« Deptartment of Obvious Predictions
The Journalist Who Lifted Iraq’s New Years Spirits: Iraqi News Agency »
Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges
As the Bush Presidency winds down, the debate raging among folks is if the President or his underlings should face prosecution for using torture. During the Christmas holiday, Mort Kondracke stated that for the sake of national unity, President-elect Obama should pass on prosecuting or investigating the Bush Administration for “war crimes” done in the name of the war on terror. His reasoning is that such activities are not done in the name of “justice” but in reality, done in the name of political vengeance.
Kondracke says:
Republicans hated President Clinton and a GOP House impeached him. Many Democrats hate George W. Bush with equal or even greater passion, but they demurred on the idea of impeachment — mainly because the action against Clinton hurt the GOP more than it hurt Clinton.
But now Bush haters are calling for the Obama administration to investigate Bush officials for alleged war crimes and other misdeeds connected with the war on terror.
Obama should make it clear right now that he opposes such action — and also that he opposes the “compromise” idea of a “truth commission” to investigate alleged Bush-era wrongdoing.
The main reason has less to do with “turning the page,” uniting the country and letting bygones be bygones — all good Obama impulses — than with preserving the morale of intelligence professionals in wartime.
He then goes on to say that any investigation or “truth commission” would case interrogators to be too cautious in the future.
I both agree and disagree with Kondracke on this issue. On the one hand, the calls for seeing Dick Cheney in chains are politically motivated, in my opinion. I’m not saying that Cheney isn’t responsible for allowing the US to venture down a road it shouldn’t have gone. I think he’s a bad apple. But I also believe that those who are calling for arrests and the like are not as interested in righting the stain that torture has created on America’s reputation than they are in scoring partisan points. Many of those people never liked Bush and hated him with a passion. Any action that would seek to bring the President down would be seen by many as nothing more than taking down a Republican, and it would tear the nation apart.
But I disagree with Kondracke that we should not hold investigations or commissions to learn what went on. While Kondracke says this isn’t about letting bygones be bygones, that’s just what would happen if Obama allowed to happen. It would allow a future President to understand they could get by international law and other agreements all for the sake of national security.
The phrase “Inter arma enim silent leges” is a latin phrase that roughly translates to “In times of war, the law falls silent.” The question for Obama and for all Americans is if this phrase is true. Does the law fall silent in times of war? Should it?
I can understand that it isn’t easy to try to protect the nation from threats. But the values that make this nation great, can’t simply be silent during times of stress. They have to mean something.
I think that we do need to have some sort of truth telling, to find out what happened, and to figure out ways to prevent such abuses from happening again. That’s what matters, not seeing George Bush or Dick Cheney in chains.
Is it still a gamble? I guess. But to me Kondracke’s gamble is bigger: it would cost America its soul.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
10 Responses to “Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges”
I agree mostly. Finding out exactly what was done, at what cost and with what results is the responsibility of every organization, governmental, business, academic, or charitable. It's called accountability and it is the ONLY way we can learn from mistakes.
As for this statement, “calls for seeing Dick Cheney in chains are politically motivated,” maybe so in some cases, not in others. Aren't laws and prosecution intended to have certain effects? Punish wrongdoers and discourage future criminal acts. Right? If we neither punish nor discourage state-sponsored torture and rape, who the hell are we?
That said, I think the easiest solution is to let some other government(s) prosecute them. There will be many takers, as citizens of lots of countries were kidnapped and tortured–countries with which we have extradition treaties. Let France try them. Then England. Then Canada. Then Austalia, and Turkey. You get the idea. It's not “political” for a Canadian court to prosecute a criminal who kidnapped and tortured one of their citizens.
i have been told there is a native-american phrase that goes something like: “Yes, but their intentions were good.” It is the response given when told something like “They traded small pox laced blankets to kill us, AND took our payment”, or “They broke every treaty they have ever signed with us”, or “they murdered the sacred buffalo so we would starve and drove us to poverty sickness and despair in reservations”, and on and on…
You get the point. Sane people do not intentionally do gravely evil things in the name of evil. rather they wrap up the evil in all kinds of moral justifications. Hitler WAS saving the world from the wicked jew. Bush WAS saving america from the super-powerful, about to destroy destroy democracy any minute now, muslim terrorists. They both were doing it for the one true God.
