have killed doing what they have done before. They aren't entitled to a lawyer, a speedy trial or anything else associated with our justice system. Keep them locked up till they rot or shoot them I don't care. Why should they be returned to "again" perpetrate their evil doings...and you know they will.

Response by SGT David T. made Jan 4 at 2017 8:04 AM

SGT David T. — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 08:04:22 -0500

Interesting question. This really comes down to how we define these folks. If they are prisoners of war, then holding them until the end of the war is an appropriate course of action. If they are simply criminals then the right to a fair and speedy trial comes into play. I am not sure how we should define them. Thankfully, I don't have to make that decision lol.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 4 at 2017 9:10 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 09:10:58 -0500

Is there due process on the battlefield?

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 4 at 2017 11:39 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 11:39:03 -0500

"No person shall ... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law ..."
--5th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

There's no serious ambiguity in that. Anywhere the U.S. has jurisdiction, that's the law, and the clear judicial understanding is that it applies to all persons under that jurisdiction, not only citizens. That we continue to ignore the requirements of due process in the case of Gitmo is a shame on all of us and a continued violation of our Constitution.

That doesn't mean they all get released; far from it, in fact. It means they all have a right under our laws to due process, no matter how nasty a person they be, and fundamentally that means that if they aren't suitable for release we must instead put them on trial. There is no other option that is just and in keeping with our highest laws.

Response by MSgt James Mullis made Jan 4 at 2017 1:23 PM

MSgt James Mullis — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 13:23:13 -0500

They should have long sense been tried as enemy combatants and/or for war crimes and if found guilty they should be serving their multiple life sentences with no possibility of parole. The real question should be why has the Obama Administration and its (in)justice department seen fit to hold people indefinitely and without legal recourse?

Response by CWO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 4 at 2017 1:23 PM

CWO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 13:23:36 -0500

It's almost like the "stray dog" theory. Once you feed it you own it. Do the research to make sure the actions proposed are valid and then act. Unless they have any more intel value then make the case in court and go from there. Just keeping them locked up probably has a downside by irritating the terrorists, but I'm not for turning them loose so just get on with the trials. Their rights are of no concern to me, assuming they've taken US lives or contributed to it. I defer to the lawyers but it's my understanding they gave up any Geneva Convention rights once they entered into armed conflict out of uniform. Different rules for combatants and terrorists or at least so I've heard. This should have been done years ago but got tied up in the larger debate over closing GITMO. Two separate issues. One is admin/legal, the other facilities/logistical.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 4 at 2017 1:49 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 13:49:17 -0500

As of December 21, 2016 (two weeks ago)...
Detainees currently held at Guantánamo: 59
Total number of detainees ever incarcerated at Guantánamo: 780
Detainees released under President Bush: Over 500
Detainees at start of Obama Presidency: 242
Detainees transferred, repatriated or resettled under President Obama: 179
Remaining detainees already approved for release: 23
Detainees transferred to U.S. courts for prosecution: 1
Detainees who died in custody since January 2009: 4
Detainees Obama Administration is holding for indefinite detention without charge or trial: 26
Detainees convicted by military commission and still held at Guantánamo: 3
Detainees Obama Administration is currently trying in military commissions: 7
Number of current detainees imprisoned for more than 10 years: 55 (93% of total population)

Response by SGT William Howell made Jan 4 at 2017 2:17 PM

SGT William Howell — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 14:17:33 -0500

They should be tried in a military court. If convicted they should be dealt with as the court deems necessary.

Response by 1SG Mike Case made Jan 4 at 2017 2:49 PM

1SG Mike Case — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 14:49:11 -0500

I see no reason to keep them indefinitely. They hold no intelligence value. Anything they were connected with cannot still be of any relevance. There are maybe 60 detainees left at GITMO. If they are merely worried that these personnel will become combatants again, then try them and incarcerate them. But, if these are the hardcore radicals, do we think they will be ok after the war is over and we release them. Do we think they won't continue to try and bring death to us? Do we hold them forever? What if we leave Afghanistan, do we let them go? I think keeping these detainees indefinitely is of no benefit to us. I say put them back into play and hope they are n the receiving end of a 5.56 or may a HELLFIRE launched from a drone!

