What's the problem here?

**BENESSE** · 06-19-2013, 12:01 AM

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/doctors-obama-let-us-treat-guantanamo-detainees-hunger-230110562.html

Guantanamo detainees on hunger strike

More than 100 of the 166 prisoners still in Guantanamo are on a hunger strike; some of them have been striking for as long as five months. Nearly half of the hunger strikers are being "enterally fed," according to the military, which means military doctors snake tubing connected to a can of Ensure up their nostrils and down the backs of their throats. Many of the detainees consider this to be torture.

The Miami Herald reported that 46 of the 166 captives in Guantanamo have been classified as "indefinite detainees" by the Obama administration, which means the government considers them too dangerous to release or transfer but cannot try them in a court of law due to lack of evidence or other reasons. Eighty-six of the detainees have been cleared for release, but their transfer has been delayed.

Someone please enlighten me, but in the absence of that, I just don't get it. If they want to kill themselves, I say fine...the only reservation being that perhaps they haven't gotten their case heard in a reasonably due time.

**Old GI** · 06-19-2013, 08:31 AM

We have coddled these terrorists so far. I thnik they should get their starvation wish granted.

**hunter63** · 06-19-2013, 09:54 AM

Grocery bill should be less......think of all the goats that will be spared.....
I don't see a problem.

**Ken** · 06-19-2013, 10:05 AM

Originally Posted by BENESSE

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/doctors-obama-let-us-treat-guantanamo-detainees-hunger-230110562.html

Guantanamo detainees on hunger strike

More than 100 of the 166 prisoners still in Guantanamo are on a hunger strike; some of them have been striking for as long as five months. Nearly half of the hunger strikers are being "enterally fed," according to the military, which means military doctors snake tubing connected to a can of Ensure up their nostrils and down the backs of their throats. Many of the detainees consider this to be torture.

The Miami Herald reported that 46 of the 166 captives in Guantanamo have been classified as "indefinite detainees" by the Obama administration, which means the government considers them too dangerous to release or transfer but cannot try them in a court of law due to lack of evidence or other reasons. Eighty-six of the detainees have been cleared for release, but their transfer has been delayed.

Someone please enlighten me, but in the absence of that, I just don't get it. If they want to kill themselves, I say fine...the only reservation being that perhaps they haven't gotten their case heard in a reasonably due time.

I have no sympathy for terrorists of any political or religious bent. I would bomb their strongholds and keep the bomb-making plants running 24-7 to manufacture more.

However, if they're captured and held in custody, different rules apply. Holding a prisoner for SEVERAL YEARS without a trial or disposition of their case can never be justified.

Continuing to hold a prisoner "cleared for release" is wrong regardless of how you look at it. If he/she has been cleared, it's fair to say that there is no evidence against him/her. Ineptitude on the part of the government is no reason to deprive anyone of their freedom.

Labeling someone who cannot be tried due to "lack of evidence" as "too dangerous to release" suggests incompetence of the highest degree. How can a determination of "dangerousness" be made with no evidence to support it?

Think about this: If a United States citizen were to be held in Iran or North Korea in circumstances where their government acknowledged that they were being detained after having already been "cleared" or that there was "no evidence," we would be clamoring to have that nation's capital incinerated.

We are establishing some very dangerous precedents, in this and other matters, that may very well be applied against our own citizens in the future.

Our government really needs to get its act together NOW.

**finallyME** · 06-19-2013, 10:56 AM

I am with Ken here. They need to be released, or tried.

**canid** · 06-19-2013, 10:53 PM

I couldn't agree more. It is beneath us as a nation to sink to this crap.

**2dumb2kwit** · 06-20-2013, 07:18 AM

Originally Posted by canid

I couldn't agree more. It is beneath us as a nation to sink to this crap.

You are correct. Forcing food into someone who doesn't want to eat, is just wrong.

**BENESSE** · 06-20-2013, 07:56 AM

Ken, excellent points! Sometimes I have to remind myself that doing the right thing should never be negotiable even when it comes to people we hate.

**Ken** · 06-20-2013, 09:04 AM

One more thing to consider..... If an individual who has been held "without evidence" was NOT a jihadist when he was taken prisoner, it's a pretty sure bet that after being held captive for years without a trial, and possibly being force fed, he WILL be a jihadist by the time he's released.

**2dumb2kwit** · 06-20-2013, 09:47 AM

Originally Posted by BENESSE

Ken, excellent points! Sometimes I have to remind myself that doing the right thing should never be negotiable even when it comes to people we hate.

Aren't we dealing with two separate issues?
1. Whether or not they should be prisoners.
2. How to deal with prisoners that is on a hunger strike.

**Ken** · 06-20-2013, 10:03 AM

Originally Posted by 2dumb2kwit

Aren't we dealing with two separate issues?
1. Whether or not they should be prisoners.
2. How to deal with prisoners that is on a hunger strike.

Actually, we're dealing with three separate issues.
1. Whether or not they should be prisoners.
2. How to deal with prisoners that are on a hunger strike.
3. How to deal with prisoners that SHOULD NOT BE PRISONERS that are on a hunger strike.

**Eastree** · 06-20-2013, 10:05 PM

Originally Posted by Ken

One more thing to consider..... If an individual who has been held "without evidence" was NOT a jihadist when he was taken prisoner, it's a pretty sure bet that after being held captive for years without a trial, and possibly being force fed, he WILL be a jihadist by the time he's released.

I was thinking along these lines. I'd bet they're creating enemies with this.

**welderguy** · 06-20-2013, 10:09 PM

if there not taliban , and we havent tried them, why are we housing them , paying for them to be guarded, and feeding them. deport there butts. get them out of our system. now my thoughts on the hunger strike , it takes about three weeks to starve to death right, let them go two weeks without eating then deport there butts.

**Ken** · 06-20-2013, 10:21 PM

Originally Posted by welderguy

if there not taliban , and we havent tried them, why are we housing them , paying for them to be guarded, and feeding them. deport there butts. get them out of our system. now my thoughts on the hunger strike , it takes about three weeks to starve to death right, let them go two weeks without eating then deport there butts.

You are a true humanitarian! May I ask exactly where you would deport their butts to, and the mode of transportation you would employ to do so?

Guests can not see images in the messages. Please register in the forum.

**welderguy** · 06-20-2013, 10:39 PM

Originally Posted by Ken

You are a true humanitarian! May I ask exactly where you would deport their butts to, and the mode of transportation you would employ to do so?

Guests can not see images in the messages. Please register in the forum.

Im thinking africa has a lot of open space.

Guests can not see images in the messages. Please register in the forum.

**Ken** · 06-20-2013, 10:46 PM

Originally Posted by welderguy

Im thinking africa has a lot of open space.

Guests can not see images in the messages. Please register in the forum.

Let me guess............. You're a travel agent, aren't you?

**welderguy** · 06-20-2013, 10:56 PM

Originally Posted by Ken

Let me guess............. You're a travel agent, aren't you?

yep . My agency is called one way travel, our motto is " we have a trip for you, even if ya dont want it."

**BENESSE** · 06-20-2013, 11:09 PM

Originally Posted by Ken

3. How to deal with prisoners that SHOULD NOT BE PRISONERS that are on a hunger strike.

In this particular case, that's the only issue.
"We" need to $hit or get off the pot, as it were. Try them or release them now, but holding them indefinitely isn't good for anyone especially not us; it's expensive, it creates a bad image around the world (we care about that, apparently) and it motivates people to seek revenge.
Imagine, (if that's possible) if the situation was reversed.