The problem with the "Gitmo Causes Terrorism" Argument

[Doubt]

And yet, Obama disagrees with you on this issue, as did Bush. Indeed, the sole difference that I can see is that Obama's proposing to keep them indefinitely inside the United States.

True enough. And I suspect that situation will backfire on him if this ever reaches the Supreme Court. Even with the current court.

ETA: There is one way he might be able to make it work for a while. Declare them POWs from the Afghan war.

 

[kerikiwi]

You seem to have a problem understanding that the playing field is not limited to states. See thread title. Terrorism. The current international playing field, and terrorism's being well enabled by advances in technology for the past thirty years, allows for a lot of extranational actors.

No, I do not have such a problem.
I am fully aware of the fact that most terrorism is not perpetrated by states.
I referred to states in my question to Skeptic because Skeptic referred to 'numerous other Islamofascist groups and states.'

 

[psychictv]

It's been accepted since at least WW1 that properganda is a valid tool in warfare.

True. It's that improperganda you have to be worried about.

 

[Skeptic]

Having Gitmo vs 'not fighting back' is a clear false dichotomy.

In theory, you are correct. In practice, if it weren't Gitmo, it would be something else. Everything the USA would do to fight terrorism would provoke the enemy and could be used as propaganda. Therefore everything the USA would do would be vetoed as a "propaganda godsend" for the enemy.

But the real outrage is not due to Gitmo, but due to the fighting back.

 

[kerikiwi]

But the real outrage is not due to Gitmo, but due to the fighting back.

Whose outrage?

 

[mortimer]

Nope. Guantanamo Bay detention camp is fuel for propaganda aimed at recruitment across the islamic world.

That may be, but is that a good reason to dismantle it?

 

[geni]

That may be, but is that a good reason to dismantle it?

There is at this point no objective reason to keep it open so yes that is reason enough to close it. Propagandais important in all conflict. In the type of conflict we appear to be involved in doublely so.

By getting rid of the Guantanamo Bay detention camp you remove recruiting tool from the hands of radical islamists and gain a "hey look we are listening to your concerns" PR tool of your own.

 

[fullflavormenthol]

The best reason for dismantling GITMO is that it stands in opposition to what we are about. Put those people on trial and let the justice system work, but keeping the potentially innocent in prison forever is not the solution to any problem.

Having a terrorist in a supermax prison after being found guilty isn't going to be a threat to grandma's farm house. Despite what people think, escaping from a maximum security prison isn't as easy as the movies and TV make you think. The world isn't Prison Break and 24, but unfortunately it seems that is where the majority of GITMO supporters get their world view from.

Turn off Fox News for a minute, accept that Glenn Beck is an idiot for a moment...take a deep breath, put away your Toby Keith records for the night; and maybe come back to reality.

 

[mortimer]

There is at this point no objective reason to keep it open so yes that is reason enough to close it. Propagandais important in all conflict. In the type of conflict we appear to be involved in doublely so.

By getting rid of the Guantanamo Bay detention camp you remove recruiting tool from the hands of radical islamists and gain a "hey look we are listening to your concerns" PR tool of your own.

The fact that most of us are not Sharia Law Muslims is also a propaganda tool for them. Just sayin....

 

[Thunder]

i want their to be a UN owned and operated prison for terrorists who cannot be released back into society.

someone who swears he will kill innocent people should not be free to do so.

 

[drkitten]

The fact that most of us are not Sharia Law Muslims is also a propaganda tool for them. Just sayin....

So,... you're insisting that the fact that we are giving them one strong propaganda tool is a justification for giving them another one?

I would think you would want to minimize the amount of propaganda you hand to the 'bad guys,' not maximize it. But that's just because I thought you wanted the Islamoterrorists to lose....

 

[mortimer]

So,... you're insisting that the fact that we are giving them one strong propaganda tool is a justification for giving them another one?

I would think you would want to minimize the amount of propaganda you hand to the 'bad guys,' not maximize it. But that's just because I thought you wanted the Islamoterrorists to lose....

I didn't state I was against closing Gitmo. I just don't think that the "propaganda" value of Gitmo should be a major factor in that decision. Any more than I think we should all convert to Islam because of the propaganda value.

 

[drkitten]

I didn't state I was against closing Gitmo. I just don't think that the "propaganda" value of Gitmo should be a major factor in that decision. Any more than I think we should all convert to Islam because of the propaganda value.

Well, the main reason for using Gitmo in the first place was to create an environment where the Bush administration could treat captives without regard to any of the established protections under US Law. That reason has since evaporated, since the SCOTUS has held that Gitmo prisoners are entitled to the protections of US law. Another secondary reason was to permit tighter control of information about the prisoners -- again, this reason has been "overtaken by events" and is no longer valid.

Really, there's no reason left to keep Gitmo open, which means that the propaganda negative alone is sufficient reason to close it.

 

[geni]

The fact that most of us are not Sharia Law Muslims is also a propaganda tool for them. Just sayin....

Not really. The majority of people they are trying to recruit are not Sharia Law Muslims either. "they don't stone women" has fairly limited geographic appeal. "they tourture your fellow muslims in Guantanamo Bay detention camp" has a rather broader appeal.

 

[Ziggurat]

i want their to be a UN owned and operated prison for terrorists who cannot be released back into society.

And I want a billion dollars.

"It's easy to sit there and say you'd like to have more money. And I guess that's what I like about it. It's easy. Just sitting there, rocking back and forth, wanting that money."
- Jack Handey

The world doesn't respond to our wants.

 

[Ziggurat]

"they tourture your fellow muslims in Guantanamo Bay detention camp" has a rather broader appeal.

And yet, "they torture your fellow muslims in just about every middle eastern prison" somehow doesn't seem to get so much attention. Maybe it's not really about the treatment of muslims.

 

[kerikiwi]

The world doesn't respond to our wants.

Talk about stating the bleeding obvious...
Aside from that, what do you think?
We are able to think, and based on our thoughts, take appropriate action.

 

[kerikiwi]

And yet, "they torture your fellow muslims in just about every middle eastern prison" somehow doesn't seem to get so much attention. Maybe it's not really about the treatment of muslims.

That is the essence of propaganda.

 

[geni]

And yet, "they torture your fellow muslims in just about every middle eastern prison" somehow doesn't seem to get so much attention. Maybe it's not really about the treatment of muslims.

Of course it does. Why do you think all those middle eastern countries have secret police and the like? Because their citizens love them so much?

 

[willhaven]

In theory, you are correct. In practice, if it weren't Gitmo, it would be something else. Everything the USA would do to fight terrorism would provoke the enemy and could be used as propaganda. Therefore everything the USA would do would be vetoed as a "propaganda godsend" for the enemy.

But the real outrage is not due to Gitmo, but due to the fighting back.

Indefinite detention with little or no evidence and no trials is just a bad precedent to set, no matter who the detainees are. If we have evidence to bring forth, convict them. If we don't have evidence to bring forth, then it's no better than a witch hunt.

And no, not everything the US does would provoke terrorist acts. They have religious rhetoric, but their main triggers and goals are political. If we didn't meddle in the affairs of other countries, we'd have less of a problem with terrorism.