Obama Copies Bush
For months now, polls show that the majority of Americans oppose closing Guantanamo Bay, and favor indefinite detention of terrorism suspects. Members of Congress and the White House are obviously aware of these polls, which is why the former have indicated to the latter that they are hard pressed to change many of Bush’s national security policies.
As a result it became clear yesterday that President Obama is willing to give in on at least one of the two major national security issues:
Obama administration officials, fearing a battle with Congress that could stall plans to close the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, are crafting language for an executive order that would reassert presidential authority to incarcerate terrorism suspects indefinitely, according to three senior government officials with knowledge of White House deliberations.
The article at the Washington Post states that Obama is considering the executive order because he fears that if he does not, Congress will not agree to close Gitmo down, or will at least try to delay torture for as long as possible.
The WaPo is probably right. Members of Congress especially take polls extremely serious. They fear they may lose reelection if they vote for bills that are deemed ‘weak’ on national security.
Obama faces the same problem, of course. Although his personal favorability ratings remain high, increasingly more Americans disagree with his key policies. If he’d enable Republicans to portray him as ‘weak on national security,’ he’ll have a terrible time winning reelection.
In other words, the executive order is a sign of weakness, not of ideals. He is losing the battle for Gitmo and the treatment of terrorism suspects in general, and he knows it.
Meanwhile, Europeans criticized Bush’s policies of indefinite detention ferociously. It was in breach with human rights, they said, and Bush behaved not like the leader of the free world, but as a dictator who could care less about ‘right’ and ‘wrong.’ Will they lash out at Obama now as well?
I think not. Obama has officially been declared the Messiah in Europe. Europeans would never support his policies if he were there president (or prime minister), but since it’s a far-from-their-bed show, they let themselves be overwhelmed by his tremendous rhetorical skills and, yes, by the color of his skin.
American liberals, on the other hand, are different. They are more idealistic than Europeans and passionate. If Obama does one single thing they do not support, they go insane… which is why I expect them to revolt on this issue.
As for my opinion: no government in the world has the right to detain anyone indefinitely, so the US does not either. You cannot lock suspects up without giving them a fair hearing, without allowing them to defend themselves against the accusations in a court of law. If you do nonetheless, it becomes a bit difficult to criticize other governments for doing the same things, albeit with individuals with whom you agree.
Concluding, it is satisfying to see Obama in trouble, and it is also good to see him compromise on an issue… but it is sad that he decided to compromize on this particular one.
Which is why the war on terror should be treated as a criminal matter and not a military one and a new task force consisting of several 1000 military police with worldwide authority and run by a rotating leader much as EU has that has the backing and support of the international community.
A facility needs to be built that will try, house and ultimately incarcerate those terrorists that are captured and brought to the new facility. The entire operation needs to be world wide run, world wide funded and world wide manned with oversight not from the UN but from a governing body much as the security council is now but with much more flexibility to go after terrorists as they work in conjunction with nations to rid themselves of terrorists.
Only then will the war on terrorism have worldwide legitimacy and will relieve the USA of being the worlds policeman on the major problem plaguing the world since the advent of nuclear weapons………
Wonder what he would feel if some other nation decided their almighty leader could decide random victims of indefinite incarceration, and somehow managed to snatch Michelle away in their madcap struggle to show off their “strength” and “commitment”. Some Christian he turned out to be. Totally idiotic and meaningless decision, I sincerely hope there are many democrats who will raise heck and try to harm Obama and invariably their party’s general agenda over this – this kind of cowardice should not go unharassed. Despicable “pragmatism” once again trumps honor and sustainable power balancing.
Well I can say this Kastanj….Even though I dont particulary like Obama, did not vote for him and think so far hes proven to be nothing more then a charimatic empty suit…you make me want to defend him. Funny actually.
Obama is really between a rock and a hard spot on this. He is finding out what we all know. Ruling is much harder then campaigning.
When I was in High School I was drafted by major league baseball team in the 32 round. I played instructional ball for about 3 months and decided that the game I loved and was good at was not the same game when people were paying me to play it. I was average when it came to be surrounded by the best of the best. Everyone around me was outstanding players who had much more dedication to training, exercising, and wanting to excel.
For me Baseball was a GAME….Not work.
I say that to make this point. Politics to bloggers is a game. Its easy to THINK you know the right thing until you actually have to start sweating to the beat. Then it all changes.
Obama is now finding out BEING president is much better then DREAMING of being president.
I must add this for my above post to make any sense. I had a senior moment there and posted before I was ready.
Obama is now finding out BEING president is much better then DREAMING of being president. Why?
Because he is the type of baseball player that loves to train, exercise and excel at what he does. He is finding this to his liking. The problem is that no matter how hard he trains there is always something he cannot do. Rather it be hitting the high fast ball, the hanging curve or the slider away…..He still thrives on being president.
Closing Gitmo is something he cannot do without sacrificing something else. The question is…if you want to hit the high fastball you tend to give up on the slider away….then the opposition just starts throwing you sliders away.
You have to make a decision or else you are just one of a handfull that can hit the high fastball, hanging curve and slider away….in that case your a superstar….Is Obama a superstar?
So far hes just and average ball player with a lot of holes in his swing.
Well, the first thing he would probably do is find out whether those incarcerated were really “random victims” or whether the person claiming that they were was just lying and exaggerating in pursuit of an ideological vendetta or loss of emotional control. Most responsible world leaders don’t jump to extreme conclusions based on bigoted presumptions like you do, Kast.
“Well, the first thing he would probably do is find out whether those incarcerated were really “random victims” or whether the person claiming that they were was just lying and exaggerating in pursuit of an ideological vendetta or loss of emotional control.”
Whenever you are taken captive in a completely gray legal area at the behest of a select few arbitrators with no insight or accountability, you are a random victim, terrorist or not.
Whenever a description is provided by an ideological extremist with no actual knowledge of the details, the issues, or of the available alternatives, the description will be inaccurate and more inflammatory than informative.