13 ms·

Life after Guantanamo: 'We are still in jail'

danuker 4y ago
As long as there is no accountability for people locking others up for decades without evidence, it will continue.
- LatteLazy 4y ago
  How do you hold the United States of America accountable?
  - Retric 4y ago
    People acted not the entire USA, and we could hold the people involved accountable by sending them to prison. Up to and including Presidents. Not that we will, but it’s theoretically possible to do all sorts of things that won’t actually happen.
    - QuarterReptile 4y ago
      Trying to imprison the guy leaving office is a great way to have that guy not leave office. There's a reason that presidents don't get prosecuted, and it's not because nothing illegal happens. It's like trying to end the war in Ukraine while also saying that you're trying to depose Putin. Putting very powerful people in corners tends to be a really bad plan.
      - adgjlsfhk1 4y ago
        then don't imprison the president, just everyone who was "just following orders"
      - nescioquid 4y ago
        I don't know if it is such an easy answer. On the one hand, a policy of not prosecuting the office holder might help the peaceful transfer of power; on the other, such a policy creates an unaccountable sovereign every four years. Was it fear of prosecution that kept Caesar from giving up imperium when returning from Gaul? It was certainly a factor. Would there have been no Roman civil war if there was such a non-prosecution policy in place? I'm less certain. The risk you bring up must be carefully considered, but so is having an unaccountable sovereign, just four years at a time.
    - marssaxman 4y ago
      Instead of doing that, the citizens of the USA chose to re-elect the people involved.
      - Ekaros 4y ago
        And some even gave them money... I think it is reasonable to jail anyone who funded anyone involved here either death penalty or rest of their lives in such facility like one in question here. They can't be redeemed as human beings.
  - mbg721 4y ago
    In the most American way possible, by shaking our fists, mumbling about bureaucrats, and settling for a fraction of a cent per taxpayer.
  - 4bpp 4y ago
    If you are a citizen of another country, at least, vote against politicians that want to strengthen your country's alliance with it, and respond to polls in ways that indicate opposition to causes it cares about. The US is dependent on its network of allies in many respects; most pertinently, much of the Iraq and Afghanistan campaigns would not have been possible without the support of its European and the Middle Eastern ones, providing overflight permissions, military bases, intelligence and often even hosting "black sites" where people from the target nations could be tortured far from the meddlesome eyes of journalists and NGOs.
    - blfr 4y ago
      What is most countries alternative to allying with the US? China? Russia? With their spotless record on human rights?
      - potatototoo99 4y ago
        Being independent? US, China and Russia project this image of great power but they can hardly project it, as evidenced most recently in Ukraine.
        cpursley 4y ago
        According to whom? The reddit armchair generals? MSM "journalists" with non-technical degrees like humanities? Russia is weeks, perhaps days, away from consolidating the Donbas (area large than the entire UK) and have greatly reduced the NATO-trained and supported Ukrainian military's (second largest in Europe) ability to conduct offensive maneuver warfare in a time span of just a few of weeks. And that's with maybe using 20% of Russias military capacity. All according to western sources. Let's not conflate how we feel about the situation with the reality on the ground. The sooner we're honest about whats going, the sooner we can have peace.
        trasz 4y ago
        Russia isn't really consolidating anything - they are destroying Donbas, razing entire cities. That's after three months of failures, like when they were forced to flee from Kyiv and then Kharkiv. And no, that's not 20% of their capability, that's all of their military capability (that's why they are using conscripts), except the strategic forces. And that's against a rather underfunded country which, during previous Russian invasion, couldn't defend at all. Ukraine's main problem is that they are not being supplied with enough heavy weapons. The sooner they are, the sooner we can have peace. You might want to take some time off from reading Sputnik, comrade :-)
  - pvaldes 4y ago
    You only need to be accountable the responsible of this, not the entire country. This is the word of a very reduced group of people. USA tribunals should be capable to pursue violations of human rights inside USA territory.
    - trasz 4y ago
      What if the entire country works hard to make sure they cannot be held accountable? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members'_Protection_Act) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members'_Prot...
      - ragebol 4y ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members'_Protection_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members'_Prot... (without the typo)
  - sockopen 4y ago
    This was done by a few people, who bleed like you and I do. Not by a country, solution is much easier.
