« The release of the CIA memos | Main | Arlen Specter Leaves the GOP »

April 26, 2009

"Obama Administration's Assault on the American Warrior Commences"

This post by Steve Schippert at NRO's The Tank is so good and I agree with him so completely I'm just going to quote the whole thing. I don't think he'll mind.

The assault is relentless. It is enraging. And today, the Obama administration's assault on those who dare to defend America from terrorist thugs who rejoice in publicizing beheadings, mass murder, and pure evil are on notice: "You will be punished. We're coming after you."

The target audience now includes the American Warrior. The Obama administration has abdicated the Warrior's defense, refusing to appeal the 2nd Circuit's decision that more photos should be released from investigations of the detention of enemy fighters from the battlefield. The Obama administration has sided with the ACLU and abandoned our soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines. This cannot stand.

Brace yourselves for the Obama administration's full on assault on the American psyche, while we in the Warrior Class gear up, strap up, and engage in our defense and our nation's defense by taking the fight right back to its source.

Earlier this week, it was the Bush administration's legal advisers, who had the audacity to write opinions on the legal limits of "enhanced interrogation techniques." They dared to include as legal for use against terrorists procedures that are part of our own Special Forces' training. Then yesterday the Obama administration could not resist its instinctive temptation to renege on its original pledge that it would not go after CIA and military interrogators who, as the administration put it, were simply following orders and guidelines determined from above.

Today, the very legacy of the American Warrior is directly under assault as part of that same process.

The Obama administration agreed late Thursday to release dozens of photographs depicting alleged abuse by U.S. personnel during the Bush administration of prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan.

At least 44 pictures will be released by May 28, making public for the first time images of what the military investigated at facilities other than the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.

Defense Department officials would not say exactly what is contained in the photos but said they are concerned the release could incite a Mideast backlash.

A Mideast backlash? The Obama administration -- and those at the Pentagon not standing up in vociferous defense of its warriors -- had better buckle up for an American backlash. Pay attention here.

The photos, taken from Air Force and Army criminal investigations, apparently are not as shocking as the photographs from the Abu Ghraib investigation that became a lasting symbol of U.S. mistakes in Iraq. But some show military personnel intimidating or threatening detainees by pointing weapons at them. Military officers have been court-martialed for threatening detainees at gunpoint.

The photos are not egregious. Not even rising to the level of panties on heads. But no matter. The assault is on. And your president -- your Commander in Chief -- supports it.

The release of these images serves no practical purpose, except perhaps for "enhanced prosecution techniques" against our own. Understand clearly that the purpose of the release -- and the Obama administration's decision to do so willingly if not energetically -- is to denigrate the American Warrior and to further the assault on the American psyche.

Those we were detaining (rather than summarily executing in the field, mind you) were being locked away at a time when beheadings were commonplace, men were being killed by slowly lowering them into 55-gallon drums of acid, and teens refusing to join al-Qaeda in Iraq were being crucified -- literally crucified -- in the public square and given just enough water to keep them alive and their public suffering great enough to serve as AQ's example to the rest. The children of resistant families were baked in ovens, folks.

And our boys are the evil ones? Not on your bleeping life. Not on my watch. Not on our watch.

From the indispensable Jake Tapper of ABC News, consider this context.

The photographs are part of a 2003 Freedom of Information Act request by the ACLU for all information relating to the treatment of detainees -- the same battle that led, last week, to President Obama's decision to release memos from the Bush Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel providing legal justifications for harsh interrogation methods that human rights groups call torture.

Courts had ruled against the Bush administration's attempts to keep the photographs from public view. ACLU attorney Amrit Singh tells ABC News that "the fact that the Obama administration opted not to seek further review is a sign that it is committed to more transparency."

No. It is a sign that the Obama administration holds no perceived loyalty to the American Warrior and is, in fact, putting them under assault in a display of loyalty instead to the ACLU. Is your mind calculating this?

