Driving into work today I was listening to a local radio station and every 20 minutes or so they give the news headlines. One of this morning’s headlines was a doozy, “Barack Obama, yesterday, signed an executive order stopping the torture of terror suspects...” I literally yelled at my radio. Whatever happened to truth in journalism, to accuracy and honesty? Listen people, it is fairly common knowledge that torture occurred in the Bush administration, but that depends on what your definition of torture is. Waterboarding, in my book, is likely torture. Waterboarding ended something like 3 years ago. But what happened at Abu Ghraib, a controversy blown way out of proportion, was not. Inappropriate and regrettable, yes, but not torture. Besides that had NOTHING to do with Bush or his administration. That would have happened under Gore or Obama or anyone else. The thing is torture has not occurred in at least the last three years. Simply detaining a person in fairly squalid condition and then interrogating them is not torture. Obama’s executive order did not end torture, torture was not occurring in the first place.

So what exactly did Obama do in his executive order. Well there were three things: the closure of Guantanamo Bay detention facility within a year, instituting new interrogation policies, and creating a task force on how to deal with detainees. Though the most frustrating comment he made was when he said his administration would “abide by the rule that says we don’t torture”. It is not frustrating because I disagree, I don’t and I hope we abide by that rule it is frustrating in that it implies torture has been going on at Gitmo continuously under the Bush administration. It wasn’t. The people there were treated humanely, international rights groups had regular access to observe the conditions. Were they great conditions and comfortable? Of course not, but their living conditions did not constitute torture.

In regards to the closing of Gitmo, how I feel about it will largely deoend on the outcome. If the terrorists held there are prosecuted and locked away and/or executed according to rule of law, it is fine with me. If Obama’s administration deports most of them or just lets them go I will have a huge issue. That would show that he does not take our security seriously and he would have weakened the country.

What concerns me though is that there is an apparent lack of foresight. So he signs an order demanding that Gitmo be closed but gives no recommendation on what to do with the prisoners. So he just created a problem on an issue that wasn’t broken and has no solution. What kind of leadership is that? Sure he has called for a task force to figure this out, but he has been campaigning on closing Gitmo for over 3 years, how did he not create a solution in that time? What this tells me is this is an act not based on fact or reality, but based on political expediency and making a constituency of his happy. For me that has no place in the Presidency, whether Republican or Democrat.

The Gitmo issue is one that stirs the passion on both sides of the political aisle. The website, Politico.com, has a daily debate on various issues and the current one speaks about this particular problem. A few of the arguments I agreed with, most upset me. But the best comment was from S.E Cupp an author and columnist. She sums the issue up the best:

“Closing Gitmo” has become a dividing wall between the left and the right over the past year, and Obama took up the cause during the election because it would win him favor with his far-left constituents. “Closing Gitmo” is a symbol of that polarizing “choice between our safety and our ideals,” as Obama said in his inaugural speech. But “closing Gitmo” is really just a red herring. Close it...who cares? The real issue, of course, is what next? Barack Obama’s offered no real-world solutions as to how to deal with enemy combatants and suspected terrorists. Canada just turned Bill Ayers away at the border...if we think our allies are going to take our detainees, we’re crazy. “Closing Gitmo” is the easy part. What’s next is what really matters.

She is absolutely right. Gitmo is a red herring. It is just a symbolic gesture. What happens with the detainees is key. Do they get sent to another country that happens to be an ally? Not a chance, Most likely they will be sent to a facility in the United States. But what states’ people are going to want those people near their homes. The perfect thing about Gitmo was that it was surrounded by ocean and Castro’s Cuba; not a wal-mart and interstate highway. What happens if one of these guys gets off and stays int he United States or returns home and then launches an attack against the U.S.? Obama is finished, especially if the detainee either escaped or was released in the U.S.

Also, why do people continue to think that the detainees should be afforded the same rights as American citizens? They don’t. Prisoners of War or these detainees are not Americans. The laws dictating their treatment are not the same as America’s rules for criminal justice. So why do people insist they be given them? It is utterly ridiculous. These people are not common criminals, they are terrorists and the left in our country insist on treating them with kid gloves. It is ridiculous. But again, if they are tried and found guilty and locked away, it is fine with me if they close Gitmo. Just do it because it is the right thing for the country and not for political expediency. Bradley Blakeman in the Politico article stated:

The President needs to get all the facts and listen first and foremost to the professionals and not the politicians, before acting too hastily. The President should not make decisions based on what the public “wants” because the public doesn’t know the facts.

The current detention and interrogation policies should be reviewed and if after review, there are changes to be made, then make them based on policy not politics. The fact that we have not been attacked since 9/11, has very little to do with luck and everything to do with prevention, intervention, and interrogation. The risks of acting politically and at the expense of sound policy and results, will make us more vulnerable to attack and weaken our intelligence capabilities. As far as the detainees are concerned, we need to try them, or deport them ASAP.

He is exactly right. Be deliberate, not haste Mr. President. If you run your Presidency based on public opinion, like Clinton did, you will never be anything more than a mediocre President.