The whole topic of terrorism, national security, 9/11, Gitmo, interrogations, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Israel, etc., is one that hasn't really been a major theme for me in this blog. But the dueling speeches yesterday offered such a clear demonstration of the near opposite approaches from the two administrations that it seemed to present a good opportunity for me to add my two cents.
Cheney and Obama were about as different from each other in their passionate rhetoric on this topic as could be imagined. Cheney is a no-nonsense, unapologetic believer, and many suggest architect, of President Bush's strategies in the War on Terror. Obama is fond of vague rhetorical flourishes, always seeking the oohs and aahs from his adoring fans.
Cheney was the same guy that drove the left crazy with his unflinching commitment to an offensive strategy to root out terrorists where they live so they can never again repeat devastation like 9/11. He refuses to apologize for that strategy, denying that "enhanced interrogation techniques" even approximate torture, and pointing out that those techniques were used only rarely and on a small number of high-ranking al-Quaeda members to obtain information that helped stop planned terrorist attacks, saving thousands or perhaps hundreds of thousands of lives.
Obama is dismayed by the aggressive approach so vigorously defended by Cheney. Aside from asserting that the Iraq war had nothing to do with 9/11, he has outlawed all use of the phrase, "war on terror". He claims that aggressive pursuit of terrorists only creates more terrorists, "enhanced interrogation techniques" is indeed torture and illegal, and those interrogations, along with the very existince of Gitmo, make our country less safe.
The big difference between the two, from my perspective, is that one is open, honest, and very specific about what was done and how it succeeded in averting all terrorist attacks that were planned after 9/11. The other uses vague rhetoric about American values and unsupported claims that his predecessor's tactics made us less safe.
Either Cheney's right about the interrogations helping avert more terrorist attacks or he's not. Since Obama offers no evidence to the contrary, we must accept Cheney's very specific case.
Enhanced interrogation techniques are designed to instill fear, discomfort, and humiliation on those captured terrorists we know have information that can be used to save lives. I don't think fear, discomfort, and humiliation are torture. I think attempting to criminalize everyone involved over a disagreement over interrogation methods is dangerous banana republic politics.
But mainly, it is easy for me to break the interrogation down into a simple analogy. One I wish someone would pose to President Obama to get his response. Mr. President, suppose your lovely daughters were kidnapped by a ring of ruthless rapists and murderers, and one of the leaders of that ring were captured. If you were allowed a half hour alone in an interrogation room with him, what would you be willing to do to make him disclose all the information he has about the location and condition of your daughters?
I know what my answer to that question will always be. And I think those "enhanced interrogation techniques" described in the memos stupidly made public by the President would be a day at the beach compared to what I'd be willing to do to save my kids.
Cheney is right about his characterization of Obama on this issue. Obama cares more about his own political power and aggrandizement than the security of his country.
The only other explanations are too frightening to contemplace. Because if it's not just about him, then he's either incompetent and stupid, or he's an agent of our enemies.
I don't need the powers of Nostradamus to see what's coming. We will be struck again, and soon. Israel will be attacked by Iran soon, possibly with a nuclear bomb. Our country will be broken and bankrupt, watching hopelessly as the world explodes and our President continues to appease and hope he can stop the carnage by force of his personality.
No comments:
Post a Comment