An important word from Mike Walker, Col., USMC (retired)
All,
By now you have heard of the trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed that is to begin in New York. Some may think this is simply a trial of a terrorist tied to 9/11.
No thought could be more wrongheaded. This fight is as important as the decision to invade Afghanistan in 2001 or Iraq in 2003 or the Iraq War surge of 2007 or the current strategic review of the campaign in Afghanistan in 2009.
In fact, one could argue that the decision already made to enter this battle was more important than the decision to invade Iraq in 2003. This is a strategic battle in which the lives of thousands, tens of thousands, of innocent civilians hangs in the balance.
It is not simply a court case dealing with terrorists. It is a nation, my Country, which has crossed the Rubicon. There is now no looking back.
What is at stake is the viability of the rule of law as it has been understood for centuries in western civilization. What is at stake is a contest between two radically divergent visions of the future for humanity.
On our side are the proponents who argue that a legal system can be founded on the principal that free and reasonable citizens can create a just and progressive society. On the other side are the nihilists who believe that the seeds of destruction of that free and reasonable society lie in exploiting and perverting its judicial system.
Again, on the one side you have a society that strives to remain within the parameters of civilized behavior, all the while failing imperfectly as any human endeavor will. On the other side you have an organization that systematically attacks every tenet of the free and rational society concept. It is an enemy the embraces and revels in the violation of every concept of civil liberties as we in America know them and stridently seeks to use those selfsame values to destroy us.
As our side enters the slippery slope of demanding perfection in the most imperfect of all undertakings, war, we have an enemy who is equally determined to make gains by violating every rule and law of civilized behavior in making war.
The goal of the enemy is clear, if they so totally destroy the rules of warfare then they hope to escape entirely the consequences of their perfidious deeds. The path is clear, if the enemy violates each and every law then the enemy creates a state of chaos where the disciplined mind will, for sake of sanity, ignore their countless sins.
In its stead and in frustration born of chaos, the bewildered rationalists will seize on and lash out at the more manageable sins of those who share, rather than reject, their free and reasonable society worldview. They would rather retreat to the safety of their comfort zone by trying one of the their own then stand in the violent chaos created by the enemy and confront the enemy's wrongs.
The lesson is clear, if you try to embrace a civilized behavior in making war then you will eventually err as all humans do. At that point, having failed to be perfect, you will be criminalized and suffer the consequences.
If, on the other hand, you behave as the enemy and liberate yourself of the norms of civilized behavior in making war by deliberately killing innocents such as strapping bomb vests on the mentally disabled and sending them into a crowed market to explode (al Qaeda really did this) and are willing to lie about all your evil deeds and kill and intimidate any witnesses then, if captured, your freedom may well be assured. That is an abomination.
What must be powerfully empowering to the enemy is to witness the energies of our more civilized souls to divert their failure in reining in the enemy's terror by targeting, out of ineptitude, those who strive yet fail to obey the civilized laws of warfare.
The ramifications of the outcome of this trial are simple. In no small part, this trial will decide whose strategy is more powerful. It will partially decide if the future of civilization rests in the hands of those who adhere to a principle of removing all restraints in fighting a war or with those who imperfectly try to limit the pain and suffering to the combatants, to those who actively engage in the battle like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.
For those who prefer the former, then set Khalid Sheikh Mohammed free. For those who believe in the later then give this man the punishment he deserves.
In no small degree, the fate of progressive civilization for at least a billion of human beings, fortunately overwhelmingly not Americans, hangs in the balance.
Semper Fi,
Mike