Response by CW3 Kevin Storm made Jan 4 at 2017 2:50 PM

CW3 Kevin Storm — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 14:50:01 -0500

Had we stood by the Geneva Convention this question would of been answered easily. The politicians in their infinite wisdom elected not to do that. Now we have to deal with this problem.

Response by CW4 Brian Haas made Jan 4 at 2017 5:36 PM

CW4 Brian Haas — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 17:36:39 -0500

With all of this about principles, I wanted to throw my two cents worth in. First of all, everybody has a different set of principals. Now you look at those we are talking about on here, there are things that can change one's principals. This is where I fall in, I guess. I have no pity on them, zero. Look at how many reentered the fight after our good for nothing president released them. If keeping them there means they don't reenter society and do something horrible, let them rot. If it's too expensive to keep them there, a bullet is cheap. And that goes in line with MY principles.

Response by SGT Allen Brunner made Jan 4 at 2017 5:51 PM

SGT Allen Brunner — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 17:51:56 -0500

While I do understand this question, I don't think it applies to what the case is really about. If someone commits a crime here in the US they are entitled to due process period! When we are at war with a legitimate government a US versus Them like in World War 1, 2, Korea, Vietnam, and even Iraq. We had rules of engagement and processed them as POW's and once the war was over sent them home. These enemy combatants are not from a Government, or Country, they are from a Ideological and Religions point of view where they will stop at nothing to force their way of life onto everyone else. They have proven this time and time again, once they are released they will continue to do what they did when they were captured. So how do you stop this? their are only two choices. Confinement until they no longer pose a threat to us or execute them.

Response by SSG Jeremy Sharp made Jan 4 at 2017 8:12 PM

SSG Jeremy Sharp — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 20:12:05 -0500

They are not US citizen criminal suspects so I am not sure they are entitled to due process. Enemy combatants is not even close to criminal suspect. One tries to kill you while the other tries to steal your car. Be careful when comparing apples and oranges. Thes guys don't want to be rehabilitated, they want to kill Americans!

Response by SFC Bobby Thompson made Jan 4 at 2017 9:13 PM

SFC Bobby Thompson — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 21:13:58 -0500

I say secretly put tracking devices in them and release them where they were captured. They might lead us to the enemy.

Response by Lt Col John (Jack) Christensen made Jan 6 at 2017 8:54 AM

Lt Col John (Jack) Christensen — Fri, 06 Jan 2017 08:54:54 -0500

Certainly can tell those of us with a legal background talking about Geneva Convention, war tribunals, prosecution, etc., etc., well I'm not. My question to all is exactly what war are these detainees from? IMO these individuals are more aligned with a philosophy of hate and intolerance towards westerners and infidels than any specific traditional war. To this end, even if all traditional war hostilities were to cease these detainees would continue to hold on to their beliefs and would not hesitate to commit the terrorist acts that got them incarcerated in the first place again. They simply do not fall into a category that would entitle them to be released at "wars end" because to them they are continually at war with the infidels. They committed criminal acts, would do so again and aren't US citizens with our Constitutional rights so let them continue to be detained until they die in captivity.

Response by Sgt Ramon Nacanaynay made Jan 7 at 2017 11:22 PM

Sgt Ramon Nacanaynay — Sat, 07 Jan 2017 23:22:30 -0500

It appears to be quite a quagmire or it would have been resolved earlier.. Let's not rush to judge but do our best to support our system of due process,

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 24 at 2017 11:24 AM

SGM Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 24 Jan 2017 11:24:22 -0500

MAJ Bryan Zeski I don't think there was a lot of due process considered when we took POWs from WWI, WWII, Korea, and Viet Nam. No they aren't legal combatants under the Geneva and Hague conventions, but if we allow terrorists a get-out-of-jail card for violating the conventions, won't we encourage more such actions? Terrorist have already used the white flag to retreat from a battlefield and used protected symbols and places to secure weapons and ammunition.

Besides, I believe they are treated humanely. They have their Koran and a place to pray. They get 3 hots and a cot.

I'm really a lot more concerned with how we insure that our soldiers come back alive than hand-wringing about the President's legacy or whether some bed-wetters think we need to be kinder and gentler.

Besides, there is no forever. I support sending them to a Daesh controlled area for their 65th birthday - to old to be a combatant, and a drain on their resources.

