I do not consider it a "problem" that the prisoners at Guantanamo still retain their identities. Given the type of psychological torment require to deconstruct a person's sense of self, I would not even make a joke of it. The fact that the prisoners routinely attack their guards actually supports Tietz's article. To answer your question of what they have to lose, the answer is their lives. Either they're still attempting to become martyrs, or they see no way out other than death. The civilian term for it is police-assisted suicide. Why might they be driven to this? Because, as Tietz states in his article, there are no clearly defined exit criteria that would end their incarceration. Thus, to answer my own question of what they have to gain, religious salvation or freedom from crushing uncertainty and despair.
Few Guantanamo detainees have been proven to have more than the most tenuous connections to terrorist organizations. While their commitment to the destruction of the West prior to their incarceration is uncertain, their incarceration has undoubtedly strengthened their hatred for the West. I could not even begin to posit a solution for this situation. However, without evidence, we can't fairly prosecute them. Without fair prosecution and defense, there can be no justice. If we deal with these men unjustly, than that thin line that separates the terrorists from us becomes that much more faint. We can't change the rules just because we don't like the outcome.
I have some hopes for the Military Commissions Act in terms of prevention. However, I also strongly feel that the US needs to definitively investigate the conditions at Guantanamo during the 2001-2004 period. We need to shine the harsh light of truth on the murky history of this prison and face the vindication or damnation that will be revealed. Only then can we move on as a nation and only then can we regain some of the international and domestic credibility we've lost over this situation. If a stain on our national honor is revealed, then we must also atone as a nation. The semblance or rhetoric of righteouness isn't enough. We need to be righteous in order to shine.
I hope you weren't considering that I "made a joke" about decontructing the identities of the detainees. I don't consider such methods acceptable either, nor do I believe the administration does, which is why I stated my belief that we haven't and won't use such techniques. I apologize if I wasn't clear on that point.
I stated in my above post that "Only if we assume that a (large) majority of detainees are not in fact terrorists does that question [What do they have to gain?] even make sense." I wasn't expecting that you actually do assume this. Ah well.
I suppose if you're going to consider the official military reports an inherently untrustworthy or at least unreliable source--even when reported by national newspapers who presumably have fact-checking resources--nothing is going to convince you short of a full independent audit. Since I obviously can't provide that, we'll just have to wait for the history books. Until then, I think this conversation has hit a bit of an impasse.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2006-10-07 06:33 am (UTC)Few Guantanamo detainees have been proven to have more than the most tenuous connections to terrorist organizations. While their commitment to the destruction of the West prior to their incarceration is uncertain, their incarceration has undoubtedly strengthened their hatred for the West. I could not even begin to posit a solution for this situation. However, without evidence, we can't fairly prosecute them. Without fair prosecution and defense, there can be no justice. If we deal with these men unjustly, than that thin line that separates the terrorists from us becomes that much more faint. We can't change the rules just because we don't like the outcome.
I have some hopes for the Military Commissions Act in terms of prevention. However, I also strongly feel that the US needs to definitively investigate the conditions at Guantanamo during the 2001-2004 period. We need to shine the harsh light of truth on the murky history of this prison and face the vindication or damnation that will be revealed. Only then can we move on as a nation and only then can we regain some of the international and domestic credibility we've lost over this situation. If a stain on our national honor is revealed, then we must also atone as a nation. The semblance or rhetoric of righteouness isn't enough. We need to be righteous in order to shine.
no subject
Date: 2006-10-07 04:37 pm (UTC)I stated in my above post that "Only if we assume that a (large) majority of detainees are not in fact terrorists does that question [What do they have to gain?] even make sense." I wasn't expecting that you actually do assume this. Ah well.
I suppose if you're going to consider the official military reports an inherently untrustworthy or at least unreliable source--even when reported by national newspapers who presumably have fact-checking resources--nothing is going to convince you short of a full independent audit. Since I obviously can't provide that, we'll just have to wait for the history books. Until then, I think this conversation has hit a bit of an impasse.
no subject
Date: 2006-10-08 07:25 am (UTC)