- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
By all criteria, this a concentration camp. Not “concentration camp” as rhetorical inflation, or emotionally manipulative shorthand, or edgy metaphor—but as in: literally.
As in: detention without trial, state control, inhumane living conditions, forced labor, dehumanization, brutal violence, isolation from accountability, psychological torture, and—by every available logical extension—murder.
That last one we can’t yet verify in the strict evidentiary sense, but the circumstances suggest it like smoke suggests fire, and they are already trying to hide their actions and deny what is occurring.
Why is it not?
Because it was used for a select few (relatively speaking). It wasn’t a camp built to concentrate a sizeable portion of our population into one small area.
I’ve already said that there are good arguments for why this shouldn’t be considered a concentration camp, and this isn’t one of them. This is like saying genocide isn’t genocide because the unique tribe you wiped out was only a couple hundred people. So, if you took that same tribe of people and put them in a camp and resteicted their movement, would you not consider it a concentration camp because of it’s size?
Gitmo was never meant to store large amounts of people (and not civilians). It was a place that was conveniently located that allow them to detain and torture individuals. That’s not a concentration camp dude.
Even when they started trying to send some migrants there, there were articles saying that they didn’t have the facilities for it because it was never meant for that.
It was an off the record black torture/interrogation site. They didn’t send every taliban they accounted there. It was selective.
Ah, sorry, I didn’t realize that the Nazis sent all their prisoners to one camp. I guess those weren’t concentration camps, either.
I’m sure the Nazis had torture/interrogation sites too.
Nobody said that not being a concentration camp made Guantanamo ok.
No, someone just said it’s not a concentration camp because everyone of one demographic wasn’t there.
Actually, on further thought, I’ll give you that. But, unsurprisingly, limited rights abuses tend to lead to more extensive rights abuses, and the only really surprising thing is that it took more than 20 years to go from torture camps to concentration camps. Waiting for those ghettos, Poland style.
You misinterpreted my response. The point is the intention (giving 1 example at the time of operation). That intention was interrogation not concentrating undesirables.
I’m pretty sure the vast majority of criminals imprisoned in America have been interrogated without having to be removed to a different country and kept in a special prison. I imagine the exceptions are military personnel stationed outside America, criminals serving sentences in other countries, and the people at Guantanamo bay? So why are they being treated differently?
I guess it’s semantics. If you want to call black sites concentration camps that’s fine by me, there’s a lot of overlap, I acknowledge that.