CONNECT
Published: Sunday 27 November 2011
“The Defense Department spends approximately $150 million per year.”
Guantánamo: The Most Expensive Prison on Earth
The United States has spent billions in taxpayer money on weapons, operations, and salary to support the “war on terror.” However, we must not disregard the hundreds of millions of dollars being spent on the upkeep and operations of the Guantánamo Bay detention camp. The facility was established in 2002 by the Bush administration to hold detainees from the wars in Afghanistan and later Iraq. Guantánamo currently houses about 171 captives. It costs roughly $800,000 per year to house each captive, which includes $38.45 of food per day.
Furthermore, the military is spending up to $750,000 to replace the aging, rusting prison camp hospital with a new “infirmary hub” and so-called “expeditionary medical shelters” around the prison camps. The camps spokeswoman, Navy Cmdr. Tamsen Reese, said that the prison “executed $2.4M in FY11 for detainee rations.” Feeding the 1,850 prison staff who eat from the same kitchen is not included, she said. Additional expenses include the following:
- $61.8 million went to “the intelligence collection mission,” hiring analysts and distributing the fruit of interrogations around the world, maintaining an intelligence database.
- $35 million went to “base operating support,” such as housing, water, plumbing and utilities.
- $30 million went to running the prison, such as “staff, guards, overall detainee operations.”
- $12 million went to the war court, hiring aircraft and staff and maintaining a maximum-security court and lawyers offices.
The Defense Department spends approximately $150 million per year. Additionally, both captives and captors also have their own kitchen, health services, transportation and security services all fueled by a steady supply line. Guantánamo’s a place where today an Army colonel can talk about “the battle rhythm” of the camps, have his family on the base and his kids in the base’s school system, which currently has 247 kids. A guard with four years in the Navy, with the rank of petty officer 3rd class, gets $2,985.84 a month, including the same hazardous duty pay as they’d pull in Kabul. A Navy commander with 15 years but no kids gets $7,840 a month, including hazardous duty pay.
This excessive spending could be utilized to build schools, support communities, and more. Instead, it is being used to pay for an unconstitutional detention camp that the president promised to close nearly three years ago. In this time of economic hardship, is this really what the American public wants or deserves?
FEATURE A
Connect with your friends
Find new content you might like and see what your friends are sharing!
35 comments on "Guantánamo: The Most Expensive Prison on Earth"
December 07, 2011 4:03pm
What is it all for when we have become residents of a nation where BIG BROTHER is always watching?
November 28, 2011 10:07pm
If you're not angry yet, try this:
http://www.businessinsider.com/what-wall-street-protesters-are-so-angry-...
November 28, 2011 1:04pm
utterly disgusting.
this prison should have never existed in the first place, it is a blatantly illegal setup, for many reasons that are so obvious that need no explanation.
the waste is not surprising, it is just another example of how the pentagon burns all the money they constantly STEAL from us taxpayers.
another disappointment for us who voted for mr. obama (once, he will not fool me again), and solemnly promised to close it down (just like he promised universal health care, an end to the wars, fixing wall street, etc., etc. ...)
p.s.: i cannot believe the nonsense that one of the people here is posting, i will not waste my time confuting his ridiculous points, but i find it incredibly ignorant to post comments that actually DEFEND such despicable actions perpetrated by our country!
November 30, 2011 11:09am
STEFAN:
this prison should have never existed in the first place, it is a blatantly illegal setup, ...........for many reasons that are so obvious that need no explanation.
.
GO AHEAD EXPLAIN
November 28, 2011 7:07am
very discouraged that obama has not fulfilled his promise.
December 01, 2011 3:09pm
Get used to It
November 27, 2011 7:27pm
It's Obama's fault too Mr. Miranda. Another one of his fake promises was to close Gitmo. Left and Right are owned by the same .01%.
November 27, 2011 3:34pm
stfu - vote for ron paul who considers all this illegal use of presidential power and unconstitutional - see if he hold to his promises and if not get armed and ready yourselves for the revolution to start up in very real terms ....
November 27, 2011 5:07pm
Fact 1:
Ron Paul will not win anything.
Fact 2:
There will be no violent armed revolution, as it would be a dismal failure. There may, however, be a non-violent revolution, ala Egypt and Serbia and, IMO, the closer we get to Laissez Faire economics, the quicker it will happen. A RP presidency, and the inevitable return to the Gilded Age it would bring, could only accelerate revolution. That is the only reason to vote for RP that makes any sense. So go for it. You'll lose of course, but it would be one more vote diverted from another member of the Klown Kar.
