General Discussion

treestar

(82,383 posts)

129. Thank you.

Mon May 13, 2013, 06:24 AM

May 2013

Notice the naysayers claim to care so much about these prisoners, but refuse to admit Congress' role and never advocate anyone bugging their Congress people to close it down.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

136 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Graph showing how Democratic support for closing Guantanamo changed after Obama backed off [View all] Jake Izzy May 2013 OP

Bizarre. Buzz Clik May 2013 #1

Look at the OP's post count michigandem58 May 2013 #77

Look at the fact that it's UNSOURCED Warpy May 2013 #127

Look at the fact that Congress won't let him close it. nt kelliekat44 May 2013 #131

Well, that too, but the problem here Warpy May 2013 #133

It's not bizarre. LWolf May 2013 #80

Gross. Brickbat May 2013 #2

He did not back off treestar May 2013 #3

Obama is CiC of the military, he could have ordered trials at any poiint for everyone in Guantanamo Fumesucker May 2013 #5

No, he needs to get them to the US for the trials treestar May 2013 #15

They don't need trials. They have been there for nearly ten years, what trials are you talking sabrina 1 May 2013 #19

Have you seen the bill that congress passed regarding the detainees at gitmo? If not, I suggest okaawhatever May 2013 #69

Yes, I am aware of the situation and do give credit to Obama for trying. My comment was sabrina 1 May 2013 #117

Thank you. treestar May 2013 #129

Not every single of of them is innocent treestar May 2013 #72

bullshit there are a bunch of innocent people in there that could be released any time He wants. nt limpyhobbler May 2013 #7

No, there they need to come to the US for trial treestar May 2013 #16

Actually, no. Igel May 2013 #20

They have been declared INNOCENT. And considering the wrong done to them by this sabrina 1 May 2013 #24

When you work out how that can be done under U.S. law, treestar May 2013 #70

"Help! We've imprisoned people illegally for a decade and don't know how to stop!" Comrade Grumpy May 2013 #105

Easy to type when you don't have to actually do it treestar May 2013 #128

What has been done is actually not legal nadinbrzezinski May 2013 #125

That's how you interpret that? It shows changing opinion after three years. It doesn't say why. stevenleser May 2013 #4

The only significant difference in the situation is that Obama is now president rather than Dubya Fumesucker May 2013 #6

No, that is a clear example of the Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc logical fallacy. stevenleser May 2013 #11

Simply put without all the fancy footwork, it is called 'situational ethics', or more simply sabrina 1 May 2013 #27

No. I'm not making excuses. I havent expressed an opinion one way or the other in this thread. stevenleser May 2013 #58

I wouldn't be proud of not expressing an opinion as something as important as this. I don't much sabrina 1 May 2013 #73

Why do you always try to distort what I say? Do you think that wins you something? Nt stevenleser May 2013 #115

Sadly, we seem to have plenty of them. Marr May 2013 #63

There is nothing I find more depressing than this. Bonobo May 2013 #66

My, my--an expert on logical fallacies. truebluegreen May 2013 #113

You don't need to be an expert to spot the obvious ones. Nt stevenleser May 2013 #116

Please explain exactly how the Post Hoc fallacy fits my post.. n/t Fumesucker May 2013 #121

Dubya would not have made an EO closing it treestar May 2013 #71

What do we do with people who are detained illegally? Savannahmann May 2013 #78

There is no country that will take some of them treestar May 2013 #79

Their home nations won't take them because of the conditions we attach. Savannahmann May 2013 #111

He has done all he can, call Congress if you really care treestar May 2013 #123

Who said no country will take them? Some countries have been demanding the return of their sabrina 1 May 2013 #119

Clue: there are times when people cannot be deported treestar May 2013 #124

Funding? They are spending a fortune on illegally holding those people in Guantanamo. You must not sabrina 1 May 2013 #135

It shows how easily we can be, er, moved. Skip Intro May 2013 #8

It doesnt show that at all. The type of research you would need to associate the two is not offered stevenleser May 2013 #12

Yikes. Although it could be interpreted as for/against bringing it up for voting since it failed JaneyVee May 2013 #9

that is shameful. I don't believe Democrats are as robotic as Republicans - but Douglas Carpenter May 2013 #10

Wait, ProSense May 2013 #13

Thank you!! The ODSers are in full force today! Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2013 #14

The two different years is intentional... TampaAnimusVortex May 2013 #17

Really? ProSense May 2013 #22

Ahh, there it is... TampaAnimusVortex May 2013 #25

Actually, ProSense May 2013 #28

We can make up out of thin air all the stuff we want to without evidence. It doesn't mean anything. stevenleser May 2013 #60

It would have to be the same question treestar May 2013 #130

"We welcome the president's continuing commitment to closing Guant�namo.. Cha May 2013 #26

This is how the One Percent wins, over and over again. woo me with science May 2013 #18

"They divide us into teams, and foment the partisanship and the hatred. " ProSense May 2013 #23

I didn't need to see the chart, it's been happening here on DU Fumesucker May 2013 #30

