Ash Carter and the Bad Guys

If you were U.S. Secretary of Defense Ash Carter and were asked to certify release packets for 52 of the “worst of the worst” unlawful combatant Islamists, what would YOU do?

Sec. Carter must certify that these detainees, still being held at the U.S. military detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, are not a threat to re-enter the Global War on Terror.

The administration of Barack Obama is already in a 30 percent recidivism deficit when it comes to released detainees rejoining the fight, but that’s only the 200 or so repeat jihadi’s we KNOW ABOUT.

663 detainees have been released from Gitmo, none have been executed, beheaded, hacked to death, blown up, dragged naked and lifeless through the streets or BURNED ALIVE. Yet the White House continues its story that maintaining the military detention facility at Gitmo is a “recruiting tool” for the bad guys.

What bad guys?

The President can’t even bring himself into reality by NAMING the threat: Islamists, jihadis, unlawful combatants.

He will drone them, even those who are American citizens, sure as you please.

He doesn’t want to CAPTURE them, although the coalition has captured its first Islamic State member (that we know of), and has sequestered him somewhere in Iraq. Here we go again.

Months ago, during a raid on high level Islamic State member Abu Sayyaf’s compound in Syria, the U.S. captured the man’s wife, Umm Sayyaf, but since then not a peep on her status (detainee, POW, protected person, war criminal?), or on her whereabouts.

By the way, do we really know where the Taliban Five are? Exchanged for U.S. Army soldier and suspected deserter, Bowe Bergdahl and promised to be let go after one year of captivity, these five high value detainees are nowhere on the radar screen.

Smelling something rotten yet?

Dealing with Obama and the War on Terror is like taking your perfectly good automobile to a dishonest mechanic for an inspection. As sure as there is morning dew on spring grass in Kentucky, they will find SOMETHING wrong with that car. And usually not one thing, many things, that cause you consternation and lots of money.

In Obama’s case, “If it ain’t broke don’t fix it” is a foreign language.

We’ve heard the excuses, “recruiting tool,” “not who we are,” and now, according to Lisa Monaco, Homeland Security Advisor to President Obama, “This is not something the president wants to turn over to his successor.” As if Obama gave a rat’s rear end about his successor, “Killery” Rodham Clinton, or no.

Currently, beyond the Secretary of Defense’s dilemma, there is squabbling in Washington over just exactly WHERE to put these bad guys within the Continental United States.

Remember trying to fix a car that ain’t broke? Well who in Congress do you think wants to deal with the folks back home about why they picked their neck of the woods to put the most serious of bad guys? That’s right, NOBODY.

“Not in my backyard” has a very special meaning when talking about Gitmo detainees.

One of the best reasons we chose Gitmo in the first place was its seclusion and security.

Think about it, communist country, island, U.S. Marines on the perimeter overlooking a mined free-fire zone, bay waters and beyond patrolled by the U.S. Navy AND the U.S. Coast Guard, electronic surveillance below, on top and above, helicopter and fighter jet coverage, satellites; it just gets silly how safe and secure the place is.

No hope of escape is a powerful psychological tool with regard to convincing these guys that unless they cooperate they will NEVER be released. What hurts is that most of them have been released, which wouldn’t be a big deal if they weren’t all prone to repeating what got them there in the first place – waging holy war on anyone not like them.

So, back to poor Mr. Carter. Be careful what you wish for.

The Secretary of Defense, in his confirmation hearing, said he would resist pressure to release Gitmo detainees who did not meet the release criteria.

The President is asking him to not only release a few of the least potentially dangerous detainee left there, but ALL of the remaining detainees deemed by his hand-picked panel to be eligible for release.

The rules have changed so much that what was first basketball is looking more and more like baseball!

Just over 73 years ago the U.S. executed unlawful WWII combatants. Eight German saboteurs were captured dry foot on U.S. soil (Long Island, New York, and Florida). Within about five weeks they were denied habeas corpus rights, tried by military commission and then six of the eight were executed by electric chair.

Oh, and none of the eight ever hurt anyone or damaged any property. They simply broke the Law of War and Geneva Conventions and then were prosecuted as war criminals (spies). They weren’t wearing uniforms and had plans and the means to kill and destroy military and civilian targets. Case closed.

