Thursday, May 21, 2009

Obama Versus Cheney

Wow. Who would have thought Dick Cheney's political career would still be going? As much as we despise him, you have to like his passion for standing by his convictions. This man is really angry about the way President Obama is handling the national security and rightfully so. Cheney was the architect behind our post September 11th policies. Within a matter of weeks, if not days, Obama destroyed 80% of them.

Today, we had dueling speeches from both Vice President Cheney and President Obama stating their cases for and against the post September 11th policies. Both speeches gave compelling arguments for their stances. Obama pointed out that the 20th hijacker was prosecuted in the criminal courts. Cheney mentioned September 11th twenty plus times.

In my opinion, both missed the point. We have an international publicity issue coupled with a national security issue that is rooted with the worst terrorist attack on American soil in history. There are terrorists housed at Guantanamo that other nations refuse to take. The Guantanamo terrorists are not American citizens that have rights under the United States Constitution. Besides, these are people who want to destroy our Constitution and way of life.

How do we address the issue? Bringing the terrorists to the United States for trial in our criminal court systems will afford them rights that they have not earned. Who wants a Super Max prison in their neighborhood much less one that houses some of the most evil people on the planet? Leaving the terrorists at Guantanamo, on the other hand, leaves us with an international black eye which Obama is trying to fix.

Last week the President stated he is willing to continue with the military tribunals in a modified fashion. I am still trying to figure out the modified part considering the terrorists where allowed access to lawyers, the ACLU, and the American Red Cross under President Bush. Yes, the tribunals are slow, but this is because of the sensitivity of the classified documents. Besides, the right to a speedy trial is only afforded under the Constitution and these terrorists are not privy to the same rights I was born under and uphold as a citizen. Before you bash me, I know the Supreme Court said they have a right to habeas corpus. We also cannot send them to the international courts without the possibility of exposing our intelligence gathering secrets to other countries.

Maybe we can gather all of the families who lost a loved one on September 11th and lock them in a room with one terrorist at a time. We can give them the evidence for each prisoner and let them decide the fate. I suspect the terrorists would be sent to a grave before the decision is ever made.

Ultimately, President Obama is going to have to decide which is more important: our national security or our popularity in the world. We know where Dick Cheney and Bush stand on the issue.

10 comments:

  1. David,
    Yes, this Obama vs. Cheney is an interesting clash. In the end, Cheney will probably lose. His voice (as well as his daughter's) tends to harden the oppostion and alienate those who are on the fence. He is now bucking the tide of public opinion, with the tide getting stronger. I take slight issue with your ending. Obama knows that national security comes first. He is too intelligent not to know that. His challenge is to advance our world popularity without sacrificing national security. If I'm not mistaken, that's where diplomacy comes in.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree I was harsh with the last point. I just feel President Obama has gone in the opposite direction than he originally stated. This whole controversy could have been avoided if he had put together a Gitmo plan. He also should have focused on moving forward. He should have just stated that the prior administration had bad policies which are being ended and stopped there. By releasing a few selected memos, he is only fueling the polarization of our country and dragging us through the mud internationally rather than showing us the bigger picture. The CIA thing is a little personal since I have family members who have served in the CIA and the Secret Service. I know some of the things they go through for our country and it is very dangerous work. In regards to Gitmo, I do not have a firm position. I do feel strongly that the terrorists have not earned the right to be tried under our Constitution.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Bruce - "His challenge is to advance our world popularity..."? Are you kidding me? Wanna know what's popular in the world? The "peaceful" world of Islam and the progression of terrorist ideology. Being popular is far from important here. It's completely contradictory to our national security coming first. And if the tide of public opinion is something we are so concerned with, it seems to me the public doesn't want the detainees in our country, or so says our representatives who won't approve the transfers.
    David - I think you're right on. I don't have family in the intelligence agency but I realize that our country's intelligence should be just that - ours. As far as Gitmo is concerned, Gates said it well - kill the name and kill the problem. But even then, appeasing the world while in turn jeopardizing our safety is just stupid. I don't believe Obama, being so wise, gets it.

    ReplyDelete
  4. And David - how'd you get on that articlepinger.com?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Jim,
    You really need to calm down. It's not about appeasing the world. First, let's kill the terrorists. But what does it cost us to do a little PR with the civilized world? The former adminsistration didn't see the need for it, but most people do. How wise is Obama? The jury is still out, but I worry less about his judgement, knowing that he tends to listen to his generals.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Jim - There was a link to article pinger under a post in the coffee shop.

    ReplyDelete
  7. He did listen to the Generals on the photos. However, this can be viewed as learning on the job. I think Obama made some campaign promises that he is now realizing are not possible. He was too quick to act by signing the order on closing Gitmo and releasing partial CIA memos without fully understanding the ramifications in the name of PR and appeasing the far left. National security is not a political game. It is in place to protect us from harm and ensure we can take the subway to work without fear of being blown up.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Dick Cheney is like old fart smell, one hopes it will fade away.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Jim,
    That kind of comment is fine for your own blog. Shouldn't we try to maintain a higher tone on David's blog?

    ReplyDelete
  10. You (Uncle Sam) can be both secure and popular; it's not a choice between one or the other. That said a Democrat president will be more popular and therefore more secure!

    ReplyDelete