Patterico's Pontifications


The Obama Administration Fights the War on Terror

Filed under: Obama,Terrorism — DRJ @ 4:16 pm

[Guest post by DRJ]

The Obama Administration continues to criminalize the War on Terror as John Brennan, assistant to the president for homeland security and counterterrorism, said yesterday that 20% recidivism rate for Guantanamo detainees is not that bad. Today, his boss General Jim Jones followed up by acknowledging that recidivism will “never be zero:”

“Gen. Jim Jones defended Brennan, the president’s top counterterrorism adviser, after Brennan on Saturday compared the U.S. criminal recidivism rate of 50 percent to the one in five terrorists who are released to other nations and return to the battlefield.

“Twenty percent isn’t that bad,” Brennan said.

Jones said the United States has to make sure to do the best it can, but it’s unrealistic to think no terrorist allowed to go free won’t return to battle.

“It’s never going to be zero,” Jones said on “Fox News Sunday.” “We have a long history of having convicted terrorist in federal courts, locking them up for many, many years and doing the best we can, but zero is not going to be the standard in which we try to achieve it.”

I watched the interview. What Jones said is that it will never be zero unless we lock them up for the rest of their lives, something we may have to do with some of the Guantanamo detainees:

“Jones added captured terrorists need to have some due process, but the “big guns” need to be “incarcerated for the rest of their lives.”

Finally, Jones admitted the NSC’s six-month delay in establishing President Obama’s High Value Detainee Interrogation Group was an error, noting “We didn’t support the president as well as he should’ve been supported.”

I thought protecting and supporting the American people was Jones’ job.


24 Responses to “The Obama Administration Fights the War on Terror”

  1. –We didn’t support the president as well as he should’ve been supported–

    We didn’t protect the American people as well as we should have protected them.

    red (7b5f67)

  2. I thought protecting and supporting the American people was Jones’ job.

    That’s what MacArthur said.

    I loathe our CiC. He is a no good, no account, lousy, radical snake. But, he won fair and square.

    Brennan and Jones are/were terrible flag officers. They are pure politicians now.

    The only questions now are when, and how hard, we will be hit.

    Ed from SFV (f6a87d)

    And they are about as good as their ECONOMIC ADVISORS.

    They have no clue.

    gus (b1a191)

  4. sounds like not only has Gen. Jim Jones been serving up the Kool-aid t all comers, he’s been guzzling it himself, when what he really needs is a couple of gallons of STFU.

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  5. Did anyone catch the later part of the 1st half of the show, where Lindsay Graham intimated that he’d be open to closing Guantanamo, as long as the administration agrees to stop treating terrorists as common criminals? I was shocked at that attitude, even coming from a squish like him.

    Dmac (799abd)

  6. Gus–you nailed it–all their advisors are of the same caliber (totally incompetent).
    The question is not if, but when.
    Graham continues to be a buffoon. If you stop treating terrorists as criminals, but close Gitmo, where do you put them? Once you introduce them to the US mainland, I can’t see how they can be denied due process (although it might not happen right away). If you have people you believe are too dangerous to ever release, but have been given Constitutional rights, how can you hold them without trial (since they might prevail and win)?

    Hrothgar (55d26d)

  7. Lindsey Graham loves compromise.

    DRJ (6a8003)

  8. I’m sorry to say this, but Jim Jones has become an embarrassment to the Marines.

    His underling Brennan should be an embarrassment to Jones, but apparently Jones has learned from Obama how to be shameless.

    I will be very plain-spoken: The Barack Obama Administration is soft on terrorism, and it is costing American lifes. Anyone who can’t see that is engaged in willful self-blindness.

    Beldar (782fb0)

  9. lifes –> lives, sorry. I just finished watching the Jones interview on TiVo, and it made me angry. One in five terrorists who we have imprisoned can return to kill more Americans, and the American government is okay with that?!? Jones might as well have just hid behind “Good enough for government work.”

    Beldar (782fb0)

  10. “It’s never going to be zero,” Jones said on “Fox News Sunday.”

    There’s a way to make it zero. Just not an optimal solution, and it goes hand in hand with the post above.

    Some chump (d97978)

  11. No dead terrorist has ever re-engaged.
    Interrogate them, then execute them –
    You got a problem with that?
    But, but, that will just encourage more to commit jihad…
    Pretty soon, they’ll run out of volunteers!

    AD - RtR/OS! (89e14c)

  12. Comment by Beldar — 2/14/2010 @ 8:30 pm

    Jones, like Murtha, is a disgrace to his Service and Uniform!

    AD - RtR/OS! (89e14c)

  13. The Obama Administration is putting the lives of Americans, both civilian and military, at risk in order to protect enemy combatants. From today’s ridiculous Rules of Engagement, to Miranda rights for the Underpants bomber, to trials in criminal courts for KSM and 9/11 jihadis, to refusals to acknowledge the Islamic motivation of Major Hasan at Fort Hood, to closing GITMO. It’s never ending.

    Every time the issue comes up, the Obama Administration’s predisposition is to protect al-Qaeda terrorists at the expense of American life and liberty. Obama can’t come out in the open and embrace Islamic jihad, but he’s down for the cause nevertheless, his actions prove it.

    ropelight (517150)

  14. Comment by ropelight — 2/15/2010 @ 10:15 am

    Following the law and international treaties isn’t always easy.

    Intelliology (00d844)

  15. The Laws of Ground Warfare make terrorists/jihadists such as Abdullmutallab(sic)/etc, unlawfull enemy combatants subject to summary execution.
    That is the only international treaty we need to acknowledge.

    AD - RtR/OS! (89e14c)

  16. Reasoning like that leads to war criminal charges, but I don’t need to tell you that.

    Intelliology (00d844)

  17. The predisposition to protect terrorists isn’t limited to the Obama Administration. They’re taking the lead, of course, but the camp followers are helping out here and there.

    ropelight (517150)

  18. Some of us follow the law even when it isn’t so convenient.

    Intelliology (00d844)

  19. Some of us bother to figure out what “the law” is, and don’t make up stuff.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  20. Good point, SPQR. I’m glad we agree.

    Intelliology (00d844)

  21. Seeing as how the Administration is now concentrating on killing AQ members by missile attack, and is declining to capture and interrogate them, does that make the National Command Authority war criminals?

    AD - RtR/OS! (89e14c)

  22. Intelliology, as I said, some of us don’t make up stuff. So evidently we don’t agree.

    AD, I doubt that Intelliology has considered the implications of the fact that Obama has expanded the Predator strike operations – given that you can’t surrender to a Predator and it pretty much impossible for a Predator to identify armed people from unarmed.

    But that’s typical of the shallowness we’ve come to expect from Intelliology.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  23. Calling his thinking “shallow” gives him too much credit – pond scum has more depth.

    [note: fished from spam filter. –Stashiu]

    AD - RtR/OS! (89e14c)

  24. “Shallow” is giving it too much credit – pond scum has more depth.

    AD - RtR/OS! (89e14c)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3427 secs.