People do hurt one another, they break laws, and the commit horrendous crimes against humanity. I find it astounding the same people who were making all the proper, legal and just arguments for impeaching clinton for lying about sex UNDER OATH, now claim “equal justice for ALL, is just so impossibly pure a concept, it's execution will harm America in some mysterious way. Because where I sit, letting the most powerful politicians and companies escape criminal prosecution for their crimes because SOME people have convinced themselves they were doing it for the greater good, like small pox in blankets, HARMS AMERICA.
Cinton was was charged with several crimes, and acquitted of all charges but lying under oath. he was punished. The Bush administration list of charged crimes include torture crimes against humanity. The fact you, and many millions more like you, can make arguments against prosecution and punishment of these crimes because the accused is an American president sickens me. it sends a cold chill down my spine. Protecting criminals as an expression of patriotism–ASTOUNDING! Seeking “equal justice for all” is only an expression of hyper partisain loyalty–AMAZING! Can't we all just pretend to prosecute these crimes and call that punishment–STUPEFYINGLY. UNCONSTITUTIONALLY. CRAZY
YES, I understand your intentions are good.
I agree with Greendreams–
If these politicians know that there are no consequences, there will be a bad precedent set for those who aim to abuse their constitutionally allotted powers. I am not thrilled about seeing Cheney perp-walked, but I am furious at those like Kondracke who believe that nothing, in effect, should be done by Obama.
I could have definitely lived without the details of Clinton's tawdry foibles- but face it- they affected him and his family much more than they did our national security.
Also am disgusted by AG Mukasey, who has refused public access to Cheney's Grand Jury interviews in the Plame matter. Mukasey is obviously protecting his higher ups Gonzo style.
After the damage that has been done to this country, the very least we deserve is the truth. If laws have been broken- why treat public servants any differently than anyone else? Even Clinton lost his law license for 5 years for perjury and obstruction— and these bozos appear to have committed far worse abuses of their offices.
The level of hubris that both Bush and Cheney exhibited mandates their prosecution if nothing else. And this falls in agreement with previous posters. If we do not prosecute them, we will be rolling out the red carpet for future totalitarian regimes to sieze our country. What would stop them? A slap on the wrist?
Further, the world community is looking to the US to mend its relations by punishing those culpable here at home. If we don't, we are in effect “agreeing with and condoning” the human atrocities and lies brought about by the actual terrorists: Bush and Cheney themselves…and their friends at BigOIl..
Regardless of what Kondracke or any other Bush apologists and defenders say, there is by no stretch of the (sane) imagination any similarity whatsoever between Clinton's personal sexual transgression–including his lying under oath about it–and the abominable crimes, shredding of the Constitution, and thrashing the rule of law committed by Bush and his cronies.
Now, once we have set that little bone of contention aside, we can inteligently and objectively discuss what should or should not be done about the Bush administration most serious offenses.
I have to say, disgusted as I and so many were with Bill Clinton, what Bush and Cheney did was obviously worse. While I don't believe it would have necessarily been likely in 2004, were Bill Clinton running against George Bush this year (for a third consecutive Bush term, in today's 2006-and-later environment), you know who would win. (And substituting Jeb in an early run in 2008 would not change the result.)
There is one simularity, lying under oath, for whatever reason you may have, is a crime, just like torture. It would be insane to say bill clinton get the same penalty as people who torture, clearly, what we see developing is just that perversion of justice.
But, I do think it instructive to compare the clinton impeachment to what is happening now. You either believe in the rule of law, or you don't. Shoving the absolute unbending vigilance to “equal justice under the law” in the face of bush apologists would be effective argumentative tool for persuading non-partisans to do the right thing. Because, you know, it's the law.
Yes, sixlegs– I agree -that's why we have laws. They are supposed to be applied equally. We all remember how many Holier-than-thou Republicans claimed that they regretted going after the President in 1998, but they felt duty-bound to uphold the “rule of law”.
When Gonzales, and now Mukasey, were so obviously protecting Bush and Cheney, and others in their administration, from the consequences of their actions, I never heard a peep from any of these upstanding, self-righteous individuals.
http://groups.myspace.com/antimasonparty
http://groups.myspace.com/antimasonparty