IRAQ: THE LEFT’S CRITICISMS VII
IRAQ: THE LEFT’S CRITICISMS VII—SOME
ODDS AND ENDS
by
Ken Eliasberg
In previous columns, I addressed most of the left’s significant criticisms (and, in referring to these criticisms as significant, I realize that I’m being extremely generous). In this column, I would like to clean up the various bits and pieces of the left’s alleged concerns. You know, stuff like Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay, the efficacy and propriety of torturing prisoners, the NSA flap, the Dubai dither, etc., etc. I refer to these matters as bits and pieces because that’s what they are, trivial—much ado about less than nothing. These are explosives in the nature of fire crackers that the left has tried to blow up into something nuclear in nature. Let’s take a look at these smoke-and-mirrors arguments.
- Abu Ghraib.- Abu Ghraib, as most of you know, was one of
Saddam’s favorite torture chambers - the prison in which many of his horrors were visited upon his people. It is where we warehoused many of the captured terrorists in the course of the Iraqi venture. It is also where some of our young soldiers visited various and assorted indignities upon these “poor souls” (meaning this wretched refuse that were bent on killing our young men and women, along with a number of innocent Iraqis). The regrettable part here is not the indignities that we visited upon these barbarous savages, but that we didn’t kill them in the first place. However, taking a more moderate approach—to placate the delicate sensibilities of our friends on the left—our soldiers misbehaved. At the very least, they humiliated these Islamofascist monsters. That is, while they were cutting our heads off, we were putting panties on theirs (a fact that made the front page of the New York Times for about 60 straight days).
On the serious side, our soldiers misbehaved, and those whose misbehavior took a nastier turn have been court martialled and imprisoned for a number of years. This, in sharp contrast to the consequences visited upon the Islamic whackos who cut people’s heads off; they are favorably acknowledged, indeed, praised, by their compatriots and rewarded by various members of the Arab community.
Bear in mind, that the offenders—our young soldiers—are at war; they face these murderous dirt bags every day; they see their buddies being killed and maimed; and, understandably, they do not have a great deal of affection for this motley crew of prisoners. We have trained them to wage war, not for diplomacy. And I am not trying to trivialize what our boys and girls did—they have paid, and paid dearly (too dearly, in my opinon) for their transgressions. That said, their transgressions—no matter how serious—hardly warrant Senator Kennedy’s ridiculous statement that Saddam’s prison has reopened “under new management.” Just when you think that the Dems have gone as low as possible, they prove you wrong again. In any event, Senator Kennedy will rest easier, I’m sure, knowing that, as we speak, Abu Ghraib is in the process of being closed.
2. Guantanamo Bay (GITMO).- Captive terrorist prisoners are also held in Guantanamo Bay, a facility located on Cuba. It houses some very dangerous people, many of whom are quite inhospitable. To provide for their varying degrees of inhospitability, they are housed in several different compounds, with the most dangerous, asI understand it, being housed in compound 5. The inhabitants of this compound greet the guards, who are unarmed, by throwing feces and urine at them and spitting on them—an indication of just how accommodating these guys are.
Early on, conditions at GITMO, while quite adequate, fell somewhat short of those available at Club Med (to the consternation of our friends on the left), precipitating a rather idiotic comment by Senator Dick Durbin that the facility was reminiscent of those run by Hitler, Stalin, and Pol Pot. By the way, his statement was foolishly hailed by a local columnist as reflecting American values (what values might those be?). Durbin’s imprudent (and incorrect) statement was greeted by a roar of displeasure, as a consequence of which Durbin beat a hasty retreat.
In all events, GITMO is a more than adequate facility, providing these dirtbags with more than they would ever get in their home countries, more than our prisoners get, and, according to a Belgium official who recently visited the facility, better treatment than prisoners in his country receive. They are given special meals, provided with prayer rugs, given an indication of the direction of Mecca (to assist them in their prayer rituals), and, on the whole, treated far better than most and far better than they deserve. For God’s sake, they are terrorists, this is war (not a clam bake), and they are entitled to nothing (which is what I would give them if the decision were mine to make).
And, just for the record, we are constantly improving GITMO, making it even more comfortable for these vicious dogs. Also, to the best of my knowledge, no one has been killed at GITMO, which makes it a safer place than joyriding with Senator Kennedy.
2.To Torture or Not to Torture.- Of course, it is and has been our policy not to torture priosoners; we are, after all, a humane country. However, John McCain, in his typical grandstanding manner, proposed legislation to cement that standard in place. In doing so, he indicated that not only is such treatment inhumane, but, more to the point, it doesn’t work. Why doesn’t it work? Because, according to McCain, it didn’t work on him. Well, aside from this bit of macho grandstanding, it does work, and most experts will confirm this fact. And, make no mistake about it, under certain circumstances, we should absolutely use torture. Let me give you an example. We have been reliably advised that terrorists intend to explode several dirty nuclear bombs right here in Los Angeles, the results of which could be the death of several hundred thousand residents of our fair city. We have in our possession a terrorist hostage who is in possession of information which would enable us to prevent this catastrophe. However, he refuses to talk. What shall we do? TORTURE HIM UNTIL HE IS MORE ACCOMMODATING.!!!!!
Let me bring the example closer to home. Someone has one or more of your children held hostage and is going to kill them. You have under lock and key someone who would enable you to prevent this, but he refuses to cooperate. What would you do? Well I’ll tell you what I would do—and what I suspect most of you would do as well—I would visit unspeakable horrors on that person until he begged me to assist me in my children’s rescue. So let’s be careful to take off the table a tool which circumstances may render it necessary for us to use (not withstanding McCain’s posturing on this delicate point).
4. NSA Wiretapping.- This one is a sick joke. While we may debate whether FISA overrides the President’s Constituional power during a time of war, can you imagine what the left (and, for that matter, the right) would be saying if Bush either refused to wiretap or took the 72 hours necessary to secure judicial approval for one, and, in the interim, another 9/11 took place. The left, in their typically hypocritical way, woul be screaming that George Bush is not only an imbecile, but one who pushes imbecility to unnatural extremes.
And for those morons—particularly one of our local dim bulbs—who complained that the NSA wire taps were an invasion of our citizenry’s personal conversations, these wiretaps were not on intra-American communications; they were only employed in situations where an Al Quaeda agent was talking to someone in the U.S. Well, I don’t know about you, but I sure as hell would like to know what that conversation entailed. For God’s sake, we have already emasculated our Intelligence capacity—starting with the Church Committee in the mid-70’s—do we want to eliminate it entirely? How about fighting these guys with blindfolds? I expect the left to propose that next.
5. The Dubai Dither.- Here the left, in a frenzied effort to get to the right of George Bush on some aspect of National Security, managed to scuttle the deal, relying on Islamaphobia to do their nasty little job for them. Strange, I thought that these were the guys who reminded us that not all Muslims were dangerous. And, apparently, the guys from Dubai—the Arab Emirates—fit that description. So what we may have done here is not strike a blow against a legitmate enemy but rather alienate a possible friend. Have you noticed something strange? Every time the left wins, America loses!
I could go on and on about the left’s attacks on our Iraqi participation—e.g. we didn’t have enough troops involved, or, if you like, we had too many, whatever—but you get the point, it wouldn’t make any difference. The left is fighting George Bush; the rest of the country is fighting a war on people who want to kill us and take down our civilization. The left’s subversion of our efforts in this regard have given an incredible lift to the hopes of our enemies.