Gitmo — here we go, again.
This time: us — we don't want them here. This time: Europe — they don't want them there.
Heavy majorities here saying on this, President Bush was right. Heavy majorities there saying on this, President Obama is wrong.
So that Gitmo shutdown? Let's just say it's detained — by a world that hates the place, but hates having those guys any other place and Democratic senators who hate the place more, but won't provide the funding to make Gitmo no more.
Look, I'm not here to debate what Gitmo is. I think I'm on pretty safe ground telling you quite clearly what Gitmo is not:
First and foremost, it is not an excuse. It is not a reason for foreigners to hate us — sadly, many already do.
It is not an excuse for rogue states to take advantage of us — predictably, North Korea and Iran, once again have.
And it is not a powder keg for militant Islamists — that one was lit long before.
Because long before there was a Gitmo, there was a USS Cole. Just like there was a World Trade Center attack in 2001 and one before that in 1993.
Long before there was a Gitmo, there was Mogadishu, where they dragged our soldiers through streets. And Beirut, Lebanon, where they killed 241 of our soldiers in their barracks.
Long before Americans began rounding up guys in orange jumpsuits, there were guys jumping Americans in places like Riyadh, Saudi Arabia — repeatedly. At a West Berlin discotheque — tragically. And on a certain Pan Am flight over Lockerbie, Scotland — memorably.
Some think that without a Guantanamo Bay we could hold our enemies at bay; that without a prison there, there's less reason for bad guys to do bad things to us anywhere.
If that was true, the world would happily take these detainees and they're not. Perhaps because while they say they're not terrorists, they know in their hearts, maybe they are.
— Watch Neil Cavuto weekdays at 4 p.m. ET on "Your World with Cavuto" and send your comments to firstname.lastname@example.org