Slashdot Mirror


Scientists Propose Biodiversity Lab To Redeem Guantanamo Prison Camp

HughPickens.com writes: The American presence at the Guantanamo Prison Camp has been deeply contentious since even before terrorism suspects began to be housed there beginning in 2002. Now as President Obama prepares to make the first presidential visit to Cuba in almost 90 years, ecologists Joe Roman and James Kraska have published their case in the influential journal Science for creating a Guantanamo-based research center to study biodiversity in the Caribbean. The primary benefit of a Guantanamo Bay research station is symbolic. "The main goal is trying to take Guantanamo and make it an inspiring place, and redeem it," says Roman. But the case for Guantanamo Bay as a science lab goes beyond political optics. According to Roman and Kraska the land and the sea offer an ecosystem uniquely worthy of study. The research hub of Roman's dreams would be a state-of-the art facility to help understand how biodiversity loss can be prevented across the Caribbean. "A parcel of the land, perhaps on the developed southeastern side of the base, could become a 'Woods Hole of the Caribbean,' housing research and educational facilities dedicated to addressing climate change, ocean conservation, and biodiversity loss. With genetics laboratories, geographic information systems laboratories, videoconference rooms — even art, music, and design studios — scientists, scholars, and artists from Cuba, the United States, and around the world could gather and study. The new facilities could strive to be carbon neutral, with four 80-meter wind turbines having been installed on the base in 2005, and designed to minimize ecological damage to the surrounding marine and terrestrial ecosystems" Hugh Pickens continues: According to Roman, the main idea is that science can be healing: a way to bring diverse nations together, a way to rectify a complicated history, and a way to help better the lives of all people through research. The biggest roadblock won't be the Obama administration but Congress. Republican lawmakers have derided Obama's preliminary framework for closing the prison, so for the foreseeable future, the status quo will remain. But Roman can still dream. "At a certain point, I don't know when, that base is going to close. It's going to return to Cuba at some point. This is a great use of that property. You don't have many places in the world like that."

19 of 170 comments (clear)

  1. Give it back? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How about just giving it back to Cuba?

    It's as anachronistic and wounding to national pride as it would be for Americans having to tolerate a foreign military base on Manhattan island.

    The Brits gave Hong Kong island back to China for a good reason. Shit like this belongs in the 19th century, not the 21st.

    1. Re:Give it back? by Xest · · Score: 2

      "The Brits gave Hong Kong island back to China for a good reason."

      Yeah, because our 99 year lease was up.

    2. Re:Give it back? by nospam007 · · Score: 2

      "The Brits gave Hong Kong island back to China for a good reason"

      Yes, the good reason was that they had a leasing contract done in 1898 for 99 years and that contract expired 1997 so it fell back to China.

      They kept the stuff the conquered.

      They didn't give back Northern Ireland, Scotland, Gibraltar, Akrotiri and Dhekelia, Anguilla, Bermuda, the Falklands, the Cayman islands, Montserrat, Pitcairn, Saint Helena, Ascension, Tristan da Cunha, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands nor the Turks and Caicos Islands.

    3. Re:Give it back? by NotDrWho · · Score: 2

      We don't give it back for the same reason that we've implemented most of our Cuban policies over the last 50 years: because a bunch of old Batista cronies in Miami are still pissed that Fidel Castro took their corrupt oligarchy away.

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    4. Re:Give it back? by Gavagai80 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The USA claims that Guantanamo Bay is a lease as well, not a conquest. Analogy: It's like renting an apartment from your brother at a super low token rate of $50 a month. Then he dies and the new owner of the complex tries to evict you. You refuse to leave the apartment and send the new owner a $50 check every month which he refuses to cash, and you tell everyone that this is a legal lease where you have every right to stay in the apartment for as long as you pay your $50 a month. For the next 55 years, because you're the one lucky renter who has more guns than the police who come to evict you.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    5. Re: Give it back? by ganjadude · · Score: 3, Informative

      ok lets be serious for a minute.

      we cant compare gitmo to Auschwitz.

      stop.... just....stop

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    6. Re: Give it back? by ganjadude · · Score: 3, Informative

      you can...but you would be a moron if you did

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    7. Re:Give it back? by fche · · Score: 2

      Aw poor commie "national pride". My heart bleeds, beyond redemption.

  2. its not that convenient. by nimbius · · Score: 3, Insightful

    to Redeem Guantanamo Prison Camp...

    there is no redemption in a torture camp. Auschwitz and Dachau didnt find salvation in an agricultural or a climate research institute. Instead they perist in silence, discipline, and remorse as a sterling reminder of some of the most profound human genocide mankind has ever committed. Many israeli jews, including new IDF troops, make a pilgrimage to these sites yearly to remember.

    Prisoners at Guantanamo have been beaten, waterboarded, subjected to forced intubation and rectal feeding, extreme temperatures, and have experienced some of the most brutal and least reported abuse under the US governments authority that any human has seen in the 21st century outside of Darfur. Some prisoners have been kidnapped from their home countries under extraordinary rendition, and others simply scooped up during the occupation campaign in Iraq. Once theyre free, many are in limbo as their home countries no longer want them and no foreign nation will consider them for immigrant status.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:its not that convenient. by rmdingler · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Guantanamo is not a source of pride for many Americans, and yet, the bulk of the human rights violations that did exist there were flushed out by the American people and the US press.

      Yes. Obama was unable to fulfill that campaign promise, and the base should be converted to something else, but comparing this to the WWII concentration camps is a bit much.

