Spring Break
Cheney and Obama squabble over country's safety
David Youseff
Issue date: 6/5/09 Section: Ed-Op
It has been almost six months since Barack Obama became U.S. president, and in that time the GOP politicians have been struggling to remain significant and to defend or disassociate themselves from the Bush administration. One of the staunchest defenders of the old administration's policies is former Vice President Dick Cheney. Recently he and President Obama had a disagreement in which Mr. Cheney asserted that the Bush administration had made the country safer. He claimed that our new president has not only made superficial changes, but actually is also making the country unsafe. To be exact, Cheney said the closing of Guantanamo Bay was "flatly contrary to the national security interests of the United States." In retort the very same day Obama delivered a speech complaining that the Bush administration has left a "mess."
Even within the GOP, Cheney's comments are not completely accepted. Tom Ridge stated to CNN: "I disagree with Dick Cheney … Waterboarding is a matter of debate, but it's no longer an issue. Debate around memos and waterboarding (doesn't) make us less safe." Even more important is the belief system of those on the front line. A former military interrogator, who wishes to be called "Matthew Alexander," recently stated that the techniques being used at Guantanamo had cost hundreds of American soldiers their lives, if not thousands. Alexander said, "At the prison where I conducted interrogations, we heard day in and day out, foreign fighters who had been captured state that the number one reason that they had come to fight in Iraq was because of torture and abuse, what had happened at Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib."
Cheney stated that the use of "advanced interrogation techniques" had only been used as a last ditch effort against high knowledge dangerous suspects and that one of the three people who has been subjected to this was Khalid Sheikh Muhammed. Muhammed was one of the masterminds of the 9/11 attacks, and also was responsible for the beheading of Daniel Pearl. While this is true and can be understood, the issue in my mind isn't this act, it is the power that we are not even sure of what happened there. Since when has the price of security been the right to understand how those who protect us do so?
This debate will only be solved by time, as Obama has to figure out where and how to implement his plan of relocating the detainees so they can be put on trial. Focus should shift to the changes that the president has promised to implement that have not only been postponed but also have become completely invalidated. With Obama's increase in wiretapping he has been increasing the funding to para-military police forces and abusing power within our border. Benjamin Franklin once said, "Those who would give up essential Liberty to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." I have to agree, and wherever you stand on this issue the knowledge that this power was even allowed should be alarming.
David Youseff is a sophomore majoring in electrical engineering. He can be reached at op-ed@thetriangle.org.
Even within the GOP, Cheney's comments are not completely accepted. Tom Ridge stated to CNN: "I disagree with Dick Cheney … Waterboarding is a matter of debate, but it's no longer an issue. Debate around memos and waterboarding (doesn't) make us less safe." Even more important is the belief system of those on the front line. A former military interrogator, who wishes to be called "Matthew Alexander," recently stated that the techniques being used at Guantanamo had cost hundreds of American soldiers their lives, if not thousands. Alexander said, "At the prison where I conducted interrogations, we heard day in and day out, foreign fighters who had been captured state that the number one reason that they had come to fight in Iraq was because of torture and abuse, what had happened at Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib."
Cheney stated that the use of "advanced interrogation techniques" had only been used as a last ditch effort against high knowledge dangerous suspects and that one of the three people who has been subjected to this was Khalid Sheikh Muhammed. Muhammed was one of the masterminds of the 9/11 attacks, and also was responsible for the beheading of Daniel Pearl. While this is true and can be understood, the issue in my mind isn't this act, it is the power that we are not even sure of what happened there. Since when has the price of security been the right to understand how those who protect us do so?
This debate will only be solved by time, as Obama has to figure out where and how to implement his plan of relocating the detainees so they can be put on trial. Focus should shift to the changes that the president has promised to implement that have not only been postponed but also have become completely invalidated. With Obama's increase in wiretapping he has been increasing the funding to para-military police forces and abusing power within our border. Benjamin Franklin once said, "Those who would give up essential Liberty to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." I have to agree, and wherever you stand on this issue the knowledge that this power was even allowed should be alarming.
David Youseff is a sophomore majoring in electrical engineering. He can be reached at op-ed@thetriangle.org.
Be the first to comment on this story