>By "homes," I of course meant home countries (and I'm sure you knew that).
>
>Actually, I didn't know that. There are so many pretexts that people use when attacking this country's attempts to fight terrorism..
>
>
>As for Guantanamo, it's proven to be a poor choice, since its isolation (or perhaps poor leadership) has led to mistreatment of prisoners. Our behavior there has damaged our reputation in the world, and led to more, rather than less, sympathy for the terrorists.
>
>It's viewed as a poor choice by those who were already practiced in the art of bashing this country's attempts to fight terrorism.
>
>Anyone who thinks this gains sympathy for terrorists has an inverted set of principles.

I think you meant 'Anyone who has sympathy for the terrorists" not "anyone who thinks this gains sympathy." Thinking it gained sympathy in others is judging the result of the actions, not feeling the sympathy themselves. Recent history shows that it generated sympathy for the detainees. Just look at the posts here and the polls taken around the world at the time. The Arab world, as well as the rest of the world, was so angry over the mistreatment of detainees that it destroyed the world view of this country. It overshadowed everything else. It is why Obama finally came to his senses over releasing more photos.

I don't think it should have garnered sympathy for "terrorists," but many in the world thought and still think that gitmo didn't and doesn't hold only terrorists.