Response by LTC David Del Favero made Jan 24 at 2017 4:51 PM

LTC David Del Favero — Tue, 24 Jan 2017 16:51:00 -0500

They get due process. The standard under which they are held as detainees requires periodic reviews of their cases to determine if they remain a threat to our forces. We conduct those periodic reviews twice as often as required by international law/treaty. They aren't entitled under international law to have legal representation, but we give it to them anyway.

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 24 at 2017 8:05 PM

CW2 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 24 Jan 2017 20:05:39 -0500

Microchip them so we can track them back to their hideouts and bomb the hell out of them

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 24 at 2017 8:07 PM

CW2 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 24 Jan 2017 20:07:43 -0500

I say we microchip them, so we can track them back to their hideouts and fellow terrorist and then bomb the hell out of them

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 25 at 2017 1:38 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 25 Jan 2017 13:38:47 -0500

Personally, I agree with Col. B.... Lets get the ball rolling, though not for the human rights perspective but the economic... how much money are we wasting on housing and feeding these animals?? And make no mistake about it... they are animals. My question to all of you who are up in arms about the rights of the poor prisoners being held without due process and blah blah blah is this; Why are you so concerned with the rights of a person who has repeatedly shown that he/she will kill you and your family as soon as they would just look at you? You guys make all this stink about freeing them and their rights etc, but deny it all you want.... if you got your way and they were all set free and given rights that are afforded to the AMERICANS they are trying to eradicate... the thanks you would get for it is a slit throat. We need them to stop doing what they are doing. We tried to reason with them (diplomacy, sanctions etc..) but they are not a rational group of people.... anyone willing to strap explosives to themselves and walk into a crowd of people and blow themselves up or who will fly a plane into a building killing 3k + people is most definitely not a rational group of people. We tried controlling them with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan which I deployed to 7 different time (4 to Iraq and 3 to Afghanistan) and we accomplished nothing and because politicians got involved making our jobs impossible it could be argued that we made the situation worse then we would have if we just nuked the whole region.

If we can't reason with these animals and we can't control them.... we need to erase them from existence... the nature of how is irrelevant... they need to go period. Or keep whining about how these murderers are treated and maybe they will be let go and then maybe they will kill off enough of you bleeding hearts to get you out of the way and we can do the RIGHT thing and get rid of them. Ideals be damned.... they would kill every one of us in the worst ways they can imagine and not give a seconds thought about how it looks or if we were treated fairly and humanly before they sawed our heads off with a rusty knife..... and you people really give a damn about how WE treat them??? seriously???

Response by PO2 Tanya Watters made Jan 25 at 2017 3:30 PM

PO2 Tanya Watters — Wed, 25 Jan 2017 15:30:43 -0500

The terrorist held at Gitmo are not citizens of the US; therefore, do not have ciyizens rights! Why is this so hard for everyone to understand?!

Response by SPC Byron Skinner made Jan 30 at 2017 9:58 PM

SPC Byron Skinner — Mon, 30 Jan 2017 21:58:17 -0500

Sp4 Byron. An excellent question and one that haas very far reaching consequences for all of you on active duty. In the US the current wave of terrors is presenting a real problem there is a hallow gap or a gray area what ever you want to call it between Civilian law enforcement and the Military in authority to deal with terrorism. A current book: "How Everything Became War and the Military Became Everything Tales from the Pentagon" by Rosa Brooks. The author is a Lawyer, journalist, worked for DoD, Justice Department and State Department and currently is writing books. First off the book has a number of factual errors. She refers to her second husband as Colonel when in fact he is a Lt. Colonel. She says that he is in Special Operations when a recent photo of him clearly shows he is in The USArmy Special Forces. Most of her examples is old news, if you are of a certain age which I passed over a decade ago you will find " facts" in most of them that you can't agree with but the thesis of the book which you don't get until the last hundred pages (paid by the word I guess) discusses this problem just where does Terrorism enter the legal system which rules are to be applied. Law enforcement who's jobs are to enforce the law and maintain border, the need warrants to search a home or the rules which is find the bastards, pile on and kill the bastards. You see a suspicious building and want to know who and what is inside you either call in a fire mission or if you are hardcore there or four guys lob a hand grenade through the openings, then the door is open and you are invited in. Law enforcement has to get a bench warrant from a judge, approach the building, a police office has to knock first and in legal theory give who ever is inside time to make a response before the two officers with the battering ram make a run at the door and a half dozen more officers go in with you. The book offers no answer but is good at framing the question. The part of the question that matters to all of you will you become a Federal Law Enforcement agency for domestic and inter nation terrorism. I know the first reaction in the barracks, you want me to be a Cop, pay me like a Cop.

