Churchill and Torture

In last night’s press conference, President Obama used Winston Churchill’s refusal to use torture during WW II, as an example of a courageous leader who stood on moral principles rather than take the easy way out in order to extract information from captured prisoners. To say the least, Obama was being either disingenuous, or ignorant of the differences between the German prisoners of war and the Islamo-fascist terrorists in custody after September 11.

In 1940 the Germans did not posses weapons of mass destruction. President Bush did not know the capabilities of al-Qaeda and their potential to use WMD against targets in the USA. The events of 9-11 had given ample notice of the willingness of terrorists to use any weapons at their disposal. London and Madrid are additional examples of the desire of Muslim terrorists to engage in mass murder.

In addition, in 1940 the prisoners in British hands were soldiers captured while in uniform. Using torture against them would have yielded unimportant information, and would have invited retaliation against captured British soldiers in German camps. No such fear of retaliation exists today. American prisoners in the hands of al-Qaeda or the Taliban are brutally executed, regardless of our behavior or methodology of interrogation.

During World War II, the British knew the locations of German bases, spies were providing information about invasions, the Allies knew the positions of troops and eventually Enigma was decoded. Thus, ordering torture of prisoners would have been unnecessary and counterproductive. I have no doubt that, from what I know about Churchill, had he faced the type of enemy we are facing today, he would have used any means at his disposal to extract information from captured prisoners. Of course, not using torture, but enhanced interrogation techniques. Waterboarding is such a technique.

In conclusion, since Obama has become such a fan of Churchill, he should pay heed to three of his quotes:

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.

You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else.

There is no such thing as a good tax.

The Carter-Obama Corollary

The Jimmy Carter Corollary: A foreign affairs phenomenon that occurs when one powerful nation kowtows to a less powerful one which in return uses this opportunity to kick the powerful nation in the posterior. Named after the 39th president when his genuflection to the Ayatollahs concluded with 55 Americans being held hostage for 444 days.

Some students of history also attribute the invasion of Afghanistan by the USSR to this corollary. Said invasion, in conjunction with the rise of the Iranian clergy led to the rise of Islamism, and al-Qaeda, events for which we are still paying the consequences. And now, once again we are facing this phenomenon that I propose should be renamed the Carter-Obama Corollary.

The first signs of a return to the genuflecting school of politics took place when the US Badminton team was refused entry visas to Iran on February 4, 2009. Since then the US has polished its act, and in an example of extreme courage approached Russia with the proposal that the United States would remove the missile defense system from Europe in exchange for Russia’s help in convincing the Iranians to give up their nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles. Russia response was: “no haggling, just remove the missiles and we will be happy.”

In another act of vision and diplomatic courage, the Obama administration will donate 900 million dollars that we will borrow from China, for rebuilding Gaza. In an insult to the diminishing intelligence of many Americans, Hillary explained that the money would not go to Hamas. I am not aware of anyone in the media asking how this will be prevented. If Hamas, which rules Gaza, has funds for rebuilding infrastructure and we give them money, would it not free said funds for the purchase of weapons and missiles?

I am not disappointed because I expected the worst from the new administration. My fears were confirmed when a bust of Winston Churchill was removed from the Oval Office and sent back to England.

Knowing Barack Obama, I have no doubt that he would be much more comfortable with a bust of Chamberlain.