Skip to main content

View Diary: Indefinite detention: Can we ask how the United States got here? (198 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  My longstanding assumption (8+ / 0-)

    Guantanamo was a crime from beginning to end--fathers-in-law selling out sons-in-law to collect second "wife payments," mistaken identities and a very small group of real terrorists.

    But I've assumed for a long time that this small group of real bad guys had their rights (yes they have some)violated so badly, or weren't that bad before but now are REALLY mad at us, and the government simply doesn't know what to do with them because they can't be tried or returned or released and they know this tiny number of men are very, very dangerous.

    What did we do to get there? Ask Rumsfeld.

    Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.

    by MrMichaelMT on Sun Jan 08, 2012 at 06:34:59 AM PST

    •  I've thought along the same lines as well (5+ / 0-)

      Guantanamo put us in a situation that leaves us with nothing but bad options, and I'm not at all suggesting that this reality makes NDAA acceptable or the right thing to do.

      But I think it may be that simple. We don't know what to do with them, and every time we try Congress goes all NIMBY on us, knowing full well that their next election will be in jeopardy if they do the right thing.

      I think it's as simple as inertia. It's a way to push a big problem down the road.

      P.S. I am not a crackpot.

      by BoiseBlue on Sun Jan 08, 2012 at 06:43:45 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I don't think you can chalk it up to (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        maryabein, Scott Wooledge, DSPS owl, kait

        Congressional inertia when they rushed thru this bill to deal with whatever issue was scaring them so badly.  This bill, or provision, came out of nowhere, for no discernible reason that we can see, and was passed lightening fast.  The questions remain, why did the US need this, and so quickly that there was essentially no debate before it was passed?  And just who benefits?  Because you just don't get this kind of thing passed this quickly without some serious money and muscle hidden behind it.

      •  I don't seriously believe that "we just can't (0+ / 0-)

        figure out" what to do with these people. Not personally toward you or MrM, but in general that viewpoint seems, naive is the only word I can come up with at the moment.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site