Hillary Clinton: “We are absolutely committed to closing Guantanamo"

[impik]

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton repeated Tuesday that the Obama administration is “absolutely committed to closing Guantanamo,” shortly after President Obama signed a bill that makes it very difficult to do so.

“We are absolutely committed to closing Guantanamo; it’s turned out to be a lot more challenging that we had hoped when we set that goal,” Clinton told reporters at the State Department after meeting with Spain’s foreign minister. “But there is no doubt about the commitment. And the continuing support from friends like Spain helps us to keep on moving.”


http://www.politico.com/politico44/perm/0111/a_promise_is_a_promise_387c0cfd-d00f-4c16-84fc-4997f72876db.html

[sharp_stick]

1. Clinton and Obama learned pretty

quickly how hard it can be to do something if Congress decides they don't want you to do it. In this country it's even harder to get it done if the jingoistic assholes that always come to the front during these things decide they can score a point or two on the pundit circuit.

[gateley]

3. Yeah, until you're stuck in that muck so many issues seem cut and dried, easy.

Then reality douses with ice cold water.

[gateley]

2. Good. And I've no doubt it's much more challenging that initially anticipated. nt

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

4. Yeah, sure Hillary, we believe you this time. Save the lies for your 2012 primary challenge.

[lefty2000]

5. Please Stop

If she lies, she lies for you. She is not your enemy, nor am I.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

18. Thanks for that insight. Knowing Hillary lies for me makes me feel a lot better.

[msanthrope]

7. Um, dude. She's blocked by law from closing it. Really. You can look it up. n/t

[Metric System]

19. Ugh.

[Cali_Democrat]

6. Riiiiiiiight

Heard that one before :eyes:

[msanthrope]

8. If you have a way to overturn Congressional law, you should forward it to

the Secretary of State....

[Cali_Democrat]

10. Put them on the next military plane to Afghanistan and let them go

Just as easily as we picked them up, we can let them go.

Continuing to violate their human rights should not be an option.

[msanthrope]

11. What? 1) Afghanistan might have something to say about that. 2)

They all aren't from Afghanistan. 3) What makes Afghanistan a safe haven for them?

[Cali_Democrat]

12. Most were captured in Afghanistan

Release them where we captured them.

[msanthrope]

13. Um--did you ever consider--

1) Afghanistan is a sovereign country. They might just have something to say about it.

2) Lots of these prisoners were 'captured' by tribal leaders. Sure, we could put them down back where the tribal leaders hold sway--and watch the carnage....


It's a tad bit more complicated than you suggest.

[Cali_Democrat]

14. Yes

1) Afghanistan is a puppet government of the US, anything but sovereign. Anyways, let them decide what needs to be done with people captured on their territory.
2)I disagree about the carnage part. Many were captured for money that was given to them by Bush. The tribal leaders didn't think they were terrorists.

[msanthrope]

15. 1) And what if Afghanistan decides on execution?

2) What keeps tribal leaders from executing the obvious examples of their greed?

I find your suggestions facile.

[Cali_Democrat]

17. Well

The United States has no problem with executing it's own prisoners so lecturing a country about execution is hypocritical. Like you said, they're a sovereign country.

[texshelters]

9. Yea, if she knew than what she knows now...

and Obama too!

Peace,
Tex Shelters

[Doctor_J]

16. This is an old post from 2008

right?