  - refurb 4y ago
    How do you hold the UK accountable? Australia accountable? Switzerland? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indefinite_detention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indefinite_detention
- elric 4y ago
  There is a certain court in The Hague that tends to have an opinion on such matters. But the US seems to think they shouldn't be held accountable when it comes to international law or human rights.. ("The Hague Invasion Act").
  - mbg721 4y ago
    If it has to get to the Hague, there were drastic failures earlier. The US has a right to a speedy and public trial, and needs to put its money where its mouth is (or was).
    - elric 4y ago
      Is this the same speedy and public trial that the gitmo detainees got?
      - mbg721 4y ago
        No, good God no! There are a ton of conservative voters who loathed the Dubya administration, and I'm one of them. But you have to understand, that's what created Trump, especially as Democrats doubled down on social issues.
    - throwaway0a5e 4y ago
      >and needs to put its money where its mouth is (or was). Unwillingness to practice what you preach when people you don't like benefit is a huge problem with all sorts of institutions in the US and will not get better at least not for a generation or two. Broad acceptance of double standards is a necessary part of the currently depending ideological divide so we basically need to wait until the people peddling that are out of the workforce.
  - tablespoon 4y ago
    > There is a certain court in The Hague that tends to have an opinion on such matters. But the US seems to think they shouldn't be held accountable when it comes to international law or human rights.. ("The Hague Invasion Act"). International law isn't really law in the sense we're used to. There is no world government. International relations are anarchic, and the "international law" that's binding on a country is pretty much what it agrees to abide by or can be forcibly compelled to abide by (through military action, etc).
dustinmoris 4y ago
As long as we can fabricate flimsy evidence that China treats Muslims badly in China then we can happily ignore the hard evidence that America is violating every single human right in America and across the world, because white woke people love pointing fingers at other nations with a superiority complex instead of looking at themselves.
- tartoran 4y ago
  Flimsy evidence? It’s quite clear to me China is abusing their Uighur population, there’s plenty of videos with direct evidence floating on youtube. What is hard for me to digest is why for some people, things need to be black and white, one is the bad guy and the other needs to be the good guy.
- corsac 4y ago
  First, there is abundant and solid evidence of Chinese violent oppression against Uigurs. Second, why do people (you) assert that awareness of human rights abuses in one country blinds people to abuses in another country? On the contrary, the more intolerable I find China's imprisonment of Uigurs and others, the more intolerable I find America's awful, useless wars and huge prison population. I don't get where you're coming from.
vxNsr 4y ago
I find it so odd that every single gitmo detainee was just in the wrong place at the wrong time. There were thousands of people who got detained in Iraq and Afghanistan, but only a select few got brought to gitmo. I’m more inclined to believe that the people of the US military bureaucracy were acting in good faith, and had a legitimate reason to believe these people were working for the enemy vs hearing the same story you hear from 100% of unrepentant convicted felons. “I was in the wrong place at the wrong time, they have the wrong guy” I’d also like to remind people who don’t believe the people of US bureaucracy were acting in good faith that it’s these same people who will be working in whatever new giant gov service you want created. Might want to consider that next time you argue for government mandated/required/etc anything. If you don’t trust them to do the right thing in this case, why do you think it’ll be different in your case?
- mc32 4y ago
  In all likelihood those guys are actual bad-guys and did what we think they did and more. The problem is we ought to follow certain principles when we incarcerate people. Provide evidence, prove it in court and allow the defendant to defend themselves against accusations. Otherwise we're in kangaroo-courts/Soviet show trial-land.
  - vxNsr 4y ago
    There likely was a trial, or something like it, but until we can ensure the safety and protection of the people who helped us convict these people it’s been deemed more prudent to keep it secret.
    - Volundr 4y ago
      > There likely was a trial, or something like it Horseshit. Even the officials in charge don't claim this. Even if they did, you can't have a "secret" just trial. The task of keeping it secret makes it impossible for the defense to have any sort of decent representation, much less gather evidence in their defense. Any "secret" trail is inherently one-sided, but again literally no US official has claimed they've been granted that much, in fact the lack of any trail has been acknowledged and even cited as a reason they can't be moved to a facility in the US.

