Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Petraeus Backs Closing Gitmo
Military.com ^ | 5/27/08

Posted on 05/28/2009 6:27:52 AM PDT by ksen

PRAGUE -- The head of U.S. Central Command, General David Petraeus, has told RFE/RL he thinks that "on balance" the expected closure of the Guantanamo Bay detention facility and abandonment of so-called enhanced interrogation techniques will "help" U.S. efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as the struggle against transnational extremist violence.

(Excerpt) Read more at military.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bho44; bhodod; clubgitmo; detainees; gitmo; guantanamo; noprisonersnoproblem; petraeus; wot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-120 next last
Haven't seen this posted here yet.

So . . . how long till the Democrats start singing General Petraeus' praises?

1 posted on 05/28/2009 6:27:54 AM PDT by ksen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ksen
How long before conservatives decry him? 3..2..1...

I'll start. He's wrong. End of discussion.

2 posted on 05/28/2009 6:30:04 AM PDT by rintense (Senior Marketing / IT / UX architect unemployed and looking for work. Freepmail me if you have leads)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ksen

He’s just saying he’d like to continue in his job. He knows and understands “The Chicago Way.”


3 posted on 05/28/2009 6:30:04 AM PDT by romanesq
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ksen

If it’s going to be done, how about sending them to “Camp” Alcatraz? There’s already some dedicated “park” money there. Just throw in a little food and you’re good to go.


4 posted on 05/28/2009 6:32:22 AM PDT by ladtx ( "Never miss a good chance to shut up." - - Will Rogers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: romanesq

Of course he serves at the pleasure of the resident, nothing to see here move on


5 posted on 05/28/2009 6:33:00 AM PDT by italianquaker (We went from a country that hates the president to a president that hates his country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: romanesq
Someone posted a week or two ago that Petraeus was a Democrat.

This move puts him in contention to replace either Hillary! or Biden down the road. A Barry/Petraeus ticket would be formidable, and it takes national defense issues off the table, at least as far as the Barry zombies and MSM are concerned.

Nice move.

6 posted on 05/28/2009 6:33:45 AM PDT by GOPsterinMA (Where can I take 'Austrian' lessons?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ksen
In an exclusive interview in Prague...

Interesting that he made this statement there. I hear Prague is nice this time of year. Gets cold in the winter though. Especially if you are wearing sandals.

7 posted on 05/28/2009 6:33:50 AM PDT by McGruff (Bumper sticker I saw on a older pickup, "Eat my Carbon")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: romanesq
He knows and understands “The Chicago Way.”

Yes

"Join Me..or Die"

Shiwan Khan--The Shadow

It's alive and well in the USA

8 posted on 05/28/2009 6:35:11 AM PDT by evad (Obama's Socialism is a giant PONZI scheme)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ksen
Two thoughts. First, George Bush also wanted to close Gitmo. But, the questions becomes, "Where are you going to put these people?" Sometimes, things really are easier said than done. /s

As for the "enhanced interrogation techniques", I actually think that Patraeus is saying what all of our uniformed officers should be saying. But, that's why we have a a CIA.

The military should only interrogate prisoners using methods solely outlined in the Army Field Manuel. When something more "creative" needs to be employed, that's when a transfer of custody should occur and the CIA, or whomever the President designates should go to work.

The uniformed military should, in no way, be party to these techniques, nor should they be done on US Military installations. JMHO.

9 posted on 05/28/2009 6:35:35 AM PDT by Big_Monkey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ksen

Well, if the General won’t fight for Gitmo, why should we?


10 posted on 05/28/2009 6:36:17 AM PDT by poindexter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ksen

Perhaps he’s taken up what Rush said yesterday. If you want to succeed, lie like a Liberal.


11 posted on 05/28/2009 6:36:30 AM PDT by Kent C
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ladtx
If it’s going to be done, how about sending them to “Camp” Alcatraz?

How bout Camp David? Maybe they would be welcomed there.

12 posted on 05/28/2009 6:37:21 AM PDT by unixfox (The 13th Amendment Abolished Slavery, The 16th Amendment Reinstated It !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ksen

Petraeus, Robert Gates, Peter Pace, Mike Mullan, the military does not want Guantanimo. It makes the war harder and it gets our guys killed.


13 posted on 05/28/2009 6:37:53 AM PDT by MARTIAL MONK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ksen

Great reporting there./sarc. Look carefully at what is parenthetical versus editorialized.


14 posted on 05/28/2009 6:41:16 AM PDT by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MARTIAL MONK

Having to capture these hard core sociopaths alive and treat them with kid gloves- is what makes the war harder and surely gets more of our guys killed.

