Okay, I'm depressed about the election.
She asks herself a question, then answers it -- Rumsfeldianly.
What is it, exactly?
It's the failure of Americans to support the war. It's the folding and crumpling because things didn't go well enough and the way we conspicuously displayed that to our enemies. They're going to use that information.
For how long?
Forever.
ADDED: This post -- and my feelings -- are not about whether Republicans or Democrats have power. I dislike both parties. I voted for half Democrats and half Republicans. And I am not saying Bush has done a good enough job of fighting the war or defending his policies. You can look back over the last few months of this blog and see how little I wrote that can be interpreted as favoring one candidate or another. The only race I said much about was the Virginia Senate race. Go find those old posts and you'll see that, from "Macaca" on, I was hostile to George Allen, and, in numerous posts, I was positive about Webb.
What I'm concerned about is national security and, consequently, the way the election was fought and is being interpreted. I'm upset because I think we have sent a terrible message to our enemies: Just hang on long enough and continue to inflict some damage, and the Americans will lose heart and give up. You barely need anything at all. You might not be able to hijack a plane with a box cutter anymore, but you can take back a country -- a country we conquered with overwhelming military power -- merely by mercilessly and endlessly setting off small bombs in your own town day after day.
How much harder it becomes ever to fight and win a war again. Only pacifists and isolationists should feel good about the way this election was won.
November 10, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
207 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 207 of 207Shipping the Muslims to Venus is beyond our capability.
Mark in Texas: I confess that there are days I wish we'd give it a try.
(Only kidding folks)
Ann Althouse said...
You're telling me to enlist? You do realize there are age requirements, don't you? These high-handed demands that other people enlist ridiculously fail to take account of the fact that a lot of people can't meet the requirements.
8:33 PM, November 10, 2006
Well now, that's convenient for you, Professor, isn't it?
Oh, and look! Over there! Boobies!
To those who responded to me, I agree if someone is picked up off the field of battle they are a prisoner of war. However, many of the men in Gitmo were picked up by Afghan warlords for cash. http://www.slate.com/id/2136422/ (article also discusses the "hearings" provided by the military). Even if you consider them prisoners of war, POWs are allowed to go home when the war is over. When will the Global War on Terror be over? Never. Is it ok just to let them rot in prison forever? You seem to be advocating that we can pick up any person, for any reason, anywhere in the world, and if they are not an American citizen, put them in prison forever, not letting them have access to a neutral court system. Do you consider thath American? Personally I think it is the exact opposite of what we stand for. See also the Declaration of Independence ("We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happines.").
The war in Afghanistan is not over. Very big of you to be so concerned about the all-important rights of people who are at war with the United States. Also, nice non sequiter quotation from the Declaration.
Odd.
"Is it ok just to let them rot in prison forever?"
A number of detainees released from Guantanamo have been recaptured or killed in Afghanistan after rejoining the Taliban. So letting them rot in prison is the better alternative for all concerned.
The criminal justice model assumes that it is better to free 10 guilty suspects than wrongly convict one innocent. In a context where the 10 freed suspects immediately plot to blow people up, the criminal justice model is not well-tailored to meet the public's interest in not being blown up. "Let them rot" works just fine.
"
"The war in Afghanistan is not over. Very big of you to be so concerned about the all-important rights of people who are at war with the United States."
You are not getting my point. How do we know all those poeple we captured WERE actaully at war with United States? Some of them certainly were, and holding them is completely justifiable. But the administration refuses to allow a neutral arbiter actually determine if a prisoner was with the Taliban or Al Qaeda. If they wren't at war with United States, and were actually a dude the local warlord didn't like and so turned over to the American for some $$$. We should allow them a chance to prove they are not enemy combatants. Instead we are fine with locking them up and throwing away the key.
"Also, nice non sequiter quotation from the Declaration."
I see you didn't get it. The quote stated that every person (not just every American citizen) has an unalienable right to liberty. We are taking that right away from people forever, without giving them a chance to prove that they weren't even fighting against us. That goes against basic American principles.
"In a context where the 10 freed suspects immediately plot to blow people up, the criminal justice model is not well-tailored to meet the public's interest in not being blown up. "Let them rot" works just fine."
Yes, as long as they deserve to rot. But we aren't giving them a chance to prove they are innocent (of being Al Qaeda, Taliban, what have you). Instead, we are quite happy to let the innocent rot for years upon end along with the guilty.
Why should a civilian judge get to decide if a person captured by the military is guilty or innocent? And how will a civilian judge then decide if the person is innocent or guilty? What evidence will there be? By what standard ought the judge weigh the evidence?
I love liberals. So certain that getting a judge involved is the answer to everything. So cute. So wide-eyed and naive.
Post a Comment