Let's see, there are USA black sites, including the one in Chicago, but to imprison them abroad means there could be sympathizers that would turn them loose again.
...Although American commandos (click here) have captured a handful of Islamic State fighters in Iraq and Syria in discrete operations in recent years, the Pentagon is now faced with the prospect of detaining a larger group of captives and potentially reprising some of the darkest images of the war in Iraq, particularly the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison....
March 1, 2016
By Eric Schmitt and Michael S. Schmidt
There are innumerable military prisons they could be housed in the USA where no one is a sympathizer, like Leavenworth. Or. Alcatraz. You know, a place with a mote around it. Alligators. Crocodiles. Parana.
They could just be turned over to a group of American citizens in an enclosed environment. That would be interesting.
But, surely, all this melodrama as to where to place prisoners is a sincere joke, isn't it?
If they need to be interrogated it has to be out of the country and off the CONTINENT. I think there are plenty of places on USA military bases far more secure than anyone would like to admit where interrogations can take place. But, in all honesty, aren't these PRIZES to show off to the others thinking they can get away with something. Is there really that much to know about the wicked Ba'athists? We know a great deal about these people and the fact they are now captured and Syria is beginning to fall under governance says it all.
The USA military knows it can only play the intelligence gathering game for just so long and then the information is stale and what good are the prisoners? At some point in time the war has to be fought and won. I would think the middle east is very close to winning from the sounds to it. I'd rather the military would house POWs somewhere secure and stop the hideous game of "Gitmo." Gitmo is perverse and unhelpful.
They could just be turned over to a group of American citizens in an enclosed environment. That would be interesting.
But, surely, all this melodrama as to where to place prisoners is a sincere joke, isn't it?
If they need to be interrogated it has to be out of the country and off the CONTINENT. I think there are plenty of places on USA military bases far more secure than anyone would like to admit where interrogations can take place. But, in all honesty, aren't these PRIZES to show off to the others thinking they can get away with something. Is there really that much to know about the wicked Ba'athists? We know a great deal about these people and the fact they are now captured and Syria is beginning to fall under governance says it all.
The USA military knows it can only play the intelligence gathering game for just so long and then the information is stale and what good are the prisoners? At some point in time the war has to be fought and won. I would think the middle east is very close to winning from the sounds to it. I'd rather the military would house POWs somewhere secure and stop the hideous game of "Gitmo." Gitmo is perverse and unhelpful.
I happen to think Russia and the USA make good partners in a search for stability, self-governance and ultimately peace with non-proliferation a goal.
Oh, here is a thought. Load the prisoners of that Mach 20 experimental vehicle and then see how much cooperation they provide.