But the current dilemma is a manufactured problem, and just like a dishonest mechanic, the Obama administration is looking at Gitmo as pure profit in the political arena. Although Gitmo is legal, ethical, moral and still the best place for unlawful combatant Islamists who want to kill us, Obama and company are treating it matter-of-factly to the point of absurdity.

Clifford Sloan, the former Special Envoy for Guantánamo Closure at the State Department, recently told The Daily Beast. “We should promptly transfer all of those approved for transfer, and, once we do that, the entire process of closing Guantánamo will be far more manageable.”

What about the REASON we opened Gitmo in the first place? Does ANYBODY remember 9/11/2001?

Tell me then, why are we still releasing those who could have been lawfully killed on the battlefield?

Hold your ground, Mr. Carter, lest your legacy be that of the one who authorized the release and certified the false civility of the next 9/11-style jihadi.

Advertisements

HOW COULD SACRIFICING ONE’S LIFE FOR 50 OTHER HUMAN BEINGS NOT BE WORTHY OF THE MEDAL OF HONOR?

Imagine this, if you can: you’re a Marine, stationed at a check point at the entrance of a Forward Operating Base in Ramadi, Iraq. Your mission is to protect the base and check every incoming vehicle and personnel.

It’s hot, it’s boring, and with each incoming person and truck you are expected to be alert, professional and vigilant, because  death could be lurking behind innocent looking eyes. There are 31 American Marines and 23 Iraqi police behind you, depending on you to do your job.

Then, one truck ignores the signs and shouts, the flares and warning shots to slow down and stop. The Iraqi police flee the scene after detecting extreme danger. But you, instead of fleeing, bear down on your weapon and fire it cyclically, as you were trained to do, aiming and striking center of mass on the incoming threat. The vehicle finally stops, mere feet from your position. Then, it hits: the concussion blast from a 2,000 pound vehicle-borne improvised explosive device.

For his actions on April 22, 2008 day, 19-year-old Marine Cpl. Jordan C. Haerter, and his battle buddy, Cpl. Jonathan Yale, received the Navy Cross, among other posthumous awards.

Military Honors: How You Can Help Recognize an American Hero

The highest ranking officials have mentioned him in speeches, including this quote from President Barrack Obama on Jan. 27, 2009 at Camp Lejeune, N.C.:

Semper Fidelis: it means always being faithful, to the Corps, and to the country and to the memory of fallen comrades like Corporal Jonathan Yale and Lance Corporal Jordan Haerter.

And this from Gen. James T. Conway, Commandant of the Marine Corps, in his 234th Marine Corps birthday video message, holding Haerter and Yale up as ideal examples of “carrying on a legacy of valor.”

There is a petition now, initiated by loved ones of Jordan to put in motion a process for him and Jonathan to receive the recognition they truly deserve: a Medal of Honor. Since the beginning of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, only 12 service members have received the Medal of Honor, seven of which were posthumously awarded.

Haerter’s mother, JoAnn Lyles said in a recent interview regarding the White House petition, that she would “certainly support an appropriate review for a higher award.” But also said, “I don’t want to push for it if it’s not warranted.”

How could sacrificing one’s life for 50 other human beings not be worthy of the Medal of Honor, the highest tangible recognition of valor America has to offer?

There is probably no honor that could adequately memorialize or quantify the sacrifices made by Haerter and Yale that hot April day in 2008, but the Medal of Honor would help preserve their memory and their actions to the highest possible degree. This would give an added level of comfort to their families, loved ones and comrades, and preserve for future generations of Americans the idea that such sacrifices will not be forgotten and will never be marginalized.

If you agree then maybe we could all make a difference by signing the White House petition via Change.org. The petition does not authorize the award for the men; it would initiate a process whereby the President could decide to ask for a review for the award.

It seems the least we can do to honor the last full measure of these young men’s lives, which they gave willingly for each of us, as well as for 50 of their colleagues that day.

It’s easy to sit back and simply watch the world go by and tsk-tsk this or that and say, “someone else can do something for these young men,” but why would a red-blooded American patriot let someone else take on a responsibility we all have, individually to do whatever we can for those who did more for us than we could ever do for them?

Sign. You won’t regret it, and maybe down the road someday, if the medal is awarded, you could be one of those who can stand tall and say you had a small but significant part in it.

Semper Fidelis.