The ied’s, decapitations and throat slittings will go on regardless of where live prisoners are stowed


15 posted on 05/28/2009 6:41:33 AM PDT by silverleaf ("Never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was legal ( Martin Luther King))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ksen

Petraeus is a smart guy. Many will interpret this politically, when Petraeus speaks in terms of the military, tactics, and strategy.

So far he’s tried successfully to stay above the political fray. I don’t think he’ll jump into it at this point.


16 posted on 05/28/2009 6:41:45 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain, Pro Deo et Patria)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ksen

Well, that seems to be the end of that. /no sarc


17 posted on 05/28/2009 6:42:31 AM PDT by paulycy (BEWARE the LIBERAL/MEDIA Complex)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ksen

he’s still in uniform, and can’t be expected to undercut the position of his Commander in Chief, no matter how ludicrous.


18 posted on 05/28/2009 6:42:47 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kent C

Did you notice in the bit I quoted that it’s no longer “terrorism” but “transnational extremist violence” we’re fighting?


19 posted on 05/28/2009 6:43:29 AM PDT by ksen (Don't steal. The government hates the competition. - sign on Ron Paul's desk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

The story’s been out there for a couple of days and I’ve yet to hear a retraction by Petraeus or a comment saying he’s being misquoted.

do you have any evidence that he is?


20 posted on 05/28/2009 6:44:58 AM PDT by ksen (Don't steal. The government hates the competition. - sign on Ron Paul's desk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ksen

I read the article and he is like everyone else who has gone on record. They support closing the base, but don’t have a solution of where the terrorists and combatants will go. Perhaps when one of these people interviewed come out with a plan of where to send these clowns that sounds reasonable, then I might agree with them. Until then, club Gitmo should be open for business. Have Colonel Jessup code red the ones that won’t cooperate.


21 posted on 05/28/2009 6:47:20 AM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rintense

Some / a lot of conservatives make the mistake of equating military prowess with “conservative” thought. They believe that a general who excels at his job simply cannot be a socialist...

Very little is known about his ideological bend, although this little bit of information does start to paint that picture.

I would also caution limited government type conservatives against blindly following dick and liz cheney as well. Even though they are strong debaters and strong on national security that does NOT equate to a strong belief in limiting the size and scope of the federal government.


22 posted on 05/28/2009 6:47:35 AM PDT by myself6 (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ksen

Turned into a tool. What a pity.


23 posted on 05/28/2009 6:48:24 AM PDT by Carley (OBAMA IS A MALEVOLENT FORCE IN THE WORLD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: romanesq

winner winner chicken dinner you hit the nail on the head.


24 posted on 05/28/2009 6:48:28 AM PDT by Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ksen

Just a comment on the title, which is meant to draw an emotional response versus what the article and quotes actually say. He never said he ‘backs’ closing it in his quotes. His statements are more nuanced. Typical reporting, they tell us what we should think about the statement versus just giving the information and letting us determine what he meant. His statement is pretty neutral and uncontroversial, however, just scanning the headlines, one wouldn’t get that impression.


25 posted on 05/28/2009 6:49:13 AM PDT by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: ksen

I’m guessing that’s the writer as it wasn’t in quotes. But even so that’s not the ‘official’ PC phrase. The writer better check his liberal play book.


26 posted on 05/28/2009 6:49:29 AM PDT by Kent C
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: ksen
"Petraeus says that closing Guantanamo 'in a responsible manner...sends an important message to the world, as does the commitment of the United States to observe the Geneva Convention when it comes to the treatment of detainees.' "

Note the careful qualifier, "in a responsible manner." He's not saying anything different than President Bush said. There was nothing in there saying he supports Obama's plan.

Not that so called "real conservatives" are going to pay attention. We just LOVE to eat our own. Besides, the timing of this article takes our minds conveniently away from the racist that the Racist in Chief wants to appoint to the SCOTUS, and her 60% decision overturn rate by that very same SCOTUS.

27 posted on 05/28/2009 6:49:45 AM PDT by cake_crumb (It's better to be "The Party of No" than (continuing as) "The Party of Can't Say No".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ksen

Send them back to the countries they came from and let their governments deal with them.


28 posted on 05/28/2009 6:50:46 AM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (Socialism is the belief that most people are better off if everyone was equally poor and miserable.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cake_crumb

I agree the title of the article is very misleading.


29 posted on 05/28/2009 6:52:06 AM PDT by Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: myself6
I would also caution limited government type conservatives against blindly following dick and liz cheney as well.

The points you make are true on one level (*blindly* following) but we are still limited to supporting people who actually exist and who actually step up to the public debate.