Fact 3:
Just because Ron Paul makes a modicum of sense on military and civil liberty issues, doesn't mean he possesses one drop of sanity when it comes to any other issue, particularly domestic economic issues.
Fact 4:
Ron Paul is not God and his acolytes need to stop acting as if he was by incessantly repeating on forums every droll and banal statement he utters as if it was handed down from the heavens by way of lightning bolt.
Making him out to be a saviour and a cult figure like Lyndon LaRouche or Sun Yung Moon is, at the end of the day, doing him no favors.
November 27, 2011 12:07pm
And we are cutting back on education and healthcare.
November 27, 2011 5:21pm
And they want to cut back on food stamps. A single American doesn't get anywhere near $38 a day in food stamps. A terrorist suspect eats better than a destitute American. He also has better medical care and housing.
November 27, 2011 9:59pm
MDFOURU
With all the hair pulling and chest thumping about Gitmo, Decisions have been made
In the field not to take prisoners anymore. It's the law of unintended Consequences Those in this Country wanting to show undeserved compassion are causing the Deaths of others. Welcome to the Real World
November 27, 2011 12:02pm
while this is very expensive, and is a disgrace for most americans that know truth, it is far from being the most expensive. throughout this land are many camps some brand new sitting waiting for their inhabitants. wonder who they are? wonder why they are going there? If I am right on who and why they are going there , these will be the most expensive, for they will hold the innocent and they will incarcerate american citizens for no reason ,other then they were abused by the power elite. if we had held onto a republic and not a mob rule democracy, perhaps these camps would not exist.
November 27, 2011 5:17pm
Wrong. Even if your paranoid delusions were true, the operational costs of those camps would not even come close to what it costs to operate Guantanamo. $38/day for food is over 4X what it costs to feed a domestic inmate in a max. security prison. Military contractors cost far more than civilian guards or military personnel. No domestic prison ever has, or ever will have, a 10:1 staff/inmate ratio. No domestic prison or internment camp costs anywhere near the per unit construction cost of Guantanamo.
Assuming that we are referring to costs strictly in the monetary sense, it is dirt cheap to imprison innocent Americans, compared to operating a military prison on foreign soil. A max. security inmate costs approx. 40,000/year to maintain. That's 5% of the cost to house a Guantanamo suspect. A minimum security "innocent American" would cost much less.
November 27, 2011 12:27pm
This is Chutzpah. Guantanamo became the only option left when certain people in the Country wanted to bring Enemy Combatants into our legal system. They Wanted to have people Captured Over Seas and Identified as at War with the United States be given Miranda Rights and told just the opposite of what was wanted. YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT.
November 27, 2011 4:51pm
No, Guantanamo became the only option when the cowards in the U.S., and the Republicans that pander to them, wet their panties at the suggestion that terrorist suspects be tried on U.S. soil.
These people could be held in max security prisons in the U.S. without posing any risk to anyone but the fear-mongering right wing politicians and their constituents who would be compelled to look under their beds each night for boogeyman turrists hiding there.
November 27, 2011 6:46pm
But then people like you would be pounding on the prison gates screaming about imprisoning them without a trial. But a trial is imposable for the reasons of No Miranda and no evidence that could be introduced because its all tainted. So if we do as you wish and they are set free will you invite one to come live with you and be their Mentor?
Are we at war? I thought that according to our Constitution only Congress could declare war. Did they? The war is unConstitutional, hence illegal. Hence the gulag is unConstitutional and therefore illegal. Right? Or is the Constitution obsolete?
November 27, 2011 4:05pm
Silly Rabbit.
Are We at War matters little to the People that are at War With Us
November 27, 2011 1:21pm
Uh, no. But these war criminals COULD be placed in maximum security prisons in the US and we could save a s#itload of $$$.
November 27, 2011 1:39pm
So true but once they set foot on American Soil they come under the Protection of our legal system. None of them where read their Miranda Rights, No evidence gathering procedures where followed ,so any evidence would be thrown out Etc. Etc For these reasons Gitmo was born as a workaround.
On the Battlefield there is no Catch and Release
November 27, 2011 1:57pm
What is this issue of "Mirana Rights" that so many people have a problem with? The "right to remain silent" is a guarantee in almost all democratic legal systems. Even in the Uniform Code Of Military Justice a soldier has that right just as someone who is accused of a war crime.
What do you think that means when a country can create a prison outside of their national and international legal system to violate these rights? What you are implying with prisoners not being read their Miranda Rights is an admission that what is being done is illegal. Whether they are here or there they are still guaranteed these rights.
