I PREDICT: Closing Gitmo Opens Door to Another 9/11

AMEN! Preach on!

 

We don't need secret prisons in which the inmates are never accused of anything. I always thought America didn't play this kind of a game. I thought it was reserved for the communists under Stalin or Hitler's Germany. I see I'm probably in the minority about that here.

 

I'm with you. I didn't vote for Obama, nor do I support many of his positions. On this one, however, I think he made a wise choice. We aren't going to go easy on terrorists; we are just shutting down a prison that hindered our internal relations and credibility.

 

I said long ago that Obama was an empty suit. He proved it.

Who cares about credibility? The islamic world hates us anyway, we're the Big Satan according to them. They will attack again, it's only a matter of time. All the Bush bashers on here, naw, I wasn't thrilled and am not thrilled about being in Iraq, but at least Bush kept us safe since 09/11 by luring the cockroaches to one main place by the sacrifices of our brave troops over there in that god-forsaken place. Yes, it cost us blood and treasure and we have lost a lot, but the Bush strategy worked for keeping us safe on the homefront. Some day, if we're still around to have a history, he will be regarded as one of our greatest presidents, I do believe.

 

Yeah, let's just expunge the date 9/11/2001 from the Bush presidential record.

 

Pandering to Radical Islam to improve HIS image worldwide..

I wonder why he cares what every nation thinks of him.

Note to Obama: NATIONS HATE THE US. And you are not the Messiah to bring world piece..

Anyone thinking he can bring world peace has believed a lie, and is deluded...

 

So you blame Bush for 9/11? :wavey:

 

Well, conservatives keep saying that former President Bush kept us safe since 9/11. So what about 9/11/2001? Does he get a mulligan for that?

 

I do. I'm not speaking about credibility in the Islamic world but with our allies. The US does not rule the world. In order to protect our interests, it is beneficial to maintain positive relationships with our allies in Europe.

 

President Bush was in office for less than 8 months by 9/11/01. It's not invalid to cite the lack of terrorist attacks in the US during the rest of Bush's presidency, but liberal hatred of Bush overlooks that fact.

Bush did a lot of stupid things, but give credit where it is due.

 

To paraphrase Richard Haass the United States doesn't need other countries' permission to act internationally, but we do need the cooperation of other countries' to succeed internatinally.

We certainly aren't the only nation working to stop acts of terror and we need the assistance of other nations to prevent acts of terror on our own soil.

 

So at what point did George W. Bush become responsible for what took place during his presidency? When does Barack Obama become responsible for what takes place during his presidency?

If an act of terror occurs on or before 9/11/2009 do you expect Barack Obama's detractors to not blame him for it, to give him the same consideration in the matter that they give George W. Bush?

 

It's not pandering to radical Islam. Pandering to radical Islam would be to cave entirely. Gitmo is just a prison camp. The struggle against terrorism is far more.

He cares what nations think about him because it is sophomoric and arrogant to act as if international relations are independent from world opinion. We can't give the metaphorical "finger" to the world and expect to have any allies left. Bush was stuck in a bad situation after some judgment errors, but Obama has the chance to restore some relationships simply because he is not Bush.

 

I predict this thread will have people on both sides of the fence... and it will run many many pages without anyone changing their minds.....

 

I don't answer for anyone but myself, so I can't speak to the detractors.

I prefer not to get caught up in the blame game. 9/11 was a paradigm shift, and the "fault" for it best lies with the terrorists who committed the act. As satisfying as it is sometimes to blame Bush as the evil responsible for cancer, AIDS, terrorism, the recession, and long lines at the DMV, the fact is that both Democrats and Republicans missed some opportunities to improve security.

The Bush administration did respond to the changing world, and no attacks have occurred since 9/11 in the US. I'll give him credit for that. On other matters, like Katrina, he failed.

 

That's probably the case. I find it somewhat amusing what the different sides will think. Sometimes it seems like some consider Bush to be just one step above a serial killer and others think Barack Obama is the antichrist.

 

I understand.

However, I am curious as to when you would say that President Bush became responsible for what took place during his presidency?

I have no problem with crediting him for no attacks on U.S. soil after 9/11/2001. However, his presidency didn't start on 9/12/2001.

Neither am I saying that he bears the sole responsibility for what happened on 9/11/2001. Then again, he does not get the sole credit for no attacks on U.S. soil after 9/11/2001.

 

A true prophet!!:thumbsup:

 

The two are not mutually exclusive. Just because he "kept us safe" doesn't mean he didn't on 9/11. Did Clinton not keep us safe the first WTC attack in 93, or does he get a pass for that? Is he not also commended for it not happening after that?

We can blame them or praise them. They get more of both than they deserve.