Osama bin Laden's Death a Vindication of Bush Administration Counterterrorism Policies
The majority of the credit for the operation that killed Osama bin Laden goes to the Obama administration. But it is also a vindication of the Bush administration's terrorism policies and shows that success comes from the continuity of policy, not its rejection (as Obama has tried for the last two years). According to anonymous government sources in the press today, it was the interrogation of al Qaeda leaders, which led to the identification of the courier, who led us to bin Laden's hiding place. Reports suggest that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed himself may have given up the identity of the courier.
Imagine what would have happened if the Obama administration had been running things back in 2002-08. It would have given Miranda warnings and lawyers to KSM and other al Qaeda leaders, no Gitmo, no military commissions -- instead civilian trials on US soil with all of the Bill of Rights benefits for terrorist defendants. There would have been no enhanced interrogation program, no terrorist surveillance program, and hence no intelligence mosaic that could have given us the information that produced today's success. In the war on terror, it is much easier to pull the trigger -- the truly hard task is to figure out where to aim. Obama can take credit, rightfully, for the success today, but he owes it to the tough decisions taken by the Bush administration.
- Comment (19)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
Comments :
Oct '10
Re: Osama bin Laden's Death a Vindication of Bush Administration Counterterrorism Policies
Absolutely. It would be the height of partisan churlishness to deny the Obama administration the credit for eliminating OBL. He has definitely surpassed the Clinton record of fecklessness.
However anyone who gives Obama credit must also credit the policies of the preceding administration which made Obama's success possible.
Dec '10
Re: Osama bin Laden's Death a Vindication of Bush Administration Counterterrorism Policies
And yet, is it not a fact that you, Professor Yoo, are still being threatened with prosecution for having prepared the basis for the activities that (presumably) led to the identification of Bin Laden's compound?
Nov '10
Re: Osama bin Laden's Death a Vindication of Bush Administration Counterterrorism Policies
Any thoughts that perhaps, bin Laden was outed by various factions within the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt, Tunisia, Libya and Pakistan in a good old-fashioned power struggle?
Edited on May 2, 2011 at 7:21pmJun '10
Re: Osama bin Laden's Death a Vindication of Bush Administration Counterterrorism Policies
Depends on which policies. I don't care what Bush did to them, but what he did to us as American citizens is indefensible.
Jan '11
Re: Osama bin Laden's Death a Vindication of Bush Administration Counterterrorism Policies
Robert E. Lee
Depends on which policies. I don't care what Bush did to them, but what he did to us as American citizens is indefensible. · May 2 at 8:23pm
What did he do to us?
Feb '11
Re: Osama bin Laden's Death a Vindication of Bush Administration Counterterrorism Policies
Now we can go the Holder way. Let it be known that KSM gave him away. Then have a civilian trial of KSM. If he gets off, send him back to his "friends" who will give him what's good for him.
Jun '10
Re: Osama bin Laden's Death a Vindication of Bush Administration Counterterrorism Policies
Klaatu
What did he do to us? · May 2 at 8:25pm
The PATRIOT Act springs immediately to mind, the TSA, illegal wiretapping. American citizens face humiliating, unnecessary attacks on their personal freedoms every time they transit an airport in the name of security theater, yet any armed group with a pound of dope and a gun can walk or drive cross the American border. So what did we give up our freedoms for?
Jan '11
Re: Osama bin Laden's Death a Vindication of Bush Administration Counterterrorism Policies
Robert E. Lee
The PATRIOT Act springs immediately to mind, the TSA, illegal wiretapping. American citizens face humiliating, unnecessary attacks on their personal freedoms every time they transit an airport in the name of security theater, yet any armed group with a pound of dope and a gun can walk or drive cross the American border. So what did we give up our freedoms for? · May 2 at 10:02pm
Which portion of the PATRIOT Act do you object to? The TSA may be a great example of an over reaching and ineffective bureaucracy but I'm not sure they are an existential threat to our way of life. In fact, on the list of over reaching and ineffective bureaucracies, it is pretty far down on the list.
As for 'illegal wiretaps', there weren't any.
Edited on May 3, 2011 at 5:17amMay '10
Re: Osama bin Laden's Death a Vindication of Bush Administration Counterterrorism Policies
I came here looking for a post by Mr. Yoo, and a great one it was! Turns out that the enhanced interrogation techniques so slandered by the liberal media, actually provided the intel necessary to dislodge OBL from his perch atop al Qaida. Imagine that?!