Wait, ProSense May 2013 #32

Well then start demanding it be closed and the prisoners either tried or released Fumesucker May 2013 #33

"Released" to where? Recursion May 2013 #35

It's also illegal/unconstitutional to hold them without trial Fumesucker May 2013 #38

Well I certainly raised it, here Recursion May 2013 #40

Prisoners of War have defined rights under the Geneva convention Fumesucker May 2013 #43

That's another good point, but not the one I've kept making Recursion May 2013 #68

These are not prisoners of war. They are more akin to the Mafia. They are soldiers of no country; byeya May 2013 #83

Well, except for the ones that are innocent of any offense. Comrade Grumpy May 2013 #112

Here's a suggestion: ProSense May 2013 #36

Were you outraged about Gitmo when Dubya was resident? Fumesucker May 2013 #37

It's ProSense May 2013 #39

Because you constantly make excuses, time after time after time Fumesucker May 2013 #41

Ah, ProSense May 2013 #44

You are wasting your time with her. n-t Logical May 2013 #48

You would ProSense May 2013 #53

Yes, with you. n-t Logical May 2013 #54

I've advised you to get over your obsession. ProSense May 2013 #55

Once again, you are nothing special. Get over yourself, go bump some.... Logical May 2013 #57

Uh, ProSense May 2013 #61

Prosense, what is really odd about you is that I did not even respond to your post. I responded... Logical May 2013 #75

You know what's ProSense May 2013 #81

Like I said, quit stalking me. I did not even respond to one of your posts. n-t Logical May 2013 #85

Really ProSense May 2013 #86

Leave me alone. I mean it. n-t Logical May 2013 #87

. ProSense May 2013 #88

You tend to love attention I have noticed. Either bumping own posts to get responses or.... Logical May 2013 #89

Hey, ProSense May 2013 #90

I love this. How long will you keep responding and whining about other posts? n-t Logical May 2013 #91

Maybe as ProSense May 2013 #92

For the 2nd time on this thread! QUIT STALKING ME! n-t Logical May 2013 #93

Just so you know ProSense May 2013 #94

For the 3rd time on this thread! QUIT STALKING ME!" Logical May 2013 #95

. ProSense May 2013 #96

For the 4th time on this thread! QUIT STALKING ME!" Logical May 2013 #97

Don't you ProSense May 2013 #98

For the 5th time on this thread! QUIT STALKING ME!" n-t Logical May 2013 #99

Don't you ProSense May 2013 #100

For the 6th time on this thread! QUIT STALKING ME!" Logical May 2013 #101

Do me a favor, ProSense May 2013 #102

For the 7th time on this thread! QUIT STALKING ME!" n-t Logical May 2013 #103

Can we ProSense May 2013 #104

For the 8th time on this thread! QUIT STALKING ME!" n-t Logical May 2013 #106

Thanks. n/t ProSense May 2013 #107

For the 9th time on this thread! QUIT STALKING ME!" n-t Logical May 2013 #108

I have to go ProSense May 2013 #110

For the 10th time on this thread! QUIT STALKING ME! n-t Logical May 2013 #114

Nothing has changed? progressoid May 2013 #64

If you ProSense May 2013 #65

K&R woo me with science May 2013 #21

A book "How to Lie with Statistics" is owned by a number of propagandists, AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #29

Explain then the number of Gitmo defenders on DU when there were basically zero five years ago Fumesucker May 2013 #31

Some are more loyal to principals instead of principles. AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #47

During those three years multiple nations have refused to take the prisoners Recursion May 2013 #34

Obama has apparently never heard that it's easier to beg forgiveness than ask permission tularetom May 2013 #42

Yeah, ProSense May 2013 #45

Goddamnit, you've seen through my evil plan tularetom May 2013 #49

Based on the OP ProSense May 2013 #50

Hey I can do this too tularetom May 2013 #59

Cool, ProSense May 2013 #62

OMG I didn't realize there were that many bobble heads in the D party. kickysnana May 2013 #46

There are. Savannahmann May 2013 #52

There are two kinds kudzu22 May 2013 #56

K & R !!! WillyT May 2013 #51

Principles are more flexible when "our guy" is running things. Tierra_y_Libertad May 2013 #67

Keep trying... SidDithers May 2013 #74

This message was self-deleted by its author michigandem58 May 2013 #76

At least 6% of us are consistent. n/t rucky May 2013 #82

The rule at this site is "It's okay if Obama does it." alarimer May 2013 #84

The US is the Ariel Castro of the international scene. Comrade Grumpy May 2013 #109

Dragging Democrats to the right kenny blankenship May 2013 #118

Holy jumpin' possums! DAMMIT PEOPLE WILL YOU PLEASE START THINKING FOR YOURSELVES?!?!? Zorra May 2013 #120

I'm not sure the climate would take all that thinking at one time Fumesucker May 2013 #122

Notice these pie charts had NO SOURCE??? Warpy May 2013 #126

The sources are listed right underneath them. woo me with science May 2013 #136

kick woo me with science May 2013 #132

I don't think it's that simple. During the brief national dialogue ecstatic May 2013 #134