As long as there is no accountability for people locking others up for decades without evidence, it will continue.

LatteLazy 4y ago
How do you hold the United States of America accountable?
- Retric 4y ago
  People acted not the entire USA, and we could hold the people involved accountable by sending them to prison. Up to and including Presidents. Not that we will, but it’s theoretically possible to do all sorts of things that won’t actually happen.
  - QuarterReptile 4y ago
    Trying to imprison the guy leaving office is a great way to have that guy not leave office. There's a reason that presidents don't get prosecuted, and it's not because nothing illegal happens. It's like trying to end the war in Ukraine while also saying that you're trying to depose Putin. Putting very powerful people in corners tends to be a really bad plan.
    - adgjlsfhk1 4y ago
      then don't imprison the president, just everyone who was "just following orders"
    - nescioquid 4y ago
      I don't know if it is such an easy answer. On the one hand, a policy of not prosecuting the office holder might help the peaceful transfer of power; on the other, such a policy creates an unaccountable sovereign every four years. Was it fear of prosecution that kept Caesar from giving up imperium when returning from Gaul? It was certainly a factor. Would there have been no Roman civil war if there was such a non-prosecution policy in place? I'm less certain. The risk you bring up must be carefully considered, but so is having an unaccountable sovereign, just four years at a time.
  - marssaxman 4y ago
    Instead of doing that, the citizens of the USA chose to re-elect the people involved.
    - Ekaros 4y ago
      And some even gave them money... I think it is reasonable to jail anyone who funded anyone involved here either death penalty or rest of their lives in such facility like one in question here. They can't be redeemed as human beings.
- mbg721 4y ago
  In the most American way possible, by shaking our fists, mumbling about bureaucrats, and settling for a fraction of a cent per taxpayer.
- 4bpp 4y ago
  If you are a citizen of another country, at least, vote against politicians that want to strengthen your country's alliance with it, and respond to polls in ways that indicate opposition to causes it cares about. The US is dependent on its network of allies in many respects; most pertinently, much of the Iraq and Afghanistan campaigns would not have been possible without the support of its European and the Middle Eastern ones, providing overflight permissions, military bases, intelligence and often even hosting "black sites" where people from the target nations could be tortured far from the meddlesome eyes of journalists and NGOs.
  - blfr 4y ago
    What is most countries alternative to allying with the US? China? Russia? With their spotless record on human rights?
    - potatototoo99 4y ago
      Being independent? US, China and Russia project this image of great power but they can hardly project it, as evidenced most recently in Ukraine.
      - cpursley 4y ago
        According to whom? The reddit armchair generals? MSM "journalists" with non-technical degrees like humanities? Russia is weeks, perhaps days, away from consolidating the Donbas (area large than the entire UK) and have greatly reduced the NATO-trained and supported Ukrainian military's (second largest in Europe) ability to conduct offensive maneuver warfare in a time span of just a few of weeks. And that's with maybe using 20% of Russias military capacity. All according to western sources. Let's not conflate how we feel about the situation with the reality on the ground. The sooner we're honest about whats going, the sooner we can have peace.
        trasz 4y ago
        Russia isn't really consolidating anything - they are destroying Donbas, razing entire cities. That's after three months of failures, like when they were forced to flee from Kyiv and then Kharkiv. And no, that's not 20% of their capability, that's all of their military capability (that's why they are using conscripts), except the strategic forces. And that's against a rather underfunded country which, during previous Russian invasion, couldn't defend at all. Ukraine's main problem is that they are not being supplied with enough heavy weapons. The sooner they are, the sooner we can have peace. You might want to take some time off from reading Sputnik, comrade :-)
- pvaldes 4y ago
  You only need to be accountable the responsible of this, not the entire country. This is the word of a very reduced group of people. USA tribunals should be capable to pursue violations of human rights inside USA territory.
  - trasz 4y ago
    What if the entire country works hard to make sure they cannot be held accountable? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members'_Protection_Act) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members'_Prot...
    - ragebol 4y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members'_Protection_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members'_Prot... (without the typo)
- sockopen 4y ago
  This was done by a few people, who bleed like you and I do. Not by a country, solution is much easier.
- refurb 4y ago
  How do you hold the UK accountable? Australia accountable? Switzerland? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indefinite_detention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indefinite_detention
elric 4y ago
There is a certain court in The Hague that tends to have an opinion on such matters. But the US seems to think they shouldn't be held accountable when it comes to international law or human rights.. ("The Hague Invasion Act").
- mbg721 4y ago
  If it has to get to the Hague, there were drastic failures earlier. The US has a right to a speedy and public trial, and needs to put its money where its mouth is (or was).
  - elric 4y ago
    Is this the same speedy and public trial that the gitmo detainees got?
    - mbg721 4y ago
      No, good God no! There are a ton of conservative voters who loathed the Dubya administration, and I'm one of them. But you have to understand, that's what created Trump, especially as Democrats doubled down on social issues.
  - throwaway0a5e 4y ago
    >and needs to put its money where its mouth is (or was). Unwillingness to practice what you preach when people you don't like benefit is a huge problem with all sorts of institutions in the US and will not get better at least not for a generation or two. Broad acceptance of double standards is a necessary part of the currently depending ideological divide so we basically need to wait until the people peddling that are out of the workforce.
- tablespoon 4y ago
  > There is a certain court in The Hague that tends to have an opinion on such matters. But the US seems to think they shouldn't be held accountable when it comes to international law or human rights.. ("The Hague Invasion Act"). International law isn't really law in the sense we're used to. There is no world government. International relations are anarchic, and the "international law" that's binding on a country is pretty much what it agrees to abide by or can be forcibly compelled to abide by (through military action, etc).

