Lexington: Is Barack Obama tough enough? | The Economist

The way the American politics shapes the world politics is well known, now the opposition tries to blame Obama for his inactions, while he plays an under cover game of targetting the insurgents with the help of drones and not letting his defence services loose more men.

The article is too focusses on the same issue with a view from both the sides. While we are getting more movies on the subjects and parlimentarians just discussing the issue from past so many years, its Obama who is flexing his muscles against the old age mentality people, who still carry out the massive attacks while in hiding.

It is already said that multiple times of people have lost their lives in the AfPak and Iraq wars than the reson behind it – the 9/11 attack. Well the 911 was also the result of America supporting the Afghans against the Russians, who later formed the Taliban and came against its main mentor.

An easy way to raise a cheer at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington last week was to bash the president for letting terrorists get “lawyered up”. To tumultuous applause, Marco Rubio, a young Republican firebrand from Florida, urged a more robust approach: kill the terrorists or capture them, “get useful information from them” and then “bring them to justice…in front of a military tribunal in Guantánamo, not a civilian courtroom in Manhattan.” An anti-Obama bumper-sticker asked: “So you’re for abortion but against killing terrorists?”

Most of these barbs are bunk. Yes, Mr Obama favours trying Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of September 11th 2001, in a civilian court. But that is not a sign of weakness. Several terrorists were successfully prosecuted in civilian courts under George Bush. And though Mr Obama is willing to admit his country’s failings, he is quite ruthless about blowing its enemies to scraps. American drones fired missiles at suspected Taliban and al-Qaeda leaders in Pakistan’s tribal areas 55 times last year, killing hundreds of jihadists and who knows how many civilians. This year, the killing has accelerated; so far more than a dozen strikes have been reported. Mr Obama orders assassinations at a far brisker pace than George Bush ever did. For some reason, his habit of blowing up alleged terrorists and bystanders from the air causes less global outrage than the smothering of a lone Hamas operative, allegedly by Israel, in a hotel room in Dubai. But whether you think it justified or not, it is hardly evidence that the president is “against killing terrorists”.

After more than a year in power, Mr Obama has still not figured out what to do with terrorist suspects captured on foreign soil. He has not yet fulfilled his promise to close the prison at Guantánamo Bay because he does not know what to do with the remaining inmates. Some are deemed too dangerous to release, but cannot easily be prosecuted. In some cases, evidence was obtained by coercion; in others, through intelligence sources that the administration does not want revealed in court. Mr Obama will not rule out holding them indefinitely without charge, but he knows this makes America look bad. He does not want to add to the problem by bringing more foreign jihadists into American custody. Instead, American forces are either killing them or letting less squeamish allies detain them.

via Lexington: Is Barack Obama tough enough? | The Economist.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s