My response to Phil

Hi Phil!

It was good to catch up…so nice of you to call on my birthday ;-)…I am glad to hear you voted in the last election…somebody needed to vote for McCain, after all! Seriously, I think it is vital that everyone gets his or her say…especially after living in a Republican-dominated decade.

Here we go on your questions:

Why a time line to withdraw from Iraq?

I realize that a timeline presents an excellent opportunity for Al Qaeda and others to create chaos in Iraq. I think you have to evaluate and conclude we made a mistake entering Iraq. We can debate that conclusion if you choose but we obviously strategically and tactically failed to create a safe environment for our sponsored government to become self-sustaining in the years after we invaded.

Because of this failure, we have an untenable position. The tactical surge was successful by locking down parts of the country, particularly Baghdad. The strategic surge failed because Maliki’s government can’t easily solve the lopsided Shite majority. Democracy can’t foster overnight…it took us decades to form the solid 3-branch system we have now.

So, where does that leave us? No one can guarantee success. You think we can be successful if we do not waver. I think it’s foolish to continue spending money and lives on a situation where the end objective is so speculative and elusive. Neither of us can know nor quantify which is right.

In short, we have done what we can to clean up our mess…its time that Iraq determines Iraq’s future.

Why must we apologize for our actions...which I am seeing time and time again?

I think America is the greatest nation on Earth…and FDR through Obama have sung our praises and criticized regimes and governments worldwide that did not live up to our idea of personal freedoms for all and a government for the people & by the people.

9/11 changed it all for many of us. We felt that we had been wronged (we were!) and that the end justified the means (it doesn’t!). In doing so I think we lost sight of what makes us great…that we do hold ourselves to a higher standard and we are not just another country…we are America & we protect the innocent and abused of the world.

The rest of the world viewed our actions after 9/11 first with respect…the entire world supported our invasion of Afghanistan…and then with disdain while we bullied and threatened our allies into supporting our invasion of Iraq. After the WMD fiasco and Abu Gharib disclosure then the world finds out we violated our own citizens’ rights through data mining and finally Gitmo to handle those we do not “rendition” to other countries for torture and interrogation.

The world mocks us for preaching to it for decade after decade…just to throw all that righteous talk out the window when we were thumped on the nose. No nation, not even the U.S., can go it alone. I think we need to get the world back on our side so that we can effectively fight terrorism and rebuild our reputation.

Forgiveness and progress starts with an apology…or several…

Why shut down Gitmo?

Let me answer this with another question…why was Gitmo selected? Why hold the detainees on federal property outside of the United States? For a simple reason…to avoid due process for those held.

Here are the highlights:

· Since October 7, 2001, when the current war in Afghanistan began, 775 detainees have been brought to Guantánamo. Of these, approximately 420 have been released without charge. As of January 2009, approximately 245 detainees remain.
· Three have been convicted of various charges
· Of those still incarcerated, U.S. officials said they intend to eventually put 60 to 80 on trial and free the rest.

In simple math, that is a 0.4 % conviction rate…if the U.S. successfully convicts the max 80 they say they intend to charge (unlikely) then the Government’s conviction rate would jump to 10.7%

In contrast, the federal government enjoys a 92% conviction rate in federal trials on the mainland.

Finally, 54% of those originally detained have been released with no charges and when Gitmo is closed a whopping 89% of original detainees will have been released after YEARS of incarceration.

Here’s the scary part…we are talking military tribunals that these detainees could have been tried in…where obviously the defendant has limited rights compared to a traditional criminal trial.

The math leads one to conclude that many of these individuals were detained with little or no evidence and that is the crux of the problem with Gitmo…how do we not lose ourselves in the fight for terror?

We must have a system for handling those that would harm America in a time of war…I don’t have a problem with military tribunals…but there must be some process for these individuals to be proven guilty…you can’t just lock up someone for years based on the testimony of low-ranking military troops that saw something suspicious in the field.

This is the paradox of terrorism…you must change an open & free society in order to successfully combat the terrorists. The good of the many outweigh the good of the few is fine in theory but the devil is in the details…

Why are politicians getting involved with interrogation tech?

We are not a military dictatorship. The key to a successful democracy is that the public is aware of what the government is doing in a broad sense. I am not naïve enough to believe that there the government doesn’t have all kinds of secret things going on…but these things should not be done at the expense of our principles.

Therefore…the military will always be supervised by civilians…rightfully so!!

What is this inherent distain for the former Pres as it relates specifically to the prosecution and execution on the war on terror?

I think many disdain Bush for a couple of reasons. First, he was obstinate to the point of idiocy. He had clear convictions and stood by them no matter what. He was so inflexible that his white house argued over a year on the exact definition of an insurgency…instead of admitting that Iraq was a cluster-fuck and that we needed to change.

He painted himself into a righteous & absolute corner on so many issues that to admit he was wrong made him admit he was ignorant…so he kept on into the breach…no matter what. For example, his “Brownie…you’re doing a hell of a job!”…as thousands had no food or water in New Oreleans. I think respect is earned and people would have cut him some slack if he just admitted that he fucked up…and fucked up…and fucked upJ. The scary part is I think he believed he was right no matter what!

Secondly, I think he was not inclusive. He felt that because he was elected and had a majority in congress that he did not have to compromise. He did not attempt to deal in measure at all…always the absolute. This works if you stay successful…and creates more disdain as you struggle…which he did in his second term.

Thank God GW was our Pres after 9-11…Good Lord!! He set this country back 50 years!! He was a country bumpkin…did you know he had never left the United States before he was elected?! Talk about a learned man…come on!!!

Anyway…here is my long-winded response…I was gentle this round…I am interested to see your thoughts on my opinions…until then, Jon