      These people are being held without American constitutional protection, but they are, by and large bad guys, and they were not indiscriminately rounded up man, woman, and child because of their race.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    2. Re:its not that convenient. by KGIII · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'd say the mass killing, slavery, burning, starvation (we definitely won't let them starve), lack of health-care, etc... Nah, there's still a whole lot of differences.

      That doesn't mean that I like it - it just means you're minimizing the hell out of the WWII era NAZI concentration camps when you compare the two. I don't give two shit but I suspect somewhere there are people who'd be either appalled or angry with your doing so. I've been to two of the old camps and I've seen a lot of documentaries as well as read a bunch of books.

      Maybe you just don't know what happened in them? They're not even remotely similar. Not really. That doesn't mean this isn't a tragedy in and of itself but, c'mon now... That's pretty hyperbolic, don't you think? Or do you really not know what went on in them?

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    3. Re:its not that convenient. by Mitreya · · Score: 2

      they are, by and large bad guys.

      Are they now? And you know this how? If there ever was a case of [citation required]...
      I think for most of them, no one even knows why they are being held. I mean, check out this list. If entries such as "Determined to be innocent. Still detained" or "Ruled innocent. Claims beating crippled him" do not scare you, I don't know what will.

      Considering that they are not guaranteed access to evidence against them or proper access to lawyers, the fact that some were still ruled innocent, implies that majority of them are likely innocent.

      Not to mention that after someone had been detained for 5-10-15 years without trial in terrible conditions, may just become a terrorist in response to such treatment.

    4. Re:its not that convenient. by oldmac31310 · · Score: 2

      I stopped reading after 'executed'. You are a psycho.

      --
      http://www.acetonestudio.com
    5. Re:its not that convenient. by Mitreya · · Score: 2
      I don't think I know where to start...

      US detention facility which was largely used for COMBATANTS seized in what is effectively a war zone, but whose status was questionable as they chose not to wear uniforms.

      Keeping combatants would have been fine if someone bothered to check carefully if they are, in fact, combatants. They have no access to evidence against them or proper access to lawyers. If someone was not a combatant, what do you think they can do to prove it?
      "effectively a war zone" I believe covers all of the countries where we had a military operation at one time? I have heard numerous statements that include United States territory as the "war zone" in "war on terror". Considering that the new definition seems to include almost every place, being captured in a war zone no longer has the same ring to it. Your "chose not to wear uniforms" status also heavily relies on assuming that once you are in Guantanamo, you are by definition a combatant. Why would you assume that? Even with very poor access to legal defense, quite a few were deemed innocent and released after years of detention.

      combatants seized in such circumstances should have been wrung for information and then summarily executed as they were nothing more than bandits

      Oh, good. Summarily executed, huh? You do realize that many were captured based on someone else pointing a finger at them (often for a reward). Wouldn't you want to at least have a trial before execution?

      SECOND: "...most brutal and least reported abuse ...that any human has seen in the 21st century"

      Not even close to true. You must have missed ISIS, then? Or did I miss the mass executions at Guantanamo? The videotaped beheadings?

      You are focusing on most brutal and you have a point. However, they might still have a valid point regarding the least reported abuse. A lot of them tried to go on hanger strike and were force-fed. To me, that indicates much has gone unreported.

      NONE of the what, 9 deaths at Guantanamo have been caused by the US government. 7 were suicides

      What kind of asinine logic is that. They are locked up for years without trial, but their suicides were not caused by US government? They were just depressed people, with a pre-existing condition?

      1 was cancer (and those last to I almost guarantee got BETTER health care and end-of-life care than they'd have gotten in whatever pestilential 3rd world country they came from).

      So as long as they got better health care, it is ok to lock them up? Not very relevant.

      as prisons go, the Cuban ones outside Guantanamo's walls have been FAR worse for 50 years. Curious that you haven't complained about that?

      They are not maintained by United States, which makes them somewhat different from the prisons that are.

      They can leave BUT THEIR HOMES DON'T WANT THEM, NEITHER DOES ANY OTHER COUNTRY - even countries inimical to the US like Venezuela or North Korea. Why do you suppose that is? These are troublemaking, BAD people.

      So is that an excuse? It's ok to keep them there as long as no one likes them?
      Perhaps they should have been tried somehow. With an actual trial outcome proving their innocence (or at least not-proving guilt), perhaps some countries would take them.

      Have you considered the possibility that their homes don't want them because they were held, for years, without trial in the scary worst-of-the-worst "terrorist prison"?

  3. The area is a military base by ThatBeDank · · Score: 2

    The US military isn't giving that real estate up period. Obama said he would close it and failed to do so. The next president will do the same. Where do you think the extremists will go for their rightfully deserved enhanced information gathering sessions?

  4. Re:I have a different proposal. by Pseudonym · · Score: 2

    [...] things that would not be normally allowed under US Law.

    I think the symbolic point is to stop doing that.

    --
    sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
  5. Primarily a Naval Base by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 5, Informative

    Guantanamo Bay is primarily a U.S. Navy Base. It is only secondarily, if that, a prison camp for those who made war against the U.S. outside of the boundaries of the Geneva Convention (this may not be true of all of those imprisoned there, but that is the justification for the prison camp aspect).

    Guantanamo Bay is the best harbor in the Caribbean for Naval operations and the U.S. has retained control over it for that reason.

    --
    The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
  6. Re:I have a different proposal. by butzwonker · · Score: 2

    Since "Guantanamo" also has obtained a somewhat unpleasant ring to it (why? no idea!), let's just give it a new name, too. Perhaps something fitting based on classic literature, like "Island of Dr. Moreau".

  7. Re:Here We Go by haruchai · · Score: 2

    They have far less to apologize for than those who supported Fulgencio Batista.

    --
    Pain is merely failure leaving the body