The problem with the "Gitmo Causes Terrorism" Argument

[Skeptic]

It is true that Gitmo and US fighting against the Taliban, etc., provokes the enemy -- Al Quaeda, Iran, numerous other Islamofascist groups and states -- into wanting to kill Americans.

But NOT fighting back ALSO provokes the enemy -- Al Quaeda, Iran, numerous other Islamofascist groups and states -- into wanting to kill Americans, too. Because it is seen as lack of resolve, proving to them that their ideal world (where infidels are killed for denying Islam, women for not covering their faces, and gays for existing) is coming, since the weak, corrupt west cannot even fight back.

[kerikiwi]

Why is Iran 'the enemy'?
What are the numerous Islamofascist states which want to kill Americans?

[The Fool]

Why is Iran 'the enemy'?
What are the numerous Islamofascist states which want to kill Americans?
leave him alone, he is a warmonger....can't stop himself.

[Praktik]

I disagree with the characterization of the OP.

Nowhere I have seen the formuation: "Gitmo causes terrorism"

I have seen though, "Gitmo feeds/fuels terrorism"

Which is kind of an important distinction.

And this is aside from the perverted morality that gitmo represents, just talking pragmatically here on the effects of Gitmo on terrorist recruitment.

[WildCat]

Before Gitmo opened in 2002 there was little Islamic terrorism.

And what little there was were false flag operations by the CIA/Mossad/NWO/Zionists etc.

/sarcasm

Gitmo is just the reason du jour, propaganda aimed at the useful idiots in the west.

[geni]

Before Gitmo opened in 2002 there was little Islamic terrorism.

And what little there was were false flag operations by the CIA/Mossad/NWO/Zionists etc.

/sarcasm

Gitmo is just the reason du jour, propaganda aimed at the useful idiots in the west.


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

[geni]

It is true that Gitmo and US fighting against the Taliban, etc., provokes the enemy -- Al Quaeda, Iran, numerous other Islamofascist groups and states -- into wanting to kill Americans.

But NOT fighting back ALSO provokes the enemy -- Al Quaeda, Iran, numerous other Islamofascist groups and states -- into wanting to kill Americans, too. Because it is seen as lack of resolve, proving to them that their ideal world (where infidels are killed for denying Islam, women for not covering their faces, and gays for existing) is coming, since the weak, corrupt west cannot even fight back.

Sigh. It's been accepted since at least WW1 that properganda is a valid tool in warfare. Guantanamo Bay detention camp is properganda negative for the US and one it would be sensible to remove.

[Darth Rotor]

Why is Iran 'the enemy'?
They have been politically at odds with the US for about three decades. They are an enemy, or at least not a friend yet.

As to "the enemy" Skeptic is an Israeli, so maybe he meant "the enemy" from an Israeli perspective.
What are the numerous Islamofascist states which want to kill Americans?
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.

Welcome to the year 2009. Friends of the bride or friends of the groom? :boggled:

DR

[Praktik]

Gitmo is just the reason du jour, propaganda aimed at the useful idiots in the west.

The interesting thing about the "useful idiots" line is that it can also be levied against people like Wildcat and Skeptic, who support Gitmo and gitmo like approaches to the detention of terrorist suspects.

Gitmo was a godsend to extremists and made their job much easier. I've posted direct evidence of that in a few threads over the past few weeks. A 2006 NIE (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5375064.stm) said the invasion and occupation of Iraq "spawned a new generation of Islamic radicalism that has spread across the globe." Abu Ghraib, as we all know, was "gitmo-ized".

Underlying this support for Gitmo I assume, is an assumption that Gitmo-like procedures provide some sort of practical benefit in combatting terror - an assumption I don't share.

In any event, thought I'd point out that there is a mirror-image of the useful idiots line and that Skeptic and Wildcat and that camp don't have a monopoly on its use. From some perspectives, they are filling the very role they claim others are playing.

[tyr_13]

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

[Guybrush Threepwood]

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.



Maybe, but the OP did say


...numerous other Islamofascist groups and states...

So it would be nice to know which numerous Islamofascist states he meant

[Undesired Walrus]

Islamism, by all accounts, seems to be mostly motivated from the appeal of their ideology ("Sharia or death" shouted those arrested for the death of Sadat) rather than things like GITMO or human suffering at the hands of Western bombs.

However, GITMO allows the US to suffer enormously if they wish to promote a moral authority, and turn their allies and ordinary people off them.

[Bikewer]

It seems likely to me that the continued detention of various prisoners at Gitmo is a recruitment/propaganda tool for certain radicals, but it's hardly the only one.

Bin Laden's complaints about the West have been discussed at length, and have mostly to do with foriegn policy. Support for Israel, support for "un-Islamic" regimes that oppress their citizens, (Saudi, Kuwait, Egypt, etc), presence of Western troops in Islamic lands.... And so forth and so on.
All before there was any "Gitmo".
More currently the occupation of Afghanistan and the drone strikes against suspected terrorists in Pakistan and other locations....
One could likely go on and on mentioning things that Islamic radicals find annoying....

[Praktik]

Islamism, by all accounts, seems to be mostly motivated from the appeal of their ideology ("Sharia or death" shouted those arrested for the death of Sadat) rather than things like GITMO or human suffering at the hands of Western bombs.

However, GITMO allows the US to suffer enormously if they wish to promote a moral authority, and turn their allies and ordinary people off them.

Indeed, it would be silly to suggest that ALL terrorism is caused by Gitmo, or the occupations, or the installation of the Shah etc etc

There are unique features of the socio-cultural history of the region that are indigenous, or "home-made" factors leading to extremism.

In my view, perhaps the single largest driver there is quite simply the lack of democratic traditions. When portions of your polity feel powerless to effect any meaningful change to their benefit from within the political system then violence becomes more likely.