I have for many years maintained the position that history would view George W. Bush much more favorably than the prevailing zeitgeist of his day may otherwise suggest. Turns out "history" was not as far into the future as I initially thought.
Round of applause for Ricochet's own John Yoo. It must have been difficult to endure the past few years of nonsensical opposition. Vindication must be gratifying indeed.
Question for Ricochet -- will Obama be taken to task for ideologically opposing the very techniques that provided this intel, or given a pass by the media? Do we have a presidential candidate that will take him to task in the debates?
Jun '10
Re: Osama bin Laden's Death a Vindication of Bush Administration Counterterrorism Policies
Not according to Federal Judge Vaughn R. Walker: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/01/us/01nsa.html The patriot act allowed illegally wiretapping the telephones of American citizens, through the telephone exchanges. That the telcos were later excused of their crimes by Bush does not change the fact that the crimes occurred.
And National Security Letters (NSLs) are not my favorites. Under the PATRIOT Act the government can show a form letter, no warrant needed despite the supposed guarantees of the Fourth Amendment, to go on hunting expeditions for any information about anything concerning individual American citizens, and it is not only illegal to refuse to cooperate but it is illegal to even speak of the event.
I'm neither eloquent nor succinct enough to run through my fears in 200 characters or less so I'll direct you to “The Patriot Act and Civil Liberties: A Closer Look” by Mr. Howard A. Johnston, a US Army War College strategy research project. You'll have to Google the title to reach the paper.
Jan '11
Re: Osama bin Laden's Death a Vindication of Bush Administration Counterterrorism Policies
Robert E. Lee
Not according to Federal Judge Vaughn R. Walker: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/01/us/01nsa.html The patriot act allowed illegally wiretapping the telephones of American citizens, through the telephone exchanges.....
For the record, the Patriot Act plays no role in this issue.
With all due respect to Judge Walker (and given his behavior in the Prop 8 case I'm not sure how much is due), his opinion is outweighed by a number of appellate court decisions. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review held in 2009 that telecom companies must cooperate with the government to intercept international phone calls and e-mail of American citizens suspected of being spies or terrorists. ((http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/16/washington/16fisa.html)
Also, in 2002 they stated, "The [Fourth Circuit in the Truong case], as did all the other courts to have decided the issue, held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information…. We take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President’s constitutional power."
Jun '10
Re: Osama bin Laden's Death a Vindication of Bush Administration Counterterrorism Policies
As to the president's authority I have to respectfully disagree, learned legal minds notwithstanding. We have a Constitution and it does not say our laws are the laws of the land...except when the president disagrees. When congress disagrees they can create an amendment and, after due public consideration and ratification, change the constitution. This is proper. Saying the president has the power to suspend the constitution for secret reasons with no consultations more than tame legal experts means to me there is no constitution.
People only have "rights" when they can protect those rights. When the government we hire can take those rights away from us without our knowledge or consent, they aren't really rights, the just privileges, which depend solely on the whim of whomever is in charge at the moment.
An aside here, I appear to be bitter and impatient with Republicans and conservatives in many of my posts. This is not because I don't like Republicans or conservatives, but because I expect better that what I sometimes see.
Jan '11
Re: Osama bin Laden's Death a Vindication of Bush Administration Counterterrorism Policies
This is not an issue of the President disagreeing with what the Constitution says but, honestly with you refusing to acknowledge that the Constitution actually says what it does. Article II of the Constitution is part of the Constitution and the powers a President exercises under it are just as legitimate as those Congress does when it passes legislation or votes to amend the Constitution. The President is empowered explicitly to be commander in chief of the armed forces and as such he has the power to conduct surveillance of our enemies. Tell me, do you object to border crossing searches? If not, why do you believe your electronic communication is entitled to a greater level of protection than your written communication as it crosses a border?
Jun '10
Re: Osama bin Laden's Death a Vindication of Bush Administration Counterterrorism Policies
I object to the president treating American citizens as enemies. When the government lumps American citizens who disagree with it's policies in with armed foreign invaders, there is something wrong with the government.
I do disagree with border crossing searches as they are performed. Carry a pound of drugs across the Mexican border and you get a free pass (pick a night, any night, and you can observe illegals crossing our southern border without intrusive TSA constitutionally questionable searches) but be a citizen and try to bring a laptop through an airport and you have a very high chance of being stopped, searched, and your laptop confiscated or stolen.
