Last Tuesday, Senator Durbin of Illinois spoke about the US detention center at Guantanamo Bay. People are calling him a traitor for comparing the USA to Nazi Germany and other evil regimes. They say his speech puts our troops at risk and encourages terrorism. They say he hates America.
But did he actually compare the USA to Nazi Germany and other evil regimes? No, not exactly. Here’s what he said:
When you read some of the graphic descriptions of what has occurred here — I almost hesitate to put them in the record, and yet they have to be added to this debate. Let me read to you what one FBI agent saw. And I quote from his report:
“On a couple of occasions, I entered interview rooms to find a detainee chained hand and foot in a fetal position to the floor, with no chair, food or water. Most times they urinated or defecated on themselves, and had been left there for 18-24 hours or more. On one occasion, the air conditioning had been turned down so far and the temperature was so cold in the room, that the barefooted detainee was shaking with cold….On another occasion, the [air conditioner] had been turned off, making the temperature in the unventilated room well over 100 degrees. The detainee was almost unconscious on the floor, with a pile of hair next to him. He had apparently been literally pulling his hair out throughout the night. On another occasion, not only was the temperature unbearably hot, but extremely loud rap music was being played in the room, and had been since the day before, with the detainee chained hand and foot in the fetal position on the tile floor.”
If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime — Pol Pot or others — that had no concern for human beings. Sadly, that is not the case. This was the action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners.
He didn’t compare the USA to the Nazis or the Soviets or the Khmer Rouge. He said that if you read that report and didn’t know it was written by an FBI agent, the country you’d think of would not be the United States of America. Okay, maybe not Nazi Germany or the USSR or the Democratic Peoples’ Republic of Kampuchea – El Salvador might have been a better (and less inflammatory) choice – but definitely not the USA. He said that what we’re doing to the detainees at Guantanamo is not in accordance with American values, and that by abandoning American values we are only hurting ourselves. He said this:
To win the war on terrorism, we must remain true to the principles upon which our country was founded. This administration’s detention and interrogation policies are placing our troops at risk and making it harder to combat terrorism.
And he went on to quote Congressman Pete Peterson of Florida, who was a prisoner of war in Vietnam:
From my 6½ years of captivity in Vietnam, I know what life in a foreign prison is like. To a large degree, I credit the Geneva Conventions for my survival. . . . This is one reason the United States has led the world in upholding treaties governing the status and care of enemy prisoners: because these standards also protect us. . . . We need absolute clarity that America will continue to set the gold standard in the treatment of prisoners in wartime.
Is the meaning of “support our troops” restricted to full and uncritical support of the Bush administration’s every action? I hope not. I agree with Senator Durbin – we support our troops best by standing firm on American values and principles. What’s treasonous about that?
Update (22 June 2005): Durbin caves, shames self, cause.
Dick 06/22/05 8:47 AM
Paul,
I was in England when this story broke. Every morning I would get up, drink coffee, read a few English newspapers, and watch the BBC. For the most part, the Blokes had a much more enlightened attitude than in the States. Basically, they saw it as politics as usual where one side misspeaks (they did tend to judge Durbin’s words as a political faux pas) and the other side then reacts all out of proportion to what was actually said.
Make no mistake, Durbin is a smart and savvy politician and knew the reaction he would get. So why did he do it? We will probably find out in the near future.
Personally, I think the Democrats will hang the next election on the anti-war vote. This is not a bad strategy as democracies cannot fight long wars. Was Durbin just testing the waters? I don’t know. But I do know that any anti-war movement that has political viability must become anti-military. That’s just the dynamics of the beast.
Being a cynic, I think Durbin had simply remembered Rule Number Two of politics, which is “Never forget Rule Number One.”
Rule Number One: Do whatever it takes to get elected/re-elected.
Is Durbin a traitor? No way. He is just an American politician playing by the rules.
Paul Woodford 06/22/05 10:08 AM
Dick, welcome back! I think the Democrats’ best strategy is to come out solidly against the war in Iraq. Stand strong on fighting terrorism, stand strong on getting us out of this insanely destructive nothing-to-do-with-terrorism war.
I resist the notion that opposing the war makes one anti-military. Certainly, war supporters are always quick to accuse the opposition of not supporting the troops. But is it true?
Totally agree with you that Dick Durbin is a savvy politician who knew exactly what he was getting himself into – but at the same time I think he said something that needed to be said.
Paul Woodford 06/22/05 12:21 PM
Update: Sen. Durbin caved, and in doing so handed a victory to those who think torturing detainees is worthy of Americans. In the words of Jeanne at Body and Soul:
There’s an understandable assumption on the left now that your courage failed you, that you caved in to enormous pressure. If that’s true, your second speech was not only cowardly, it was astonishingly foolish. Take a look at the response of some of the people who demanded an apology now that they have it. They have nothing but contempt for your “teary-eyed” and “blubbering” apology. You’ve given the kind of people who celebrate everything you’ve fought against one more victory. You’ve made it far easier for them to argue that there is no torture problem, the only problem is Democrats and their overheated rhetoric.
Flying Booger 06/22/05 2:32 PM
I see that the Medium Lobster, on behalf of the 101st Thumbscrew Division, has accepted Sen. Durbin’s apology.
Dick 06/23/05 7:10 AM
Paul,
I hope you are right about separating being anti-war from being anti-military. But given the history of anti-war movements, I just don’t see it happening as it calls for a sophistication and knowledge that is way beyond the average voter.
I think your tripartite strategy for the democrats is a viable one but has one weak leg, which is breaking the link between military action in the Middle East and the war on terrorism. I’m not sure if the Democrats can do that, especially if the current trendings continue. For example, athere is the recent report on terrorism, which reported the incidents of terrorist activity at an all time high. But if you separate out terrorism in Iraq and Kashmir (both tied to Islamic fundamentalists), the rate of terrorist activity is extremely low in the rest of the world. So how will the two sides spin this?
It will make for an interesting campaign.
Flying Booger 06/23/05 1:03 PM
Dick,
If what you are saying – reference people confusing opposition to this war with lack of support for our troops, and, ultimately, with anti-Americanism – is that vermin like Rush Limbaugh will whip up the Stupids and make such confusion inevitable, I cannot disagree. But damnit, I’m going to fight it anyway. This war, that is, and the Stupids too.
As for the Democrats, I’m giving up on them. They continue to make Rush Limbaugh – a laughable but evil buffoon whose hold on a substantial proportion of the public could easily be destroyed by a statesman of principle and intelligence – look good in comparison to them. They set themselves up, over and over, to accusations of gutlessness, selling out, and lack of morality. As Dick Durbin just did.
Back in 2000 I voted for Ralph Nader. Next time around I voted for Kerry, but without any real belief in his capabilities or respect for the man. Next time, if the Democrats still cannot find a leader with guts and beliefs he or she is willing to stand by, I’ll be voting for Nader again.
p.s. I’m really glad you’re back!
Dick 06/24/05 6:55 AM
Paul,
A person should only listen to Rush Limbo as a form of penance. So what have you done wrong? (Okay, I’m trying to be funny.)
But in all seriousness, how do we get people back to a rational discourse?