|
Real thugs unworthy of apology
By STEVEN ZAKSpecial to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution To judge from the endless expressions of American penitence, one might think weâd finally seen evil and it is us. The incidents at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq have, as one might expect, provided grist for the leftâs endless America-bashing mill. Thus, for instance, the Los Angeles Timesâ Robert Scheer concluded that "Americans too can be âevildoersâ" and argued further that the nonlethal humiliation of a few terrorists compares with Saddam Husseinâs decades of "torture chambers and rape rooms." Likewise, self-described "human rights" activist Leonard S. Rubenstein in The Washington Post said that the incident "shamed every American," and then went on to fret that the Geneva Convention hasnât been deemed applicable by the Bush administration to the al-Qaida terrorists at Guantanamo, Cuba. Actually, the Geneva Convention does not and ought not apply to unlawful combatants who donât themselves honor them. Iraqi "insurgents" are terrorists, many foreign. Iraqi "cleric" Moqtada al-Sadr and his followers are open allies of Hezbollah and Hamas, which alone would disqualify them from any legal entitlement to humane consideration. Itâs no great surprise that a shame-filled leftist wouldnât buy that, but one might expect otherwise from conservatives. Alas, the usually level-headed Jed Babbin in National Review Online worried too about the Geneva Convention, not to mention "common decency." Ralph Peters in the New York Post did likewise and upped the ante by calling the accused American MPs the "thugs of Abu Gharaib." A strong word, "thugs," better applied to, say, mass murderers such as Saddam or former Hamas terrorists Sheikh Ahmed Yassin and Abdel Aziz al-Rantissi. One can only describe as alarming this new brand of self-flagellating moral equivalence, and the way Americans have finally come together -- to bash ourselves. I suppose everyone is entitled to his own threshold of revulsion. But some might find such an outpouring of loathing and rage more appropriately occasioned by, say, terrorist hatefests where Americans are burned alive and hung from a bridge over the Euphrates. Or by the cold-blooded murders of a pregnant 34-year-old Israeli mother and her four daughters â the youngest age 2 â gunned down point blank by the Islamic allies of our enemies in Iraq. None of this is to argue that Americans ought to torment even irredeemably evil captives, but only to suggest that the incidents at Abu Ghraib may better be explained not by reference to sadism but to frustration. Weâre at war with an evil not seen since the Third Reich, yet we canât seem to wage it without an attitude of remorse. Letâs be clear: Weâre there because Iraqis, collectively, have created a hellhole that threatens the world, not to mention a nightmare for themselves. Nearly 800 Americans have died trying to clean up their mess, and for that we owe no apologies â not for damaged mosques that house terrorists, not for occupied "holy" cities, not for anything weâre trying to accomplish. If the contrite way we wage war makes you apoplectic, imagine what it feels like to the troops on the front lines. Imagine, even, that you were in custody of enemy combatants who would happily burn you alive if the situation were reversed. Do you think you might, just might, be tempted to do a little venting? Steven Zak is an attorney and writer in California.
Posted by: Steven Zak 2004-05-06 |
|
| http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=32384 |