There are philosophical questions concerning the nuances of the Constitution and how it is observed by the sitting government and the various parties. Then there are the practical questions about events that actually take place. I'm a bottom line kind of guy in this respect. I am afraid every time I go to an airport that my name will appear on a secret list that I won't be able to get off of, to find out how I got there, to have any recourse.
Jun '10
Re: Osama bin Laden's Death a Vindication of Bush Administration Counterterrorism Policies
I remember not that long ago the TSA asked the VA for a list of names of veterans because they considered veterans to be a domestic terrorist threat. I'm not sure anymore whether to believe in my government or fear it, whether exercising my Constitutional right to free speech, as amended openly and secretly, will bring a SWAT team kicking down my door in the middle of the night and having me carted away to some secret location, to wonder if my citizenship itself has been stripped away because I've been declared an "enemy combatant" on the word of who knows who because the laws are secret. Not that I'd understand them even if they weren't. It's a shame it takes a hired gunslinger (lawyer) to keep you safe on the street anymore.
I believe my written communication as well as my electronic communication has absolutely no protection, whether it crosses a border or not, and that's a shame for someone who spent a lifetime supporting and defending the Constitution of the United States.
Jan '11
Re: Osama bin Laden's Death a Vindication of Bush Administration Counterterrorism Policies
There is no evidence that the President did treat any American citizens as enemies or lump anyone who merely disagrees as a foreign invader. You are tilting at windmills.
How many laptops have Customs stolen?
When did TSA ask the VA for a list of veterans?
Where are you getting this stuff?
For the record, your communications are entitled to no protections as they cross the border.
Jun '10
Re: Osama bin Laden's Death a Vindication of Bush Administration Counterterrorism Policies
Memorandum for William J. Haynes II, General Counsel, Department ..
http://www.justice.gov/olc/docs/memo-aba-taskforce.pdf
Detention of American Citizens as Enemy Combatants
www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL31724.pdf
United States Citizens Detained As "ENEMY Combatants": The Right To Counsel As A Matter Of
Ethics
http://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1283&context=wmborj&seiredir=1#search=%22stripping+citizenship+from+enemy+combatants%22
Bill Lets U.S. Citizens Be Held as Enemy Combatants
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6167856
Joe Lieberman introducing bill to strip suspected terrorists' citizenship
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/05/joe-lieberman-introduces-bill.html
The key here is that proof of wrongdoing is not needed, nor is there recourse for the loss of one's citizenship. A government official simply says someone is an enemy combatant and you become a non-person, no proof required.
Jun '10
Re: Osama bin Laden's Death a Vindication of Bush Administration Counterterrorism Policies
TSA considers barring veterans with mental health issues from commercial flights
http://homelandsecuritynewswire.com/tsa-considers-barring-veterans-mental-health-issues-commercial-flights
TSA Looks to VA and DoD for "Mental Defectives"
http://www.vawatchdog.org/milcom/tsalookstovaanddodformentaldefectives.htm
Mental health labels are also something applied by government officials for which there is no real appeal. Merely suggest someone “isn't right” and there is no way to prove otherwise. God himself could come down and decree a person's sanity but there would always be doubt, because, as we all know, the government doesn't lie.
Where are you getting this stuff? Various news lists and sites I visit. I consider Ricochet a news site for that matter.
For the record, your communications are entitled to no protections as they cross the border. For the record? Why not? And I'm concerned with my communications when they don't cross borders as well. Though I'm sure that some lawyer will argue than any form of electronic communications could conceivably be routed through other countries at some time during transmission and are therefore fair game.
Jan '11
Re: Osama bin Laden's Death a Vindication of Bush Administration Counterterrorism Policies
Sorry, been away for a few days.
You seem to have stolen a few bases here. We were discussing the designation of US citizens as enemy combatants in the context of the foreign intelligence surveillance program and you jumped to an overall discussion of the president's ability to designate US citizens as enemy combatants. My point, that there is no evidence that there were any US citizens designated as combatants specifically to target their electronic communications stands. Attempting to conflate the two issues borders on dishonest.
Next, I would hope you are not arguing that US citizenship immunizes someone from being an enemy combatant. That would be an argument with no basis in laqw or history.
You also seem to have shifted your argument from TSA asking for a list of all veterans so they can put them on a list to a list of vets adjudicated as mentally ill. Whether you agree or not that is a very big distinction.