As long as we can fabricate flimsy evidence that China treats Muslims badly in China then we can happily ignore the hard evidence that America is violating every single human right in America and across the world, because white woke people love pointing fingers at other nations with a superiority complex instead of looking at themselves.

tartoran 4y ago
Flimsy evidence? It’s quite clear to me China is abusing their Uighur population, there’s plenty of videos with direct evidence floating on youtube. What is hard for me to digest is why for some people, things need to be black and white, one is the bad guy and the other needs to be the good guy.
corsac 4y ago
First, there is abundant and solid evidence of Chinese violent oppression against Uigurs. Second, why do people (you) assert that awareness of human rights abuses in one country blinds people to abuses in another country? On the contrary, the more intolerable I find China's imprisonment of Uigurs and others, the more intolerable I find America's awful, useless wars and huge prison population. I don't get where you're coming from.

vxNsr 4y ago

I find it so odd that every single gitmo detainee was just in the wrong place at the wrong time. There were thousands of people who got detained in Iraq and Afghanistan, but only a select few got brought to gitmo. I’m more inclined to believe that the people of the US military bureaucracy were acting in good faith, and had a legitimate reason to believe these people were working for the enemy vs hearing the same story you hear from 100% of unrepentant convicted felons. “I was in the wrong place at the wrong time, they have the wrong guy” I’d also like to remind people who don’t believe the people of US bureaucracy were acting in good faith that it’s these same people who will be working in whatever new giant gov service you want created. Might want to consider that next time you argue for government mandated/required/etc anything. If you don’t trust them to do the right thing in this case, why do you think it’ll be different in your case?

mc32 4y ago
In all likelihood those guys are actual bad-guys and did what we think they did and more. The problem is we ought to follow certain principles when we incarcerate people. Provide evidence, prove it in court and allow the defendant to defend themselves against accusations. Otherwise we're in kangaroo-courts/Soviet show trial-land.
- vxNsr 4y ago
  There likely was a trial, or something like it, but until we can ensure the safety and protection of the people who helped us convict these people it’s been deemed more prudent to keep it secret.
  - Volundr 4y ago
    > There likely was a trial, or something like it Horseshit. Even the officials in charge don't claim this. Even if they did, you can't have a "secret" just trial. The task of keeping it secret makes it impossible for the defense to have any sort of decent representation, much less gather evidence in their defense. Any "secret" trail is inherently one-sided, but again literally no US official has claimed they've been granted that much, in fact the lack of any trail has been acknowledged and even cited as a reason they can't be moved to a facility in the US.