Two Bush-era officials reject Cheney's security stance (Gates and Ridge)

AFP on Yahoo ^ | 5/22/09 | Dan De Luce

[NormsRevenge]

WASHINGTON (AFP) – Two top Bush-era officials on Friday rejected ex-vice president Dick Cheney's scathing criticism of US President Barack Obama, saying the country's national security was not in jeopardy.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who served in the same post under former president George W. Bush, and Tom Ridge, the former head of homeland security, both voiced disagreement with Cheney a day after he attacked Obama's performance as the new commander-in-chief.

Gates said in an interview that opponents of Obama's decision to close the "war on terror" prison at Guantanamo were engaging in "fear-mongering," a reference to Cheney's stance on the issue.

Defending the president's decision to shut the detention center at the US naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, Gates said the prison was damaging America's image and served as a propaganda tool for Al-Qaeda.

"The truth is, it's probably one of the finest prisons in the world today. But it has a taint," Gates told NBC television's "Today" program during a visit to New York.

"The name itself is a condemnation. What the president was saying is, this will be an advertisement for Al-Qaeda as long as it's open," he said.

In an interview with CNN's "State of the Union," Ridge said he could not support the former vice president's charge that Obama had undermined US national security.

Asked if he believed the country was now less safe as a result of Obama's policies, Ridge said: "I do not."

The Republican said the discussion had become too politically charged with Cheney making a televised speech on Thursday immediately after an address by the sitting president.

[DoughtyOne]

Look, I’m going to ask this as kindly as I can. What do you think 1,500 potential terrorist cells in the U.S., coupled with hundreds of Gitmo terrorists released here, will result in?

McCain favored both of these things. He advocated Gitmo prisoners be given access to U.S. courts.

Your premise is extremely flawed. Both of these men would have exposed the United States to terrible danger. It would be a toss up which would exposed us more to another terrorist attack.

You act as if I have chosen to open the door to more terrorism, when the guy you voted for advocated for precisely what Obama has with regard to these two issues.

On top of this, they both want all illegal immigrants gifted with citizenship.

To hell with the both of them.

[BARLF]

Back to Front Page Text size – + McCain attacks Guantanamo decision
Email|Link|Comments (27) Posted by Foon Rhee, deputy national political editor June 13, 2008 11:37 AM
John McCain today slammed the US Supreme Court ruling that terrorist detainees at Guantanamo Bay have a constitutional right to challenge their detention in civilian courts.

At a town hall meeting in Pemberton, N.J., McCain called it “one of the worst decisions in the history of this country.”

While McCain reminded voters that he has worked to prevent the torture of terrorism suspects, he also argued against giving those rights to enemy combatants who are not US citizens.

McCain also noted that US officials have said that about 30 detainees released from Guantanamo Bay have attacked American forces.

“There are some bad people down there,” he said, adding that the first obligation of the government is to ensure the nation’s safety. “This decision will harm our ability to do that.”

McCain also warned that the courts will be “flooded” with habeas corpus petitions, delaying the adjudication of the cases.

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/06/mccain_attacks_1.html

You said:

McCain favored both of these things. He advocated Gitmo prisoners be given access to U.S. courts.

?????????????????????????

[DoughtyOne]

2007/02/17 McCain states he will close Guantanamo Bay terrorist detainment center on his first day in office  Video  (same as date link on the left)  (Video removed from YouTube, but quote remains on this site.)
2007/06/18 McCain's Gitmo problem, close the base, grant some Geneva Convention status reserved for lawful combatants, stop water boarding...

The problem with McCain is that over time he has been on both sides of just about every issue.  Claiming to be strong on the Second Amendment, he was still able to muster support for some anti-gun legislation.  Claiming to be anti-abortion, he still came out strongly for a person who was a devout pro-abortion activist.  Claiming to hate the Supreme Court decision, he still found it reasoned to move Gitmo prisoners to U.S. soil.

