home

U.S. Readies SuperMax at Gitmo


From SuperMax to GitMax. The U.S. is finalizing plans for the newest maximum security prison at Guantanamo. The Associated Press reports we are spending $37.8 million on the facility to house a maximum of 220 prisoners. That doesn't even include the upkeep or cost of confinement.

Underscoring the military's toughening stance, a jailhouse in the final stages of construction on a cactus-studded plateau overlooking the Caribbean is being "hardened" into a maximum-security facility. Camp 6 was to have opened in August as a medium-security lockup. The modifications have pushed back the completion date of the $37.8 million jailhouse, which has a capacity for 220 inmates, to Sept. 30. It will take its first detainees in mid-October, Army Capt. Dan Byer said.

How long will they be there? Forever.

"I think what we have here is an orange. What we're doing is squeezing out the juice and what we're left with at the end of the day is pulp that will just stay here," said Navy Capt. Phil Waddingham, lead officer here for the Office for the Administrative Review of the Detention of Enemy Combatants.

From a flawed policy to a disasterous policy. As op-ed contributor and former military man Paul Reikoff writes in the New York Times today, Do Unto Your Enemy...

America's moral standing has eroded, thanks to its flawed rationale for war and scandals like Abu Ghraib, Guantánamo and Haditha. The last thing we can afford now is to leave Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions open to reinterpretation, as President Bush proposed to do and can still do under the compromise bill that emerged last week.

Blurring the lines on the letter of Article 3 -- it governs the treatment of prisoners of war, prohibiting "violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture" and "outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment" -- will only make our troops' tough fight even tougher. It will undermine the power of all the Geneva Conventions, immediately endanger American troops captured by the enemy and create a powerful recruiting tool for Al Qaeda.

But the fight over Article 3 concerns not only Al Qaeda and the war in Iraq. It also affects future wars, because when we lower the bar for the treatment of our prisoners, other countries feel justified in doing the same.

Reikoff provides this example, which we all know is but only one possible scenario:

It is not hard to imagine that one of our Special Forces soldiers might one day be captured by Iranian forces while investigating a potential nuclear weapons program. What is to stop that soldier from being water-boarded, locked in a cold room for days without sleep as Iranian pop music blares all around him -- and finally sentenced to die without a fair trial or the right to see the evidence against him?

And then?

If America continues to erode the meaning of the Geneva Conventions, we will cede the ground upon which to prosecute dictators and warlords. We will also become unable to protect our troops if they are perceived as being no more bound by the rule of law than dictators and warlords themselves.

If only Congress would take heed, and tell McCain, Warner and Graham to take their compromise and stick it.

< UVA Teammates: George Felix Allen A "Racist" | Bernie Ebbers To Start Serving 25 Year Sentence >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Re: U.S. Readies SuperMax at Gitmo (none / 0) (#1)
    by john horse on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 03:55:40 AM EST
    After reading this brief interview with historian Kate Brown I think Guantanamo is America's Gulag. Regarding Reikoff, he also makes the point that humane treatment will make it more likely that enemy soldiers will surrender rather than fight on which will save American lives.

    Re: U.S. Readies SuperMax at Gitmo (none / 0) (#2)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 05:10:05 AM EST
    John Horse - Now let me understand this. We are fighting a war against people who kill themselves in an attempt to kill us. I reference car bombs in Iraq, varioius cafe/street bombs in Israel, 7/7 attacks in England, the recent failed car bomb attack in Syria, the foiled airliner(s) attack in England. So if we are good to them they will surrender? Huh??? Can you explain your logic??

    Re: U.S. Readies SuperMax at Gitmo (none / 0) (#3)
    by profmarcus on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 05:27:00 AM EST
    this sucks so bad it's impossible to put it into words... And, yes, I DO take it personally

    Re: U.S. Readies SuperMax at Gitmo (none / 0) (#4)
    by profmarcus on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 05:34:35 AM EST
    i overlooked JimakaPPJ's comment above mine... when we choose to defend ourselves without a base of values, beliefs, and principles, we forfeit our right to exist as a free, democratic republic, based on our declaration of independence and our constitution... sadly, i think we did that some time ago, well before 9/11... it's only more visible now as the bush administration seeks to make it official policy in law, rather than covert actions hidden from public view... it's this long history that, in many ways, is now coming back to haunt us, and it's a shame we refuse to have any kind of national dialogue on the issue... And, yes, I DO take it personally

    Re: U.S. Readies SuperMax at Gitmo (none / 0) (#7)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 07:26:40 AM EST
    prof - Why does the Left worry more about the terrorists' prison conditions than they do the health care problems of our own citizens? Regarding the terrorists, the fact is that you are making a political statement and attack on Bush. And yes, that is the truth.

    Re: U.S. Readies SuperMax at Gitmo (none / 0) (#8)
    by theologicus on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 07:50:04 AM EST
    To understand why some of the regular trolls in these threads are so obtuse, I recommend the following essay. It's a review by David Neiwert (who is a self-described "conservative") of John Dean's new book, Conservatives Without Conscience. Neiwart's subtitle is: Current conditions in US seem to align with Robert O. Paxton's nine "mobilizing passions" of fascism. Both Neiwart and Dean argue that these trends have nothing to do with true conservatism. But unlike Dean, Neiwart sees them as signs of "neo-fascism" He's not just throwing labels around. He makes a serious case.

    Re: U.S. Readies SuperMax at Gitmo (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 08:55:05 AM EST
    JimakaPPJ: I endorse completely what profmarcus says. We are talking here about core principles that have endured throughout what is generally referred to as the civilized world. America made a name for itself as adhering to these principles. It is always possible to find instances of really bad guys doing really bad things. And I don't intend to make this sound flippant. But the point is that if one lets one's overall philosophy and practice get dragged into the gutter using the rationale that because the bad guys are so bad then we don't have to stay good then guess what, we are no longer good. Just because we are hurt, angry and feel justified in adopting euphemisms-for-torture doesn't mean it's the right thing to do - for anyone. The past few years have turned up countless examples that show conclusively that once society starts down this road it is much, much harder to turn back. Encouraging starting down that road, or staying on that road, is not principled. And it is certainly not leadership.

    Re: U.S. Readies SuperMax at Gitmo (none / 0) (#6)
    by ScottW on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 08:55:05 AM EST
    PPJ, I look at this whole thing like a bar fight. My buddy has grabbed on his way out to fight some jerks that grabbed his girl. Now we are out there with a group of them pushing and yelling, all of a sudden I find out my buddy's girl isn't even at the bar and that it looks like my buddy started this whole mess. This fight is getting ugly, and all of a sudden my buddy (who by the way has a major small man's complex) whips out a knife. All of this is based on a premise that has been debunked. What do I do, continue this charade because it is my friend who has lied again and again because he has to prove how manly he is ?? I see the knife, and I know this is going to escalate and someone is going to end up on the wrong side of a knife or possibly a gun (nuke). For me it's an easy choice, my lying buddy is on his own, he started all of this an keeps escalating it. The crowd seems to be siding with our opponents and they seems willing to engage against us. We are normally some pretty tough guys, but we are not used to everyone against us, we are used to a fair fight. I want out, and I want to explain that I was brought into this thing under a big fat lie. Sure I was in, but I have to right to change my mind when the facts are out. My buddy does not deserve my help because he lied to me about everything. Sorry Bush old pal, but you want to whip out a knife and not expect our enemies to whip out a gun or two, you are as insane and the crowd chants. Plus of course, let's not forget the old adage about bringing a knife to a gun fight and that to me is what legalizing torture is. If anyone thinks our enemies aren't going to turn this up a notch or two, they are as delusional as my buddy. We were infidels, not we are torturing infedels. Not the perfect analogy and if I had more then a minute or two I could probably make it perfect. You know at one time Hitler was our enemy and he was exterminating Jews. By your logic that would have given FDR the go ahead with exterminating Germans. The Japanese did some pretty cruel stuff to our POW's (think death march), so again, by your logic we should have made death marches legal. Our enemies have always done bad things, but what has kept America, America is that we don't sink to there levels of inhumanity, we are above that, you know and I know it.

    Re: U.S. Readies SuperMax at Gitmo (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 08:55:05 AM EST
    Good article, Theo. Thanks... ---edger

    Re: U.S. Readies SuperMax at Gitmo (none / 0) (#11)
    by Sailor on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 09:00:56 AM EST
    Why does the Left worry more about the terrorists' prison conditions than they do the health care problems of our own citizens?
    yet another lie by ppj; dems can confront the issues of rethuglicans illegal detentions against the GenCons and the fact that rethugs have destroyed the public health care system simultaneously. Just because the MSM doesn't cover it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

    Re: U.S. Readies SuperMax at Gitmo (none / 0) (#12)
    by Che's Lounge on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 09:34:50 AM EST
    Why does the Left worry more about the terrorists' prison conditions than they do the health care problems of our own citizens? They don't, or at least they don't stoop to such ridiculous comparisons.

