|
|
| speedracer_mec |
From: WSJ Editorial Opinion Journal Page
Kerry Fails the Guantanamo Test
He promises he would weaken the fight against terrorism.
BY JOHN YOO
Tuesday, November 2, 2004 12:01 a.m. EST
September 11 made long-term strategy against terrorism the most important issue before our nation this election. President Bush has pursued clear, and at times unpopular, policies that use every possible tool against al Qaeda. In contrast, John Kerry, who talks tough, follows ideas that will weaken the United States in the fight against terrorism.
Mr. Bush has adopted a straightforward approach to preventing future terrorist attacks. He believes that the war on terrorism demands the use of all of war's weapons. By authorizing the CIA to target al Qaeda leaders, Mr. Bush is using force to attack terrorists and their networks abroad. By denying terrorists prisoner-of-war status under the Geneva Conventions, he has prevented terrorists from hiding behind the very laws of war they mock. By pushing the Patriot Act, President Bush enhanced the government's ability to disrupt another attack at home.
Mr. Kerry has responded by outflanking Mr. Bush rhetorically. In the last presidential debate, he repeated "kill" like a kid in love with a new word: "I have a plan that will help us go out and kill and find the terrorists, and I will not stop in our effort to hunt down and kill the terrorists." But aside from proposing new spending for searching containers at seaports, Mr. Kerry said precious little about what he would do if elected.
In fact, Mr. Kerry's policies will obstruct our ability to prevent future terrorist attacks. As a small, non-state network of religiously-motivated extremists, al Qaeda cannot be defeated on the battlefield by regular armed forces. Its operatives hide within our societies to launch surprise attacks on our civilians. Our only means for preventing future attacks, which could someday involve weapons of mass destruction, is to gain intelligence that permits pre-emptive action. Once attacks occur, it is too late.
Mr. Kerry's approach would directly undermine our ability to collect terrorist information. Take the Patriot Act, which expands government authority to conduct surveillance of suspected terrorists. The act made some significant changes to the system of secret courts, hearings and warrants for pursuing potential national security threats: It updated the standard for warrants to allow law enforcement and intelligence to cooperate, it allowed searches without immediate notice to the target, and it extended warrants to business records.
Although Mr. Kerry voted for the act, he has since changed his mind. During the primaries, he supported "replacing the Patriot Act with a new law that protects our people and our liberties at the same time," and said that the act's best part is its 2005 sunset provision. According to news reports, he even compared use of the Patriot Act to the Taliban's repression of Afghans. Mr. Kerry now says that he would repeal the provisions for delayed-notice searches and demands for records. Sacrificing these important tools to please his party's civil-libertarian wing is not a successful strategy for a commander in chief.
Or consider the detention and trial of terrorists. Mr. Bush has declared that the conflict with al Qaeda is not governed by the Geneva Conventions, which apply only to international conflicts between states that have signed them. Since al Qaeda is not a nation-state, and its members flout the laws of war, Geneva regulates neither the detention nor the interrogation of its detainees. Mr. Bush has ordered that special military commissions may try terrorists for war crimes. As for Americans who join al Qaeda, such as dirty bomber José Padilla, Mr. Bush has allowed their detention as enemy combatants.
Mr. Kerry sides against aggressive counterterrorism. Last month he announced that "a Kerry administration will apply the Geneva Conventions to all battlefield combatants captured in the war on terror." This reverses consistent U.S. policy since the Reagan administration to deny terrorists the legal status of honorable warriors. John Edwards has said that a Kerry administration would use the courts-martial that try U.S. servicemen, but not military commissions, for terrorists. This eliminates a significant American advantage in the war for information. Mr. Kerry's policy would prevent the U.S. from employing interrogation methods in Guantanamo Bay that go beyond polite conversation but fall well short of physical mistreatment. Under Geneva, a POW need only provide name, rank and serial number and cannot receive negative treatment for refusing to cooperate. At Guantanamo, by contrast, interrogators can reward cooperators with better food, more creature comforts and favorable plea bargains. Mr. Kerry's policy would dry up our most important method for stopping future terrorist attacks--gaining information from the terrorists themselves.
Mr. Kerry's position should, perhaps, come as no surprise. Important constituents such as lawyers, academics and civil-rights groups have bitterly opposed the military detention of terrorists and their designation as illegal combatants--to the point where many asked the Supreme Court that an American-born Saudi, captured in Afghanistan with a weapon, either be charged with a crime or freed. This represents a failure to recognize that the September 11 attacks began a war. Would a President Kerry continue to follow their advice?
These supporters will likely supply the cabinet and sub-cabinet officers who will develop anti-terrorism policy for a Kerry administration. Former Clinton officials have returned to develop the campaign's defense and terrorism policies. This provides little assurance that Mr. Kerry will follow through on his promise to "hunt down and kill the terrorists." Sandy Berger, the former Clinton national security adviser and potential Kerry Secretary of State, rejected four plans to assassinate Osama bin Laden. In one case, he apparently worried that bin Laden's capture could not meet the Fourth Amendment standards for an arrest. Other members of Mr. Clinton's legal and national security teams raised legal doubts about killing bin Laden. These officials would no doubt populate the Kerry White House and its State, Defense and Justice departments. That team had two presidential terms to destroy al Qaeda, but failed. They do not need a third.
Mr. Yoo, a law professor at the University of California, Berkeley, is a visiting scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and a former Bush Justice Department official. |
|
|
| Dave Piazza |
Stupid people beleive stupid things. This terroist bull is another example.
As the report below indicates; stupid people love a foolish president.
http://americanassembler.com/featur...te_averages.htm
State Avg. IQ 2000
1 Connecticut 113 Gore
2 Massachusetts 111 Gore
3 New Jersey 111 Gore
4 New York 109 Gore
5 Rhode Island 107 Gore
6 Hawaii 106 Gore
7 Maryland 105 Gore
8 New Hampshire 105 Bush
9 Illinois 104 Gore
10 Delaware 103 Gore
11 Minnesota 102 Gore
12 Vermont 102 Gore
13 Washington 102 Gore
14 California 101 Gore
15 Pennsylvania 101 Gore
16 Maine 100 Gore
17 Virginia 100 Bush
18 Wisconsin 100 Gore
19 Colorado 99 Bush
20 Iowa 99 Gore
21 Michigan 99 Gore
22 Nevada 99 Bush
23 Ohio 99 Bush
24 Oregon 99 Gore
25 Alaska 98 Bush
26 Florida 98 Gore
27 Missouri 98 Bush
28 Kansas 96 Bush
29 Nebraska 95 Bush
30 Arizona 94 Bush
31 Indiana 94 Bush
32 Tennessee 94 Bush
33 North Carolina 93 Bush
34 West Virginia 93 Bush
35 Arkansas 92 Bush
36 Georgia 92 Bush
37 Kentucky 92 Bush
38 New Mexico 92 Gore
39 North Dakota 92 Bush
40 Texas 92 Bush
41 Alabama 90 Bush
42 Louisiana 90 Bush
43 Montana 90 Bush
44 Oklahoma 90 Bush
45 South Dakota 90 Bush
46 South Carolina 89 Bush
47 Wyoming 89 Bush
48 Idaho 87 Bush
49 Utah 87 Bush
50 Mississippi 85 Bush |
|
|
| speedracer_mec |
| quote: | Originally posted by Dave Piazza
Stupid people beleive stupid things. This terroist bull is another example.
As the report below indicates; stupid people love a foolish president.
http://americanassembler.com/featur...te_averages.htm
State Avg. IQ 2000
1 Connecticut 113 Gore
2 Massachusetts 111 Gore
3 New Jersey 111 Gore
4 New York 109 Gore
5 Rhode Island 107 Gore
6 Hawaii 106 Gore
7 Maryland 105 Gore
8 New Hampshire 105 Bush
9 Illinois 104 Gore
10 Delaware 103 Gore
11 Minnesota 102 Gore
12 Vermont 102 Gore
13 Washington 102 Gore
14 California 101 Gore
15 Pennsylvania 101 Gore
16 Maine 100 Gore
17 Virginia 100 Bush
18 Wisconsin 100 Gore
19 Colorado 99 Bush
20 Iowa 99 Gore
21 Michigan 99 Gore
22 Nevada 99 Bush
23 Ohio 99 Bush
24 Oregon 99 Gore
25 Alaska 98 Bush
26 Florida 98 Gore
27 Missouri 98 Bush
28 Kansas 96 Bush
29 Nebraska 95 Bush
30 Arizona 94 Bush
31 Indiana 94 Bush
32 Tennessee 94 Bush
33 North Carolina 93 Bush
34 West Virginia 93 Bush
35 Arkansas 92 Bush
36 Georgia 92 Bush
37 Kentucky 92 Bush
38 New Mexico 92 Gore
39 North Dakota 92 Bush
40 Texas 92 Bush
41 Alabama 90 Bush
42 Louisiana 90 Bush
43 Montana 90 Bush
44 Oklahoma 90 Bush
45 South Dakota 90 Bush
46 South Carolina 89 Bush
47 Wyoming 89 Bush
48 Idaho 87 Bush
49 Utah 87 Bush
50 Mississippi 85 Bush |
so whats al bore been up to lately? besides campaigning in hawaii |
|
|
| Dave Piazza |
| quote: | Originally posted by speedracer_mec
so whats al bore been up to lately? besides campaigning in hawaii |
Isnt it pathetic that you keeping trying to bump these Bush threads you created whilst my Kerry threads get much greater support and hits :stongue:
And you fail to make educated points in why we should support Bush.
It is so obvious that he's an idiot that you cant defend him. |
|
|
| speedracer_mec |
| quote: | Originally posted by Dave Piazza
Isnt it pathetic that you keeping trying to bump these Bush threads you created whilst my Kerry threads get much greater support and hits :stongue:
And you fail to make educated points in why we should support Bush.
It is so obvious that he's an idiot that you cant defend him. |
why even begin...
You dont even post on these forums and have missed on thousands of topics where people like shakka, imokrok,occrider,opus,liquidx,yoepus,quecho,nytrancefan,arbiter,resonant_drag Have posted and discussed.
You are a troll coming into these forums on election day to post.
Maybe next time show up half a year earlier to discuss debates and conventions
Get a clue moron.:rolleyes: |
|
|
| ResonantDrag |
| he's desperate. clinching to a soon to be forgotten president in a world progressing past his own shallow perspective. good thing he's just a kid, cause i hate to see a grown man cry.;) |
|
|
| Dave Piazza |
| quote: | Originally posted by speedracer_mec
why even begin...
You dont even post on these forums and have missed on thousands of topics |
You have no idea who I am. Look at my screen name carefully :D |
|
|
CLICK TO RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE
tranceaddict Forums Archive > Other > Political Discussion / Debate
|
