Glenn Reynolds has a large compendium of links on Gitmo. He links to a Russmussen poll showing that only 20% of the American people thnik prisoners at Gitmo are being mistreated.
The Democrats have a problem with looking weak on terrorism. So what do they do? Raise a stink about supposed instances of “torture” and put themselves squarely on the side of the very terrorists we’re trying to fight — slandering our troops along the way. That isn’t just politically tone deaf, it’s like the Democratic Party changing it’s slogan to “No Terrorist Left Behind.” It reinforces the view that the Democratic Party is profoundly unserious about this war, and that’s going to cost them politically.
The Democrats have already lost two consecutive elections largely because they were rightly perceived as being weak on national defense. This flap over Gitmo is only going to further cement that idea in the minds of the American electorate.
And that’s the issue — the Democrats didn’t have a security policy in 2002. They didn’t have one in 2004 — and now the closest thing they have to a security policy is hoping that maybe we can make ourselves look good enough that Islamic fanatics will stop sawing off heads and join us in an international chorus of Kumbaya. The Democratic policy on Iraq is one of constantly sniping at the Administration. Al-Qaeda is in Iraq now, and we have to defeat them. You don’t defeat an enemy by telling him exactly when you intend to leave, ensuring that all they need to do is wait us out. Yet we still have many Democrats calling for withdrawal in Iraq, which would hand al-Qaeda its greatest victory yet.
The Democrats don’t understand this war, they don’t understand the stakes, and their policies would hand al-Qaeda a major victory. The only rhetoric on the war coming from the vast majority of Democratic politicians is defeatism and odious comparisons to gulags and death camps.
It would be nice to have a principled opposition party. Sadly, the only principled and cogent critiques of the war are coming from other Republicans like John McCain. Until the Democrats get it through their heads that the enemy that knocked down the Twin Towers is a better target than the Bush Administration, the Democrats will continue to be rightly regarded as the party that is unacceptably weak on national security.
What’s right isn’t always popular. For political reasons, I wish the Democrats would ignore this issue, but in the current political climate the party has no hope of being in the majority anyway, so they might as well stand on principle. Calling a spade a spade regarding what Amnesty International correctly labeled a gulag certainly qualifies as taking a principled stand on the flagrant abuse of constitutional rights indefinitely being imposed on a few. It’s becoming clear that we’ll all be dead long before these detainees see sunlight because there will never be a definitive declaration of “victory” in the War on Terrorism.
The Democratic Party has taken beatings every time in history they’d stood up for human rights, because protecting minorities is never popular. It’s likely the Democrats will suffer continued poll defeats if they continue to disparage the lifetime detainment of thousands of American citizens who have never been charged with a crime, but it’s the right thing to do in a nation that has any interest in abiding by its constitution.
Torturing people, to death or otherwise, is wrong. And anybody who who tortures people or condones torture is a criminal. I would rather err on the side of good and decency when we decide what is torture and what is not. Nothing is so great that it is worth torturing people for. Republicans probably get so angry when people mention torture because they know what they’re doing/supporting isn’t right.
What an honor to be among such enlightened and principled people. Maybe I’ll head over to Gitmo, Iraq, Iran, Syria etc with the complete works of Locke and Rousseau. I’ll call it the Western Enlightenment Tour! I’m sure I’ll be well received, because current international threats have merely arisen because the US is such an evil torturous imperial power. With my more enlightened attitude I’m sure I can achieve a “sustained dialogue” which would finally bring the peace we have so desired. Sounds pretty ridiculous doesn’t it. I err on the side of practicality when dealing with non-Americans who don’t even have the slightest conception of liberty. I know in Kant’s eyes my previous statement is unequivocally immoral, but I bet Kant would have made a terrible National Security Adviser or International Relations Analyst. Sometimes when dealing with foreign threats we have to break the rules in the short term to ensure any semblance of peace in the long term.
Except what’s happening at Gitmo is only torture if you so water down the term so that’s its meaningless. Playing Christian Aguliara music? “Invasion of space by a female?” If that’s torture, every 12-year-old girl is a Torquemada.
I agree with Alan Dershowitz — if the FBI knows there’s a nuke planted somewhere in Manhattan, I’m not going to get my knickers in a twist if they dunk some guy’s head in a toilet to figure out where it is.
No, Republicans get angry when asshole Democrats start accusing our soldiers of being just like the SS or the Khmer Rouge. Republicans get angry when Democrats throw shit fits about torture, but only when it can be used to bludgeon America.
“Calling a spade a spade regarding what Amnesty International correctly labeled a gulag . . ..”
?!?