November 27, 2011 4:15pm
Dave
Just sit back and ponder Miranda Rights, while others Guard our Borders Around the World, Keeping you Safe in your Bed at Night... Pondering Miranda Rights.
November 27, 2011 11:38am
$800,000 a year is spent on each prisoner! Something smells here and this jail might be a money laundering operation.
November 27, 2011 4:29pm
Of course its a money laundering operation. The entire military is nothing but a huge money laundering operation. Billions of taxpayer dollars are laundered each year through the military industrial complex, which skims off enormous profits before forwarding millions more to Congresspeople in every district in the country.
I wonder how much of that $800,000 goes into the pockets of private military contractors and how much less it would cost if the actual military assumed all currently privatized functions.
November 27, 2011 11:35am
Those prisoners are eating better than before they were captured. Close the prison and save that money. Transfer those prisoners to prisons on US or release them. What a waste of money and resources when we need it the most. Thanks, Mr . Bush/Cheney.
November 27, 2011 12:35pm
Jose
Release them to go back to the battlefield. What would you say to a parent whose Child is killed by those you saw fit to be released. To save some money and Play Politics is hardly an answer they would except, let alone let you leave their house in one piece.
November 27, 2011 4:49pm
Using your logic, everyone arrested should be held indefinitely, lest they return to the street to resume their crimes.
I would tell the parents to grow up, just like I would tell them to grow up if their kid was killed by a robber who had to be released because there was not enough evidence to imprison him. As much as it may disappoint you, and the cowards among us, we don't live in a society that imprisons people because of what we think they might do.
Remember, Jose said TRANSFER THEM OR RELEASE THEM. If there is no evidence they'll return to a battlefield, likely because that's not where they came from, release them. If there's evidence, transfer them to U.S. prisons and charge them with crimes. As it is, we are having to pay a lot of money just to mollify the fears of a bunch of whiney, scared, crybaby cowards who burst into apoplexy and dive under their beds every time the word terrorist is mentioned.
November 27, 2011 7:28pm
MDFOURU
Tell the parents of a Fallen Soldier "To Grow Up"
I don't want to waste any more of my time with someone unable to see a distinction between Civil Law and Acts of War. it is your mindset that made Gito necessary .
.*I will let your own words define the person you are.
.
.we are having to pay a lot of money just to mollify the fears of a bunch of whiney, scared, crybaby cowards who burst into apoplexy and dive under their beds every time the word terrorist is mentioned.
November 27, 2011 2:13pm
What battlefield is that? I am assuming that you're in some communist country and don't hold to the principles of "Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat" or "innocence until prove guilty". How about the fact that many of the people being held there are guilty of no crimes and have done nothing in this "war" - they aren't combatants. I guess you are against basic human rights and the rule of law. If they are guilty of a crime then that is what the legal system exists for. If they are guilty then the American people have a right to see them on trial and to pay for their crimes, not some politician saying "Oh, yeah... we have the bad guys locked up. We are doing a good job. Trust us."
November 27, 2011 7:44pm
Everyone Dave 550 is channeling those at Gitmo. He says they aren't guilty of being Combatants.
I have to ask you Dave 550 Not Guilty of What? What I don't get is some on this thread can't understand this subject does not fall under Civil law. This falls under International Law of War.
November 27, 2011 11:21am
$38.45 per prisoner per day for just food?? Sounds like another KBR/Halliburton no-bid contract.
November 27, 2011 11:51am
No... What is costing so much is the Accommodation to Special Dietary Requirements. The cooks have to cook special meals for the guests separate from other personnel on the Base.
November 27, 2011 4:39pm
B.S.. Once again, you pull your so-called "facts" out of your butt. Cooking for 171 people separately from a staff of 1,850 makes a negligible difference in costs. Any good sized domestic prison accommodates special dietary requirements for part of the inmate population, and it doesn't cost anywhere near $38/day to do it. Don't you think there are thousands of Muslims and Jews behind bars in the U.S.? Their dietary requirements are no different than the Muslims at Guantanamo. Monetarily speaking, it's no big deal.
These costs are directly due to the use of private military contractors. Back in the day, when the military did their own food service, the costs were a tiny fraction of what they are now.
BTW, WTF are they doing with a staff/inmate ratio of over 10:1 anyway?
November 27, 2011 2:01pm
Not really. $38.45 per day in meals comes to $14,034.25. The cost comes from having to send people back and forth, giving them hazard pay, in some cases, allowing them to bring their families along to live on base. Meals are not the biggest expenditure. Do the math.