Where is our Secretary of Defense?

The Department of Defense announced in a letter addressed to the federal court on Thursday that it would release the photos.

In a copy of the letter posted on the ACLU's Web site, acting U.S. Attorney Lev L. Dassin said that 21 photographs would be released and that the government "also is processing for release a substantial number of other images."

Mr. Gates, if you cannot muster the principle and courage to stand against this, then our support for you as the remaining adult on the newly formed children's playground may well have been misplaced. You have instantly become indistinguishable from the rest.

This has me so angry I'm practically spitting out my own teeth. I've had enough. Apologizing to Europe and the Muslim world for America, the warm reception of Chavez, blaming America for Mexican drug cartels' murderous rampages, and the threat of prosecuting Bush administration officials because of their legal opinions on what does and does not constitute torture.

And now, the American warrior class is openly and clearly in the crosshairs in a media campaign to denigrate them and cast dishonor upon them and, once again, America.

The aim of the release is to assault America in the court of public opinion, using the wholly owned media PR subsidiary as the armored assault vehicle. And the administration, through its acquiescence, is at minimum enabling this, choosing consciously to end the public defense of the American warrior class and its very legacy. Perhaps the administration is acting with willful disregard for them by taking direction from the ACLU/Soros/Moveon.org hard Left in a form of electoral quid pro quo. At worst, the administration is directly aligned with them and acting in concert rather than taking direction from them.

Either way, the principled defense of the warrior is over, by choice of the Obama administration in directing the Pentagon to end the defense short of SCOTUS. It is an outright abdication.

I say no. Not now, not ever. The Left got away with an all-out assault on the American veteran and military service during Vietnam. It will not happen again. And most certainly not from the military's own Commander in Chief. Not without a bold, determined, and passionate challenge the likes of which have never been seen.

For the exodus of good men and women from a military under assault from its own administration is likely to begin as service commitments come to an end. Retention just took a hit, as officers and NCO's alike begin to understand that they have been left in the wind. Recruiting just got more difficult.

The next logical step for this anti-military administration is to submit the American Warrior to the jurisdiction of a kangaroo International Criminal Court. Don't think the American Warrior isn't watching and thinking. International law, rather than American sovereignty, is all the rage these days in the White House after all.

The Warrior will begin to question precisely what it is that he risks all to defend. And when faced with the fact that he may remain undefended in doing so, his risk expands and the once-booming clarion call to service reduces to distant whispers.

And that will be . . . the end.

Posted by Tom at April 26, 2009 9:15 PM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.theredhunter.com/mt/refer.cgi/1337

Comments

"Courts had ruled against the Bush administration's attempts to keep the photographs from public view."

Maybe they decided they could not win the case. A good decision since the previous administration also lost the case.

These releases of information and photographs are coming from freedom of information lawsuits.

President Obama is not purposely releasing this stuff to hurt Bush, or our soldiers.

If these actions are found to be illegal, that's the mistake and fault of the superiors who gave the approval that these actions were OK and legal.

Posted by: Time at April 27, 2009 12:16 AM

Thank you for stopping by, Time.

But the left that is pushing this, and I mean everyone from the ACLU and Movon.org to Senator Patrick Leahy, do want to hurt American soldiers and intelligence professionals. These people hate America plain and simple.

That Obama caved into them shows that at the very least he sympathizes with them. I half think Obama just wants to be a celebrity and have his worshipers fawn all over him. But his actions overseas, apologizing for his country time and again, letting Latin American dictator wanna-be's diatribes against the United States go unanswered, show that without a doubt he doesn't like America very much.

Let's understand something else, too.

Right now Obama and the liberals are having oh so much fun bashing the Bush Administration over all these allegations of torture and so on.

When President Kennedy first learned of the Soviet nuclear missiles in Cuba, feared that he'd be impeached if he didn't get them out. Given the tenor of the times, he was probably right.