    Re: U.S. Readies SuperMax at Gitmo (none / 0) (#13)
    by Sailor on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 10:03:07 AM EST
    Why does the Left worry more about the terrorists' prison conditions than they do the health care problems of our own citizens?
    yet another lie by ppj; dems can confront the issues of rethuglicans illegal detentions against the GenCons and the fact that rethugs have destroyed the public health care system simultaneously. Just because the MSM doesn't cover it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

    Re: U.S. Readies SuperMax at Gitmo (none / 0) (#14)
    by Al on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 10:45:45 AM EST
    We are fighting a war against people who kill themselves in an attempt to kill us. I reference car bombs in Iraq, varioius cafe/street bombs in Israel, 7/7 attacks in England, the recent failed car bomb attack in Syria, the foiled airliner(s) attack in England. (PPJ)
    Who is this "we" you are talking about? Are you proposing that Gitmo be used to house people suspected of participating in an attack on a cafe in Israel? Or the alleged liquid explosive silliness? Just where is the jurisdiction of the CIA supposed to end according to you? How do you propose these suspects should be tried? What if - gasp - the CIA gets the wrong man? And if you're going to cite attacks by anybody on anybody anywhere in the world, aren't you being a bit selective? You do understand you can't imprison suicide bombers, right? Only those who survive. How do you propose to identify those?

    Re: U.S. Readies SuperMax at Gitmo (none / 0) (#15)
    by aw on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 11:42:07 AM EST
    PPJ, you are such a scaredy cat.

    Re: U.S. Readies SuperMax at Gitmo (none / 0) (#16)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 11:55:40 AM EST
    JB - No one would ever mistake you for Bolton. If you want to debate the treatment of prisoners, and if you want to define that treatment, and if you want to claim "core civilized values," whatever that means, then fine. Let's have a go. But don't make the argument that our treatment of prisoners will make any difference in how the terrorists react, and don't argue that it will lead them to surrender, which is were John Horse was. He was, in fact, trying to justify his position based on an incorrect assumpation. Because it hasn't, and won't. Prof - Please read my response to JB. BTW - Have you been told lately that no one cares if you take it personally? ScottW - Your comment leads me to believe that you are quite young and relatively inexperienced. As for you deserting your buddy, hey, perfect philsophy if you are France or Germany... I mean, there is no past, only "now" and what "I" want. Correct? You write:
    You know at one time Hitler was our enemy and he was exterminating Jews. By your logic that would have given FDR the go ahead with exterminating Germans.
    Read some history. Study WWII. Especially the fire bombings of Dresden, Tokoyo and the nuking of Japan... Sailor - Well, that Medicare Rx insurance plan seems to be working real well.... maybe Bush will destroy it some more. Read my comment to JB. If you want to debate the issue, define how you want the prisoners treated, in detail, and let's have a go. But we both know you won't. Why? Because you have no plan except, complaining about Bush and the Repubs. You write:
    Just because the MSM doesn't cover it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
    Maybe you're not paranoid. Maybe someone is following you. Then again.... Nope. You are. Walter66 - I think they will. You should immediately start driving south to that great Democracy, Mexico. Al - Ever figure out where Arar was captured? ;-) 1. Nope, and if you bothered to read John Horse's comment before you commented on my response.... you know that I was pointing out that "nice" treatment to people who willingly kill themselves will not accomplish anything.. 2. As to the "we," they certainly aren't Al.... He'd rather let someone else bear the burden of defending him. Che writes:
    ridiculous comparisons.
    They don't? "Bush = Hitler" "America = Germany" hahahahahahaha You're funnier than you know.

    Re: U.S. Readies SuperMax at Gitmo (none / 0) (#17)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 12:09:06 PM EST
    aw - Thanks. I have now been upgraded from a "bedwetter" to "scaredy cat." Your kindness is exceeded only by your lack of common sense.

    Re: U.S. Readies SuperMax at Gitmo (none / 0) (#18)
    by Che's Lounge on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 12:25:53 PM EST
    Gitmo = healthcare. Very insightful.

    Re: U.S. Readies SuperMax at Gitmo (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 02:21:26 PM EST
    the statement that "the military" is making this, is that accurate, or is this a boondoggle to make someone in the administration more money? the military doesn't sound like this is something they are interested in?> or am I way wrong here?

    Re: U.S. Readies SuperMax at Gitmo (none / 0) (#20)
    by Al on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 02:21:26 PM EST
    Al - Ever figure out where Arar was captured? ;-) (PPJ)
    Huh? Maher Arar? What does he have to do with any of this? You do understand his arrest and torture was a mistake, don't you? Your "we" seems to include Israeli civilians and anyone clueless enough to take the exploding Gatorade myth seriously. It doesn't appear to include Palestinian civilians or Lebanese civilians, for example. What is more, you are implying that someone who plots to bomb a cafe in Israel, and fails, should be housed indefinitely in Gitmo. According to you, the Israeli military also get to use Gitmo. It's not just an American Gulag, it's an international Gulag. And you still don't know how to identify, let alone convict in a non-kangaroo court, "people who willingly kill themselves" as you call them.