And even this represents the outcome of internal and external factors. Tribalism is not known for its democratic bent. But outside powers have for centuries also engaged in the setting up of client regimes in the ME and stymied democracy when the outcome was not likely to suit their needs.

[drkitten]

It is true that Gitmo and US fighting against the Taliban, etc., provokes the enemy -- Al Quaeda, Iran, numerous other Islamofascist groups and states -- into wanting to kill Americans.

But NOT fighting back ALSO provokes the enemy -- Al Quaeda, Iran, numerous other Islamofascist groups and states -- into wanting to kill Americans, too. Because it is seen as lack of resolve, proving to them that their ideal world (where infidels are killed for denying Islam, women for not covering their faces, and gays for existing) is coming, since the weak, corrupt west cannot even fight back.

False dichotomy.

You're assuming that the only possible responses to terrorism are either the full Bush doctrine with all its flaws or a Gandhi-esque total passivity.

[Darth Rotor]

So it would be nice to know which numerous Islamofascist states he meant
Fair enough, and I suspect Iran might be one such, being The Islamic Republic of Iran, and being run by an autocratic clique ... however, fascist is probably not the best descriptive ... unless you consider executing homosexuals for homosexual to be somewhat fascistic? :confused:

[Doubt]

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

I agree.

The main problem of Gitmo is that it makes the US look like a bunch of hypocrites. We talk about equal protection under the law. Then when things became difficult, the Bush administration tried to create a new status for people we have problems with.

There are some very bad people at Gitmo. They should have either been put into the US criminal justice system or kept as POW's. There was no need to try and create a gray area to hold people indefinitely, which appears to be the original intention.

The other big problem is the interrogation methods used there also violated long standing principles of how we are supposed to treat captives. Tossing out the army manual and adopting techniques from escape and evasion training was pretty stupid. Those techniques were copied from North Korea and used there to elicit false confessions from US soldiers. They were not intended to get accurate information.

The abuses of Gtimo end up being used as propaganda to support the enemies of the US. To call Gitmo a cause of terrorism is not very useful for anyone. It is, however, a case of handing the enemy extra fuel they can use but don't really need to keep the fires of discontent burning.

[Praktik]

The abuses of Gtimo end up being used as propaganda to support the enemies of the US. To call Gitmo a cause of terrorism is not very useful for anyone. It is, however, a case of handing the enemy extra fuel they can use but don't really need to keep the fires of discontent burning.

Yes. On top of the questions of the practical effectiveness of torture and detainee policy generally, its more an issue of it being a useless and avoidable "freebie" given to the enemy.

[Brainster]

I agree.

The main problem of Gitmo is that it makes the US look like a bunch of hypocrites. We talk about equal protection under the law. Then when things became difficult, the Bush administration tried to create a new status for people we have problems with.

There are some very bad people at Gitmo. They should have either been put into the US criminal justice system or kept as POW's. There was no need to try and create a gray area to hold people indefinitely, which appears to be the original intention.

And yet, Obama disagrees with you (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/15/obama-plans-to-hold-detai_n_392907.html) 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.

[Praktik]

Yes. Obama is making mistakes too. Though indefenite detention is perhaps not as much of a galvanizer as torture was. Its more of a stark demonstration of the selective application of purported American "values".

[Doubt]

And yet, Obama disagrees with you (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/15/obama-plans-to-hold-detai_n_392907.html) 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.

[Ziggurat]

Of course it does.

Not around here, that's for damned sure.

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

One of the tasks of secret police is making sure that such things don't get much attention.

[Ziggurat]

Talk about stating the bleeding obvious...
Aside from that, what do you think?

I think parky is talking nonsense. The UN is by design an ineffective organization. Creating a UN-run prison won't accomplish anything (least of all any improvement in anyone's safety), and I don't see any rationale for the UN member states to agree to such a thing either.

We are able to think, and based on our thoughts, take appropriate action.

I don't see how any action we could take would lead to the creation of a UN-run prison.

[GreNME]

The problem with the "Gitmo Causes Terrorism" Argument

http://image.grenme.com/thread/StrawMan.jpg

[geni]

Not around here, that's for damned sure.


And your local muslim population is how big?

Eh of course in the west we leave such matters to the bleeding heart liberals:

http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/news/saudi-arabia-must-not-flog-75-year-old-woman-20091215
http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/MDE25/005/2009/en
http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/MDE17/002/2009/en
http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/MDE12/033/2009/en
http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/MDE19/006/2009/en
http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/MDE30/022/2009/en
http://www.amnesty.org/en/for-media/press-releases/mauritania-government-guilty-routine-torture-20081203


One of the tasks of secret police is making sure that such things don't get much attention.

Indeed. Which is another reason why Guantanamo Bay detention camp was bad idea. Creates a focus for resentment. Harder to do if prisoners are scattered in supermaxes across the US.

[Ziggurat]

And your local muslim population is how big?

By 'here' I mean this message board.

[marksman]

Everything the USA would do to fight terrorism would provoke the enemy and could be used as propaganda.

While true, not all things the USA would do to fight terrorism will be equally effective terrorism. Guantanamo has been a remarkably effective piece of propaganda, and thus is it makes sense to remove it, even on the grounds of counter-propaganda.

Perhaps Obama's decision vis-a-vis indefinite detention for the (soon-to-be-former) Gitmo detainees will continue to be used as an effective propaganda tool. Maybe it will be less effective for propaganda as Gitmo itself. Maybe, the new prison Obama wants the government to open will become just as or more reviled than Gitmo.

But we certainly should consider the counter-propaganda value of closing Gitmo as an effective strategy in diminishing recruitment efforts of terror groups who seek to attack the United States.