The closing of Gitmo is a bittersweet victory for the Obama camp. While it closed what has brought nothing but scandal and negative attention to America, Obama must now decide how to handle enemy combatants.

President Barack Obama wasted no time in shutting down one of the most controversial prisons in the history of the United States.

On January 22, his second day in office, Obama signed several executive orders closing what is left of the Central Intelligence Agency's network of secret prisons, limiting the CIA's interrogation techniques and ordering the closing of Guantanamo Bay detention center with in a year.

With Gitmo going out of business a whole host of new problems arise. What does the new administration do with current and new prisoners? How do we prosecute these individuals? Where do we prosecute them? Under what law do we prosecute them? Should enemy combatants have the same rights and privileges that American citizens have? These are not easy questions to answer, but they need to be answered soon.

Guantanamo Bay Naval station has been in U.S. hands since 1903 when we leased the 45-mile site from the Cuban government. In 2002 former President Bush started using the base as a detention camp for suspected terrorists.

The administration has ordered a review of the remaining 245 detainees and ending the military tribunal system that former President Bush set up.

Several congressional delegates have voiced their concern about what will happen to prisoners after the base closes. There are two options being discussed. One is to house them in American prisons while they await some military trial; the other is to send them back to their country of origin for prosecution.

The issue I have with sending detainees back to their country of origin is that they could be put back on the battlefield rather than locked away. If we have detainees from Iran and we then return them for trial it is unlikely that Iran will prosecute them. Instead they would be heralded as heroes for defying the "Great Satan" and making it home.

I have less of an issue with the detainees being held on American soil. In fact we held captured German prisoners in prison camps in America during World War II. We hold dangerous serial killers in prisons spread across the country. How Mr. Congress man is a serial killer any less dangerous then a terrorist? Will he break out of the maximum security prison any quicker than a serial killer?

In addition to closing Gitmo, Obama suspended the CIA from using any interrogation technique other than the 19 written in the Military handbook. While these are banned for now, the Obama administration has reserved the right to reinstate the CIA's ability to use more intense interrogation methods in the future.

By removing the CIA's power to interrogate prisoners for now and yet keeping the right to reinstate the more controversial interrogation methods the administration is sending mixed signals. Either they need to forbid the CIA from using these methods while they are in office or they need to support the CIA in their methods. There should be no ambiguity in the administration.

In my opinion, while the situation at Gitmo was not ideal, I understand the necessity of such a central prison compound. Without such a prison we would have prisoners scattered all around the globe. This would hamper interrogation and the release of the detainees, as interrogators might have to wait on confirmation from other camps before releasing their detainees. While the closing of Gitmo is a popular move, it could cause more problems than it really solves.