Obama's and Cheney's Dueling Realities on National Security

The two faced off on closing the prison at Guantánamo Bay and harsh interrogation techniques

May 26, 2009 RSS Feed Print

It was a remarkable moment for Washington and the nation—the high-profile clash of two diametrically opposed visions of national security and how to keep America safe.

President Barack Obama, in a speech Thursday at the National Archives, described a world that is best handled with reason, restraint, and common sense, and where traditional American values of respect for the law, openness, and opposition to torture still matter.

On the other hand, former Vice President Dick Cheney, in a speech delivered at the American Enterprise Institute a few minutes after Obama's, painted a darker, more dangerous world, where policymakers must plan for the worst and where Americans must hunker down on a permanent war footing.

The immediate topic was Obama's plan to close the prison for suspected terrorists at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, which has become an international symbol for abuse of detainees. But the Obama-Cheney "debate" had a much wider focus: the terrorist threat and how to combat it. "I took an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution as commander in chief, and as a citizen, I know that we must never, ever turn our back on its enduring principles for expedience sake," Obama said.

He also said George W. Bush's administration, though well intentioned, "made decisions based upon fear rather than foresight and all too often trimmed facts and evidence to fit ideological predispositions." As an example, he said 240 people at Guantánamo have "spent years in legal limbo." "We are cleaning up something that is, quite simply, a mess, a misguided experiment that has left in its wake a flood of legal challenges that my administration is forced to deal with on a constant basis, and that consumes the time of government officials whose time should be spent on better protecting our country," Obama said. But he didn't spell out precisely what would happen to all those detainees if Guantánamo closes. And this void was a big reason Congress, in a rebuke to Obama, rejected an $80 million appropriation for the prison's shutdown.

But Cheney said closing Guantánamo would be wrong, and he faulted Obama for announcing, shortly after taking office, that he would shutter the facility with "little deliberation and no plan." Cheney defended the Bush administration's antiterrorism policies, including the use of "enhanced interrogation techniques" such as waterboarding that Obama has called torture. Cheney said those methods generated important information about terrorist activities. The former vice president went on to portray two parallel universes. There is a choice between Bush's approach, which Cheney said has kept the country safe since 9/11, and the Obama approach, which Cheney said deals with 9/11 as an anomaly that it is "not sufficient to justify a sustained wartime effort. "Cheney said the two views represent "the great dividing line in our current debate over national security." On that, at least, both sides would probably agree.

Tags:
interrogations,
Guantánamo Bay,
Obama administration,
torture,
Bush administration,
Barack Obama,
national security terrorism and the military,
Dick Cheney

Reader Comments Read all comments (21)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

HejRQR

Wukrskcw of NE 6:50AM July 15, 2009

The answers to your biased questions:

1. No.

2. Nothing.

3. Yes, since 9/11 was the pretext to invade sovereign countries, no more attacks on US soil were needed as long as the plan is proceeding.

4. More.

5. I would set to achieve the most results in the shorter time.

6. The fact that high-tech explosive/incendiary mixture has been found in the rubble of WTC collapses, and that the collapses of the 3 WTC towers (WTC 1,2,7) have 10 elements in common with controlled demolitions while having none of the elements of gravitational collapses.

7. No one.

8. None. But take notice that Guantonomo is not a detention facility based on the concept of "prisoners of war", but rather a concentration camp for "enemy combatants" where torture is the rule.

9. No.

10. No.

11. Spend all the time I can afford to expose the government lies on 9/11 terrorist attack which points us on the wrong enemy to fight.

12. No.

13. No.

14. No, if it would stop to that rather than invading countries to steal their resources and promoting the use of torture worldwide.

15. Yes, they think so, just like you do.

16. ...

17. No, I am fond of the rule of law on "conflict of interests" and into investigating all the contracts Halliburton got for Iraq reconstruction, from its former CEO Dick Cheney.

Riccardo Pizzirani 5:35AM June 01, 2009

If you wish to evaluate the two points of view and the two statements I suggest the following: Listen to both speeches twice, the first time either Mr Obama or Mr. Cheeney first and then in reverse order. Then answer the following questions honestly.

1. On Sept. 15 2001 were you afraid the US would be attacked again soon?

2. On Sept. 15 2001 how much would you have bet that there would not have been another attack on the US by May 2009?

3. Did the policies and actions of the US after 9/11 effect the absence of attacks on the country to date. If they didn't what did?

4. Is the experience and leadership of an organization more or less critical to its success than the sheer number of members?

5. What would it be like for you to know that there were competent and qualified people actively hunting you? How would that effect how you spent your time and set your priorities?

6. What factual evidence is there to support the assertion that policies and actions of the US government have increased the numbers of terrorists?

7. What would have been a better place than Guantonomo to establish a "prisoner of war" type facility?

8. What alternative is there to a detention facility based on the concept of "prisoners of war?

9. Do you believe that the "terrorists" will refrain from attacking the US if we just leave them alone?

10. Do you believe that we should treat terrorist acts as crimes to be responded too after they have been committed?

11. What would you be willing to do to prevent a biological, chemical, or nuclear attack on your city and your family?

12. Do you believe that you have the right to demand that others die to support your belief system?

13. Do you believe that islamist extremists think that they have the right to demand that others die to support their belief system?

14. Do you believe that anyone in the world is offended by the US attempting to assert it's moral superiority by asserting that it has some form of moral authority?

15. Do you think that Islamist extremists believe that they are morally correct and superior to "non-believers".

16. Which of the two statements reflected wishful thinking about the world you live in and which reflected factual reality of the world you live in?

17. Do you believe that the safety and security of the country should be compromised for political advantage by any national elected official or government officials?

There is only one legitimate special interest group in the United States. United States Citizens.

Arthur P. Rochlin of FL 11:34AM May 28, 2009

Photo Galleries

Before and After the Joplin Tornado

A look at Joplin one year after the deadly tornado.

advertisement

Latest Video