Playing Politics with American Lives

Playing Politics with American Lives

by Mark Luedtke

Imagine if Winston Churchill and Franklin Roosevelt had closed down all allied prisoner of war camps during WWII. Imagine if they had either released all the prisoners into Britain or the US, returned them to their home countries, or put them into the civilian court system. The thought is laughable. It should go without saying, but in our crazy society, everything must be stated clearly - any of these options would increase the duration, casualties and cost of the war. Any would lead to greater erosion of rights at home. Any person who suggested such a thing during WWII would have been put in a straight jacket and a padded cell, and rightly so.

But that's exactly what President Obama promises to do in the War on Terror, with the full support of radical liberals. The first official act of President Obama was to order the prisoner of war camp in Guantanamo Bay shut down in one year. In the same week, Obama complained there were no complete files in the White House on detainees for his staff to investigate so they could determine what to do with the detainees. Maybe I'm naïve, but it seems to me that the responsible course of action would have been to investigate before making any decision.

Obviously Obama was just playing politics for his radical left base. He has no idea what to do with the detainees, and he's admitted as much. Now Attorney General Holder says Obama might release some detainees into the US. Obama is playing politics with American lives so he can force the most radical leftist agenda in history down our throats.

But Obama didn't make this mess – President Bush did. Like nearly everything else, Obama is making a bad situation created by George Bush worse.

Over the last seven years, only two detainees have been tried by military commission. That reflects the poor rules developed by President Bush and Congress. Many of the detainees at Guantanamo were not captured on a battlefield, but criminals arrested for terrorist crimes. By blurring the distinction between enemy combatants and criminals, Bush opened the door to powerful, legitimate criticisms over civil rights violations at Guantanamo. By using harsh interrogation techniques on criminal suspects, he destroyed the ability to try the criminals in a civilian court and opened the door to irresponsible accusations of torture.

This failure of leadership and disrespect of the rule of law by President Bush also opened the door to the Supreme Court sticking its nose in the process of detention at Guantanamo. Although the Court has no power to interfere in the waging of war, it was obvious that Bush was overreaching his war powers and holding criminals. In response, the court extended habeas corpus rights to every Guantanamo detainee because it can't tell an enemy combatant from a criminal without a hearing, further complicating the mess.

Sanctimonious European governments share in the responsibility too. European governments sat on the sidelines eating popcorn while publicly attacking the US at every opportunity. In many cases, they privately backed US actions, but they never helped to find alternative solutions.

And of course the radical liberals who are using the war on terror and any other crisis to expand the power of government have exploited this issue for political advantage instead of helping solve it.

Rectifying this legal nightmare won't be easy, and Obama's order to shut down Guantanamo without having an alternative solution just complicates the matter more. Some European governments like Switzerland and Spain are making noises about accepting detainees, but not dangerous detainees. That's a big help. Federal courts in New York and Virginia are considering hearing some Guantanamo cases.

But the handling of Guantanamo has significantly harmed the Constitution's separation of powers. The Judicial Branch has no power to force the Executive Branch to surrender enemy combatants into the court system. Yet George Bush did just that, undermining the Constitution.

What we need right now is a leader to boldly stand up for the Constitution and American interests. Obama should tell the Court it has no power to interfere in the detention of enemy combatants. When the Supreme Court disagrees, Obama can ask the famous question, “How many battalions does the Supreme Court have?” The co-equal Executive Branch must stand up for its Constitutional authority to wage war without Judicial intervention.

At the same time, Obama should clearly delineate enemy combatants from criminals held in Guantanamo. He should work with Congress to set new rules for military tribunals of enemy combatants based on the Nuremberg trials from WWII, not US civilian legal process, and he should try the enemy combatants.

Obama should either try the criminals in US court, turn them over to the appropriate country for trial, or release them. Finally Obama should identify victory conditions in the War on Terror, meet those conditions, then end the war.

But that's not about to happen. Dropping the use of the term enemy combatant didn't change a thing. Obama wants to extend the War on Terror just like he wants to extend the economic crisis so he can enact his radical agenda. Like Bush, Obama wants America involved in an Orwellian perpetual war that grants him war powers. Bush and Obama both believe that crises should be exploited by government to grab power, though they focus power on different agendas.

Obama hasn't milked the detainee issue for all its worth yet, so don't expect any solutions soon. But expect Americans to pay a price.