Can you name any actual living person, active in politics, that articulates better positions than these? (This is not a flame, it is a serious question. I'm interested.)

30 posted on 05/28/2009 6:53:18 AM PDT by paulycy (BEWARE the LIBERAL/MEDIA Complex)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: MARTIAL MONK
It isn't the REAL Gitmo that gets our men killed. It's the politically motivated, democrat SHAM-Gitmo... the torture and "dehumanization" capital of "BUSHWORLD INC."... that is dangerous to our troops. As long as our friends and enemies THINK that place is where we send POW's we might as well close it!
31 posted on 05/28/2009 6:53:24 AM PDT by cartoonistx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ladtx
I used to think Alcatraz was a good location, but it's too close to people and could draw too many undesirables. Would you want your family member stalked and killed by extremists just because he was a guard at Extremitraz?

Here's my idea of what to do with the Guantanamo detainees. I haven't heard this any where but I think it will work if you must close Guantanamo.

Where is the most secure location in the US? No it's not a supermax Cat 5 prison. Where can guards go in complete anonymity? Where can Red Cross, International Press, or whoever be taken in complete secrecy and not observe anything but the condition of the detainees? Here it is: I recommend that they be taken to some newly constructed facility in Area 51. Think about the isolation and the security of the area. The current people who work there are flown in from McCaren Airport in Vegas. The same thing could be done with the detainees and anybody that's needed for support. Congressional visits, Red Cross and every other human rights organization would be very controlled. They would be flown in and driven by windowless busses to the detainee sight. Anybody see any major flaws with using Area 51 to detain these extremists?

32 posted on 05/28/2009 6:54:49 AM PDT by Harley (Life is Tough, But It's a Lot Tougher When You're a Liberal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: mnehring; ksen
"Great reporting there./sarc. Look carefully at what is parenthetical versus editorialized."
33 posted on 05/28/2009 6:56:55 AM PDT by cake_crumb (Misery Index: 32%)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: cake_crumb

Good response. I think that too many of us are reacting without taking the time to understand why he’s saying what he’s saying. My first reaction is the same as most others on this thread. However, Petraeus has done an excellent job and given that, I want to go the extra mile to understand his thinking here.


34 posted on 05/28/2009 6:57:03 AM PDT by twigs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: GOPsterinMA

I don’t know if hes a demo ,but I know hes a bilderberg


35 posted on 05/28/2009 6:57:10 AM PDT by angelcindy ("If you follow the crowd,you get no further than the crowd")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: romanesq

Exactly, what does anyone expect him to say. Notice there was minimal explanation and no discussion of alternatives.


36 posted on 05/28/2009 7:00:18 AM PDT by gandalftb (An appeaser feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: mnehring; ksen
"Great reporting there./sarc. Look carefully at what is parenthetical versus editorialized."

Sorry; I was going to say good point and I heartily agree. Forgot to adtually ADD it :(

37 posted on 05/28/2009 7:00:30 AM PDT by cake_crumb (Misery Index: 32%)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: twigs

I know I would have given a very similar if not verbatim response as the one he did. Words matter. Which is why paying special attention to their usage and context is important.


38 posted on 05/28/2009 7:03:29 AM PDT by cake_crumb (Current Misery Index Approximately 32%)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: MARTIAL MONK

Well then, by all means, let’s all retrofit our basements for that Adopt an Enemy Combatant program. Heaven know, Islam really was a Religion of Peace before Guantanamo came along. Just ask the embassy workers in Kenya and Tanzania, the crew of the USS Cole, the families of everyone killed on 9/11, etc.


39 posted on 05/28/2009 7:08:04 AM PDT by WhistlingPastTheGraveyard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: paulycy

Their positions on what they are currently publicly debating are the best positions.

However...

We have little to no information on what their positions are on the federal governments leap into socialism / marxism.

Therefore...

I believe that calls by conservatives for either Cheney to lead the GOP or run for office are staggeringly premature.


40 posted on 05/28/2009 7:09:25 AM PDT by myself6 (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: myself6
I believe that calls by conservatives for either Cheney to lead the GOP or run for office are staggeringly premature.

I can agree that any choice today, May 28, 2009, is premature. But you haven't offered any alternatives. Who would you suggest be on the short list of actual human beings to take the leadership role?

41 posted on 05/28/2009 7:12:30 AM PDT by paulycy (BEWARE the LIBERAL/MEDIA Complex)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: ksen

I am for closing it too as long as we don’t bring the animals onto American soil. That IS the problem. The American courts will end up releasing them to kill Americans without a second thought. They will suddenly rediscover the constitution when it comes to giving foreigners constitutional rights that Americans have not seen for years now.