Many seem to have forgotten the attitude in this country after 9-11. The public supported just about anything to stop another attack, which we feared may be imminent. Lawmakers gave carte blanche, often with a wink and a nod, to security services to do what they had to do. If there is another attack, you can bet this attitude will return.

So Obama and his liberal supporters had better hope, no, pray, that we do not suffer a terrorist attack on his watch, and certainly not one that can be tied to his policies. If it becomes known that even one of the terrorists was released from Guantanamo, or that we even just might have gotten information to stop the attack had we used aggressive measures, Obama is toast. And if the attack is bad enough and can be tied to his policies, he might well suffer the fate that Kennedy feared.

Posted by: The Redhunter Author Profile Page at April 27, 2009 9:26 PM

Lots of "ifs" here Tom.
Believe it or not, I share your concern about the American Soldier. They volunteered and deserve every benefit of the doubt. And beyond.

But all the ifs you add weaken any argument you make regarding Obama's policies. IF it were found a thug released from Gitmo knew something and IF we would have used enhance interrogation and IF we didn't and IF something got blown up and IF Obama wasn't president and IF.... I could go on and on.

This sucks because it doesn't move our Nation forward or make us safer. But eventually the blaming will have to stop. I hope President Obama will have the wisdom to recognize when the left is satisfied that we've blamed Bush enough. The right can blame all it wants because the only politician with the gravitas to actually put a stop to the blaming and game playing is Obama. And learn from past mistakes. Avoid them in the future. And just as importantly, learn and build on past success.

We're a ways away from this time.

Posted by: truth101 at April 28, 2009 5:39 PM

You can I can both agree that the blaming should stop. One thing I admired about Bush is that he never blamed Clinton for 9-11, nor did he allow anyone in his administration to do so also.

My position is simple; if Obama wants to change policies fine. Do so and we can debate that. But these "truth commissions" and such must stop. There was no torture. I don't consider waterboarding torture, though I understand that reasonable people can disagree. But what we have is an attempt to criminalize policy differences.

Those promoting these trials and investigations consider themselves holy and pure. They aren't and should watch out themselves. As we chat Predator drones are firing Hellfire missiles at terrorist suspects in Pakistan; this a continuation of Bush Administration policy. We are not at war with Pakistan, there has been no congressional or UN resolution authorizing such action, and many in the Pakistani government (the issue is confused) say that such actions have not been authorized by them either. So the Obama Administration is vulnerable to charges of conducting an illegal war, not only in Pakistan but probably in other places too that we dont' know about. Further, someone in the future can always say that whatever interrogation techniques are currently approved amount to "torture." It is all, to a large extent, all in the eye of the beholder.

As for "IFs"..... IF a shadowy terrorist group based in Afghanistan could recruit 20 people to carry out an act in the United States, IF they could fund it, IF they could get them into the U.S. without being caught, IF they could maintain secret communications without being found out, IF they could get a half dozen of them into flight school, IF they could coordinate to all get on airplanes at the same time, IF they could actually all get on those planes without being identified, IF they could seize the airplanes, IF they could actually fly huge airliners with no previous experience, IF they could navigate them to previously planned targets, IF the passengers didn't revolt on all of the flights, IF the Air Force didn't respond in time, IF they actually hit the buildings without crashing the planes elsewhere first.... nah, too may IFs for that to happen.

Posted by: The Redhunter Author Profile Page at April 30, 2009 7:56 AM

IF somebody that taught flight school wondered why a student didn't want to learn how to land a plane and IF he asked somebody in law enforcement abou that and IF that somebody in law enforcement would have started an investigation And If.... We can If each other to death.


I will take under advisement your investigation point. As for drones over Pakistan, I remember Rush and the right wingers raising hell about missles flying into Afghanistan to get Bin Laden. Pakistan is close to anarchy. I don't that we can trust the Pakistan government to be of any real help in rooting out and killing terrorists.

Posted by: truth101 at April 30, 2009 5:30 PM

Post a comment




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)