    Re: U.S. Readies SuperMax at Gitmo (none / 0) (#21)
    by john horse on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 03:13:54 PM EST
    PPJ, If you had bothered to read Reikoff's article before commenting on it you might have learned how the Geneva Conventions saves American lives. A senior officer at the Infantry Officer Basic Course at Fort Benning, Ga. said "When an enemy fighter knows he'll be treated well by United States forces if he is captured, he is more likely to give up." Reikoff found this to be true when he served in Iraq. As he says "I saw countless insurgents surrender when faced with the prospect of a hot meal, a pack of cigarettes and air-conditioning. America's moral integrity was the single most important weapon my platoon had on the streets of Iraq. It saved innumerable lives, encouraged cooperation with our allies and deterred Iraqis from joining the growing insurgency." But what do they know? They are probably the type of people who bother to read an article before commenting on it.

    Re: U.S. Readies SuperMax at Gitmo (none / 0) (#23)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 04:57:34 PM EST
    walter66 - Well, we can let them go.. so they can fight again. As these loverlies did. John - If you are talking about ordinary soldiers... But we're not. If we were, the war would be over. We're talking terrorist here, John. You know, blow me up Mohammed and his happy crew... Al, baby. Sweetheart. Weren't you the one claiming Arar was arrested at the Canadian border? What I was doing was pointing out that terrorist and suicide bombers can't be tempted by nice treatment. What would you have us do?? Offer'em 77 virgins plus a weekend in Vegas?

    Re: U.S. Readies SuperMax at Gitmo (none / 0) (#24)
    by ScottW on Tue Sep 26, 2006 at 08:37:22 AM EST
    PPJ, so better to get knifed then run from a fight my lying ass buddy started. Call me France and Germany, cool, at least they haven't lost 3000+ people or killed 45,000 Iraqi civilians. I'll take humility over life any day. We did nuke Japan, but the methods used by our enemies were NEVER but into law, big difference. I wasn't saying that we didn't do some bad things, I was saying that we never made them legal. Once it's legal, it going to be expected. I am not naive enough to think we don't or need torture (in extremely rare instances), but I am naive enough to think we are not a Nation that legalizes it. And PPJ you can argue this point or that point, because if the NYT article is right, we are not safer with the current brand of combating terrorism, which means the methods used are not working.

    Re: U.S. Readies SuperMax at Gitmo (none / 0) (#25)
    by Sailor on Tue Sep 26, 2006 at 01:56:15 PM EST
    Another lying link from faux news full of lies about the conditions at gitmo and lies about captures.

    Re: U.S. Readies SuperMax at Gitmo (none / 0) (#26)
    by john horse on Tue Sep 26, 2006 at 03:57:50 PM EST
    PPJ, Regarding whether the Geneva Conventions save US lives, please read what Reikoff said again. This time READ IT SLOWLY. I know you can do it PPJ. Here is what Reikoff who served in Iraq had to say "I saw countless INSURGENTS surrender when faced with the prospect of a hot meal, a pack of cigarettes and air-conditioning. America's moral integrity was the single most important weapon my platoon had on the streets of Iraq. It saved innumerable lives, encouraged cooperation with our allies and deterred Iraqis from joining the growing INSURGENCY." The last time I looked "INSURGENTS" weren't "ordinary soldiers". Yet as Reikoff says from experience they were more willing to surrender than fight on because they knew they would receive humane treatment. Not everyone will do this but as the seasoned office at Fort Benning said if an enemy knows that he will be "treated well by United States forces if he is captured, he is more likely to give up." On the other hand, if an enemy knows that he will be treated harshly he is more likely to go down fighting taking American lives with him along the way. Also, treating prisoners like they did at Abu Ghraib has a way of p*ssing people off and increasing the number of insurgents. Treating prisoners humanely saves American lives. By the way, I noticed that you haven't provided a single military officer who backs your view. I cannot understand why you advocate a course of action that will likely result in increased casualties and that noone with actual combat experience believes.

    Re: U.S. Readies SuperMax at Gitmo (none / 0) (#27)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Sep 26, 2006 at 07:12:21 PM EST
    John H - Insurgents are not terrorists, or at least that is what the Left has been claiming. ScottW - I wasn't saying we did "bad" things in WWII, just pointing out that we killed a lot of civilians. Tis the nature of war. BTW - The NIE proves you wrong. You guys have been mouse trapped, again. Sailor - Everybody lying except Sailor. HAHAHAHAHAHA