We should send them back to their own nations of origin and I do not care what those countries do with them. Liberals would rather have them kill us than take the risk that their governments will kill them.


42 posted on 05/28/2009 7:15:08 AM PDT by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden

YEP !
Sounds like another libtard mantra about the “2 states solution” in the israelo-palestinian conflict!
As if it will happen only by repeating it like a parrot whatever can be the reallity on the ground


43 posted on 05/28/2009 7:22:14 AM PDT by Ulysse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: SaraJohnson
We should send them back to their own nations of origin

They won't take them back. We asked. They told us to pound sand.

It's either Gitmo or the O.J. Simpson Memorial Justice System. There are no other choices.

44 posted on 05/28/2009 7:28:53 AM PDT by WhistlingPastTheGraveyard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: ksen

I nominate Berkley as the site to house them.


45 posted on 05/28/2009 7:33:10 AM PDT by for-q-clinton (If at first you don't succeed keep on sucking until you do succeed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ksen; rintense
Petraeus says that closing Guantanamo "in a responsible manner...sends an important message to the world, as does the commitment of the United States to observe the Geneva Convention when it comes to the treatment of detainees."

This is not a statement without conditions. "In a responsible manner" is the key.

It's only common sense that there can be more than only one solution to a problem like imprisoning terrorists. The problem with keeping them locked up in the US is the ACLU.

I don't think Obama would agree with that.

There would be no more US prisoners out of Afghan and Iraq. I'd think that jurisdiction really shouldn't belong to us anymore since their governments are in place. And I'd return these to those governments.

46 posted on 05/28/2009 7:37:12 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain, Pro Deo et Patria)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ksen
No need for GITMO if you leave their corpses on the battlefield instead.

Dead terrorists don't need tax payer-funded prayer rugs nor bleeding heart LIEberal lawyers.

47 posted on 05/28/2009 7:42:08 AM PDT by RasterMaster (DUmocrats - the party of slavery, sedition, subversion, socialism & surrender)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: paulycy

There are no alternatives at this point.

None... (that I know of) At least as far as the National party and federal offices go... And that is a good thing, as Ill explain.

There are many folks at the state level who share our “angry malcontent right wing extremist” views. Honestly, that is where the focus should be. We are not going to beat the federal government back into the limited size and scope that was intended for it from with the federal government. We are going to do it with the organizational units that originally created the fedgov... the States.

Do I really think it matters that cheney, steel, limbaugh or any other person heads the national GOP or holds some federal position? nope... they are ineffectual anyway. The real danger is in the shift of momentum and focus of the folks on our side away from what can make significant change back to the same old worn out path.

We need to concentrate 100% of our efforts on getting control of as many states as possible with folks who are willing to set those states against the usurpations of the fedgov. Anything else is just a distraction from the main front of this war.


48 posted on 05/28/2009 7:50:16 AM PDT by myself6 (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: angelcindy

Oh good - another “New World Order”-ist.


49 posted on 05/28/2009 7:51:08 AM PDT by GOPsterinMA (Where can I take 'Austrian' lessons?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: ksen
It is an Overseas Contingency Operation to ameliorate the root causes of Transnational Extremist Violence levied by Aggrieved Underprivileged Minorities reacting with the only means they have to the ravages of Neo-Colonial Belligerence and Decades of Corporate Raiding of Local Environmental and Labor Resources. Ask the Green Party or the Socialist International. I've heard them blame Pepsi and Playboy too.

I'd rather be blunt about it - these are idealistic, Wilsonian campaigns to trade thousands of American lives and trillions in American treasure for the mere hope that the supposedly transformative powers of democracy will turn large groups of savage neolithic moron thugs into temperate, classically liberal, peaceful societies that will no longer attack America or its allies (ally?) just because they will all get to decide the next few of their leaders by ballot before eventually electing another democracy-ending dictator to offer them the chance at achieving what they almost universally accept will be the Final Solution to all of their problems - all presented under the rubric of "national security" because even the brain-addled sheeple who demand tons magical solutions to problems (like "free everything for everyone forever") retain enough cognitive ability to render a direct appeal to Wilsonianism electorally infeasible. American foreign policy has been the playground of idealists since the early 20th Century, and now we are finally seeing a truthful linguistic evolution for the terms used in the promotion of Wilsonian idiocy.

50 posted on 05/28/2009 7:54:38 AM PDT by M203M4 (A rainbow-excreting government-cheese-pie-eating unicorn in every pot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-120 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson