Gitmo out...

There are a bunch on the left decrying the percieved "torture" at Gitmo - the horror of Christina Agularia music and naked ladies that poor terrorists were subject to. I don't have a lot to add to that, as others like Lileks and Goldstein have already said it better than I can.

But much of what the left wants to close Gitmo down to reduce the "negetive perceptions" of the US by, well, people like them. The Baltimore Sun, for example, ran this editorial calling for the closure of gitmo. What the editorial - or anyone I've heard so far - doesn't answer is what to do with the terrorists who are in Gitmo if we close it.

Option 1 is release the terrorists into the streets. That poses a couple problems. First of all, we've gotten a ton of information from the detainees, which has helped us stop other terrorists and their plots. Secondly, the ones we have released (presumably the least dangerous of the detainees, since we released them) have a nasty habit of going back to fight us. And I can't imagine the very people complaining about Gitmo would not complain if a terrorist attack, or a troop attackin Afganistan or Iraq, occured with the involvement of someone we released from Gitmo.

Option 2 is to move the camp somewhere else. This accomplishes nothing but technically fulfilling the desire of those who want Gitmo closed. The same complaints will occur someone else.

Still, it does bring up a tempting option. Make the liberals happy and announce that we will close Gitmo. Then piss them off even more by announcing that we will be moving the detainees - to Abu Ghraib.