So just how outraged was McCain at the Supreme Court ruling?  Once the Gitmo prisoners were moved to U.S. soil, it would take very little time before they would demand and get access to our courts.  You mentioned his criticism of the Supreme Court ruling.  You don't seem to understand that his stance on closing Gitmo was going to facilitate the very thing he was loudly objecting to.

He stated he would close Gitmo on day one.  That means that every prisoner at Gitmo would have to be transferred on day one.  The guy just didn't think things through.

On day two of his administration about 380 suits would have been filed to demand access to our courts.  And on day three they would have gotten it.

And on day four you would have been stating how rotten it was of the Supreme Court, and how John McCain was a stand up guy for opposing it.

John has had the proclivity to be a useful idiot for close to thirty years in Congress and the Senate.

[DoughtyOne]

BTW, my comments were not accurate, and I am sorry for that.

I remembered him coming up with decisions that would result in the detainees getting access to our courts. When I said what I did to you, it was based on that remembrance.

It wasn’t accurate to state that he advocated for access. I believe it would have been more accurate to state that his polices would have facilitated that access, despite his vocal objects to that access.

I should have address this in my response to you, and didn’t.

[BARLF]

You sent me to a video that has been shut down. If you want to prove your point you might at least send me to a working link.

I did my own digging and found this:

Democrats still have an unlikely ally in their fight to close the Guantanamo prison: 2008 GOP presidential nominee John McCain (Ariz.).

McCain said Wednesday that his longstanding belief that the prison should close has not changed, only that a plan is needed first.

"You have to have a comprehensive policy for the detainees," McCain said. "But there is a PR problem -- the image in the world, what it symbolizes in the world."

Inhofe said as far as he knows, McCain and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) are the only Republicans in the Senate who favor closing Guantanamo.

Did you read the link I sent that McCain doesn't want them here or tried in our courts? Your lopsided view about every thing McCain with no derogatory comments about the Muslim is revealing.

Our debate started because you posted a snarky remark about ( All those folks who voted for McCain last year. Have we had enough of the RINOs yet?)

As if we,voters for McCain were beneath you and dumb, in other words we should have voted for THE ONE.

That's 57,168,270 or 46% of 2008 voters you just flipped off as having no sense.

Again, you have not answered my simple question. I asked you a question based on your own statement. Will you be comfortable with losing thousands of our citizens as long as it is not in our name?

If and when another terrorist attack happens in our country,killing innocent people it will be obama's fault, not John McCain's.

[BARLF]

Thank you for that.

I have enjoyed our debate. No hard feeling toward you personally, I just disagree with your logic.

Stay safe....

[DoughtyOne]

You sent me to a video that has been shut down. If you want to prove your point you might at least send me to a working link.

2007/02/17 McCain states he will close Guantanamo Bay terrorist detainment center on his first day in office  Video  (same as date link on the left)  (Video removed from YouTube, but quote remains on this site.)

If I had never seen the video, I would agree with you.  I did see the video last fall and in it McCain says just what the quote says he did.  Beyond that, I warned you the video was no longer there.  Don't act like it was some big surprise or something.

I did my own digging and found this:

Democrats still have an unlikely ally in their fight to close the Guantanamo prison: 2008 GOP presidential nominee John McCain (Ariz.).

McCain said Wednesday that his longstanding belief that the prison should close has not changed, only that a plan is needed first.

Well, if he's saying this now, it's too late.  He said he would close it on January 20th, 2009.  If he doesn't have a plan yet, he looks rather idiotic.

"You have to have a comprehensive policy for the detainees," McCain said. "But there is a PR problem -- the image in the world, what it symbolizes in the world."

Most of the Western world doesn't have a death penalty.  Britain and Europe are allowing themselves to be overrun by Muslims.  Europe thinks Israel stands in the way of peace.  Europe thinks Russia is trustworthy enouogh to use them as a source for a major portion of their energy needs.  Europe thinks the International Criminal Court is an excellent idea.  Europe loves the United Nations.  Europe fought Ronald Reagan tooth an nail to prevent our deployment of defensive nuclear weapons there.  So John has a little problem getting his priorities straight.  We aren't Europe and Europe is never going to think we're doing the right thing on all issues.  We either have a backbone and do what we think is right or not.  McCain is ready to surrender our values.  I'm not.

Inhofe said as far as he knows, McCain and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) are the only Republicans in the Senate who favor closing Guantanamo.

Sounds about right.

Did you read the link I sent that McCain doesn't want them here or tried in our courts? Your lopsided view about every thing McCain with no derogatory comments about the Muslim is revealing.

I expect you to know what is wrong with Obama.  If you don't, then I think it becomes a whole lot clearer why you think McCain is just fine.  If you need me to lead you by the hand on that point, it pretty much confirms my premise regarding people who voted for McCain.

McCain states he still has no policy what to do with the detainess, yet he was going to release them on January 20th, 2009, and then he says I don't want them here or tried in our courts.  Wow, and you sucker for all this.  LOL

Our debate started because you posted a snarky remark about ( All those folks who voted for McCain last year. Have we had enough of the RINOs yet?)

As if we,voters for McCain were beneath you and dumb, in other words we should have voted for THE ONE.

Well I do think of people who voted for McCain as beneath me on that issue.  I make no appologies about that.  Your powers of reason are nil.  Not once have I stated that people should have voted for Obama.  I stated that I did not vote for Obama.  And yet you come to the conclusion that I am stating you should have voted for 'The One'.  And then you get upset when you think I look down on you.  Well...

Now, will you appologize for stating I said folks should have voted for Obama when I didn't do any such thing?

That's 57,168,270 or 46% of 2008 voters you just flipped off as having no sense.

Very impressive.  Well we have seen what McCain has done since election day, and you still haven't clue one.  There are people all over this forum stating they are sorry they voted for McCain.  Others state they are glad they didn't fall into that trap.  I'm one of them.

Again, you have not answered my simple question. I asked you a question based on your own statement. Will you be comfortable with losing thousands of our citizens as long as it is not in our name?

And again, you don't have the mental faculties to understand that on the biggest threats to our national security, McCain and Obama are of the same mind.

1. They both want to close Gitmo
2. Nobody will take the detaininees, so under Obama or McCain they would have to wind up in the U.S. if Gitmo is closed
3. Under either of these men, the detainees will get access to our courts if they are incarcerated in the U.S.
4. Both men intend to let upwards of 30,000 Saudi Nationals remain in the U.S. on student visas, which are easily abused
5. That means that under either man upwards of 1,500 terrorist cells the size of the combined total of the Islamic aderents who took down the twin towers, remain in the United States at this very moment...  tick... tick... tick... tick...
6. Both want to reduce our nuclear stockpile to the greatest extent they can
7. Obama cancelled the F22 and McCain clapped
8. Obama cancelled part of the missile defense system and McCain clapped
9.  I believe one of the preditor unmanned systems was also cut, and again McCain clapped.

Now, will you be happy losing thousands of our citizens, if it is a result of any of these items, that McCain either proposed to do himself or clapped when Obama did?

If and when another terrorist attack happens in our country,killing innocent people it will be obama's fault, not John McCain's.

Oh he'll get the credit.  And you know what, I'll be damned glad the Democrats will be tarnished with it, and not McCain the Republicans and more importantly the Conservatives.

And this despite the fact that Obama and McCain saw eye to eye on nearly all of this.

[DoughtyOne]

Thank you for you last post. We’ll do just fine when we talk about other subject matter. Most likely. I don’t hold grudges over to other threads as a general rule.

If I get someone who is a pinhead against me as a general rule most of the time, then I’m not quite so forgiving.

You take care.

Look forward to discussion other issues with you.