Response by LTC Mike George made Jan 31 at 2017 7:16 AM

LTC Mike George — Tue, 31 Jan 2017 07:16:17 -0500

As one Gunny put it best, the Marines win battles the Army wind wars. His point being the Marines are very good at fighting and the Army I'd very good at logistics. You need them both but you don't want to dilute either.

Response by TSgt Ronald Reed made Jan 31 at 2017 5:28 PM

TSgt Ronald Reed — Tue, 31 Jan 2017 17:28:25 -0500

Major, Why don't the government release them and near your family home. How would you feel? These are extremely dangerous terrorists that should be held in Gitmo until a safe way to deal with them. I feel a lot safer knowing they are incarcerated until a Democrat can take them up in their neighborhood. If released do you think they will conduct themselves any differently than when they were sent to GITMO?

Response by PFC Francis Ramseyer made Feb 8 at 2017 9:59 AM

PFC Francis Ramseyer — Wed, 08 Feb 2017 09:59:26 -0500

Well, I think people held at GITMO are there for a good reason. As far as I am concern they can be there for ever if they represent a danger for the free world.

Response by GySgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 10 at 2017 1:20 PM

GySgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 10 Feb 2017 13:20:18 -0500

Trump is wrong here. Gitmo should be shut down. It is unconstitutional to hold people without due process and it creates more enemies.

Response by GySgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 16 at 2017 12:43 PM

GySgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 16 Feb 2017 12:43:24 -0500

Guantanamo Bay and the policies there are UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Obama lied to the American people when he said he would close it down and restore habeus corpus. Trump is WRONG on this issue. There are certain, unalienable rights every man has to include habeus corpus and these prisoners should be given their day in a real court of law.

Response by LtCol Robert Quinter made Feb 18 at 2017 3:13 PM

LtCol Robert Quinter — Sat, 18 Feb 2017 15:13:14 -0500

They are there because of acts of war against us. Get wrapped around the axle with legalities and protestations of definitions, but they represent organizations that would do us harm. If the other side wins, they will have the keys to the cells to free them, or we can try them for war crimes when the violence ends.

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 22 at 2017 9:58 PM

COL Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 22 Feb 2017 21:58:50 -0500

Agree!

Response by PFC Francis Ramseyer made Feb 23 at 2017 12:49 PM

PFC Francis Ramseyer — Thu, 23 Feb 2017 12:49:31 -0500

Gitmo is good. It should remain under military control. Human rights has nothing to do with these people, they are not enemies, they are terrorists and they never behave like human, so we should keep them ad eternum.

Response by SPC Brian Stephens made Feb 23 at 2017 2:50 PM

SPC Brian Stephens — Thu, 23 Feb 2017 14:50:35 -0500

Why not hold them until they can be tried by a military tribunal and execute them in accordance with their sentence and the need for room? Once they set their feet in the United States, they have the full rights of the U.S. Constitution and they should never be entitled to that.

Response by MSG Dan Castaneda made Feb 23 at 2017 3:44 PM

MSG Dan Castaneda — Thu, 23 Feb 2017 15:44:18 -0500

Terrorist sympathizer are we?

Response by TSgt Dan Decker made Mar 1 at 2017 1:23 AM

TSgt Dan Decker — Wed, 01 Mar 2017 01:23:12 -0500

Yep, hold them forever or until they are very, very old, or until they die. They don't have the right to due process.

Response by SSG Terry Clay made Mar 1 at 2017 9:20 AM

SSG Terry Clay — Wed, 01 Mar 2017 09:20:51 -0500

The right to due process under the law, the right to a speedy trial and to be judged by a jury of our peers are not guaranteed anyone but AMERICAN CITIZENS. The our rules, laws,statutes and liberty apply to no one on Earth but us. Enemy combatants, border jumping illegal non-immigrant foreigners ( also known as foreign invaders) don't have a Constitution all right to anything we enjoy. Nothing, nada, zilch, didley...nothing. Period.

Response by SSG Terry Clay made Mar 1 at 2017 9:22 AM

SSG Terry Clay — Wed, 01 Mar 2017 09:22:14 -0500

I hate auto-correct...