• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama signs defense policy bill

Dittohead not!

Dittohead not!

master political analyst
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
52,009
Reaction score
33,944
Location
The Golden State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
[h=1]Obama signs defense policy bill, objects on Guantanamo[/h]
President Barack Obama signed into law Friday a defense policy bill that authorizes $611 billion for the military in 2017, lauding provisions designed to sustain momentum in countering the Islamic State group while harshly criticizing Congress's insistence on keeping open the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Click to expand...

Not bad for a Muslim ISIS sympathizer who hates the military. What about Guantanamo?


But he was highly critical of several other provisions. Among them, Obama cited the continued operation of Guantanamo. He said spending hundreds of millions of dollars to keep fewer than 60 men in isolation undermines U.S. standing in the world and emboldens violent extremists.
Click to expand...

Hey, isn't it worth a few hundred million to keep Obama from fulfilling a campaign promise?
 
Dittohead not! said:
[h=1]Obama signs defense policy bill, objects on Guantanamo[/h]


Not bad for a Muslim ISIS sympathizer who hates the military. What about Guantanamo?




Hey, isn't it worth a few hundred million to keep Obama from fulfilling a campaign promise?
Click to expand...
Obama could have simply closed Guantanamo by Executive order at the start of his presidency or used his Democratic supermajority to close it down using the legislature. He did neither because he's a weak willed feckless coward.
 
reinoe said:
Obama could have simply closed Guantanamo by Executive order at the start of his presidency or used his Democratic supermajority to close it down using the legislature. He did neither because he's a weak willed feckless coward.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't letting all those prisoners go cause some problems? He wanted to move them to U.S. prisons but Congress disagreed. It was Congress that was cowardly because they were scared of the prisoners being in the country.
 
iguanaman said:
Wouldn't letting all those prisoners go cause some problems? He wanted to move them to U.S. prisons but Congress disagreed. It was Congress that was cowardly because they were scared of the prisoners being in the country.
Click to expand...

The can't be held in U.S. prisons because eventually they'd have to be charged with some sort of crime or set free. If Obama cared about justice he'd either charge them, summarily execute them, or set them free.
 
reinoe said:
The can't be held in U.S. prisons because eventually they'd have to be charged with some sort of crime or set free. If Obama cared about justice he'd either charge them, summarily execute them, or set them free.
Click to expand...

Sure, summarily executing them or setting them free would be "caring about justice."
 
reinoe said:
The can't be held in U.S. prisons because eventually they'd have to be charged with some sort of crime or set free. If Obama cared about justice he'd either charge them, summarily execute them, or set them free.
Click to expand...

Wow. We have certainly wandered a long way from home, now haven't we? I don't think we are in American anymore....

Submitted for your approval, one DP poster that thinks America is about rounding people up on other people's streets, never charging them with a crime, never granting due process and summarily executing them....
 
Dittohead not! said:
Sure, summarily executing them or setting them free would be "caring about justice."
Click to expand...

Either they're guilty of a crime or they're not. Or we could have trials to determine their guilt. What we're doing now is a waste of taxpayer dollars and is not in the spirit of any sort of justice. If they're so guilty that a trial is superfluous, like when we send out drones to kill known terrorists, then summarily execute them.
 
reinoe said:
Either they're guilty of a crime or they're not. Or we could have trials to determine their guilt. What we're doing now is a waste of taxpayer dollars and is not in the spirit of any sort of justice. If they're so guilty that a trial is superfluous, like when we send out drones to kill known terrorists, then summarily execute them.
Click to expand...

There should be trials.
There should have been trials years ago.
 
reinoe said:
Obama could have simply closed Guantanamo by Executive order at the start of his presidency or used his Democratic supermajority to close it down using the legislature. He did neither because he's a weak willed feckless coward.
Click to expand...


folks like you and the GOP objected. do you remember why you did that?
 
Militant_Vegan_ said:
folks like you and the GOP objected. do you remember why you did that?
Click to expand...

"Folks like you" are libertarians who think that unlimited unjustified incarceration are always wrong. Are there any other strawman arguments you'd like to put forward so that you can embarrass yourself or are you done for now?
 
Isn't this the same bill democrats like shoving their partisan **** in every year knowing they can blast republicans for not signing it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom