The eve of Super Tuesday (and other Issues)
It seems that most Americans in 70 percent approve of Guantanamo Bay when it's against even international law. It has been over a decade of the war on terror. The current President is not reversing many of George W. Bush's extrajudicial policies (the includes American exceptionalism, Guantanamo prison camp, extrajudicial assassination, and arbitrary detentions). President Barack Obama used his national security team to monitor the Special Operations raid in Pakistan that killed Osama bin Laden. Some self-identified liberals agrees with Guantanamo still existing and other reactionary foreign policies. 6 years ago, the U.S. public was ranked as the most enthusiastic supporters of international law. We fall behind the Germans and the Chinese in global surveys. Now, most Americans reject the use of international law when it comes to the actions of the U.S. government in the global war on terror. A recent Washington Post/ABC news poll found that 70 percent of the American public approves of the U.S. government's decision to indefinitely keep the Guantanamo prison open. Even though, there is huge international condemnation of this policy of the prison to be open. This figure includes 53 percent of self-identified liberal Democrats and 67 percent of moderate or conservative Democrats, “even though it emerged as a symbol of the post-Sept. 11 national security policies of President George W. Bush, which many liberals bitterly opposed,” noted the Washington Post. This poll comes as a complete 180 turn of the American public in their views of foreign policy. Back in 2006, 63 percent of people said that America should follow international law as it pertains to Guantanamo Bay. Only 30 percent said that the U.S. should to be bound by these obligations. Americans back in 2006 supported giving international courts broad authority to judge U.S. compliance with treaties (with 70 percent rejecting the idea that the U.S. receive exceptional treatment under such treaties). In 2009, a survey public that 69 percent of Americans support the statement of: “Our nation should consistently follow international laws. It is wrong to violate international laws, just as it is wrong to violate laws within a country.” Only 29 percent chose the converse position, “If our government thinks it is not in our nation’s interest, it should not feel obliged to abide by international laws.” People have criticized Guantanamo Bay for its violations of international law. Even the Human Rights Watch said that indefinite detention violates U.S. obligations under international law. They want to either prosecute the detainees now or safety repatriate them to home or third countries. Arbitrary detention, however, isn’t the only area in which Americans are increasingly willing to disregard principles of international law. Regarding torture, a survey conducted last year by the American Red Cross found that 59 percent of American teenagers and 51 percent of adults believe that it is acceptable to torture enemy fighters in order to attain important military information. Further, 37 percent of youth support “Depriving civilians in combat areas of food, medicine, or water in order to weaken the enemy,” a war crime that is also supported by 29 percent of adults. A whopping 71 percent of youth and 55 percent of adults support “Refusing to allow prisoners to be visited by a representative from a neutral organization to confirm that they are being treated well.” Extrajudicial assassinations are supported by an even broader majority, with the new Washington Post-ABC News poll finding that 83 percent of Americans approve of the use of unmanned aerial drones to carry out targeted killings of terrorist suspects without due process. The United Nations special representative on extrajudicial executions has raised that President Barack Obama drone strikes is a challenge to the international rule of law. Even a 29 page report to the UN Human Rights Council presented in June 2012 have Alston called on America to promote better restraint in its use of drone in places like Pakistan and Yemen. There must be more accountability in these affairs. You can't say it's moral for drone attacks to go on in Pakistan. The liberal base of the President refuse to close the brig in Cuba. Even constitutional lawyer and Salon.com blogger Glen Greenwald said that shifting attitudes of America to support this reactionary foreign policy evil policies as blind leader loyalty. If its assault on American values and the shredding of our Constitution is wrong under George W. Bush , it's wrong today in 2012. But “now that there is a Democrat in office presiding over Guantanamo and these other polices — rather than a big, bad, scary Republican — all of that has changed,” says Greenwald. These policies represent liberal establishment hypocrisy. You are a hypocrite if you oppose the Iraq War and endorse Libyans to be lynched by NATO/al-Qaeda forces in Libya (whose leadership is pro-oil and it's a Western puppet state). These evil policies were rejected by most Americans years ago. Much of the American public has been more desensitized to arbitrary detention, torture, and extrajudicial assassinations. These policies aren't civilized at all. We have the right to disagree with these evils.
Top economists and others have proven by war is bad for the U.S. economy (and any economy). The Nobel wining economist Joseph Stiglitz said that war is bad for the economy. He said that the 1990's boom proved that peace is far better than war. The Gulf War of 1991 influenced the recession during 1991 and that was bad for America. Stiglitz has proven that this decade's Iraq war has been very bad for the economy. Even Former Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan said in 1991 that a prolonged conflict in the Middle East would hurt the economy. Job training funds and educational funds are great ways to build up the economy. Even conservative Harvard economist Robert Barro argued that increased military spending during WWII depressed other parts of the economy. Robert Higgs said that military spending wasn't the primary source of the recovery during WWI and that GDP growth during WWII was greatly exaggerated. Larry Summers and the Brad Delong argued in 1998 that: "...five-sixths of the decline in output relative to the trend that occurred during the Depression had been made up before 1942.” A lot of the job creation in the past 10 years deals with defense spending. Private job growth has been stagnant from the years between 2000 and 2010. Between May 1999 and May 2009, employment in the private sector only rose by 1.1%, by far the lowest 10-year increase in the post-depression period. Most of the job growth in that time period was public, which I have no issue with. Yet, the private sector includes things like health care, social assistance, and education (which gets tons of government support). So, the military industrial complex is very strong. According to the economist Dr. Dean Baker, when America has massive military spending on unnecessary and unpopular war, it will lower economic growth & increase unemployment. This means that money is eliminated domestic to fund foreign affairs involving the military. Long term wars can strain the American economy. Even former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said that America running up debts has been impacted by shoveling money into the Pentagon. People from liberal Kenneth Gabraith to libertarian Ron Paul said that war causes inflation (and too much inflation can harm the economy). Wars can increase terrorism and tensions in the world as well. We have been in Afghanistan in almost twice as long as we have been in WWII. We have been in Iraq longer than WWII. We have a seen a depression because of economically reactionary policies. Not only that, but we have seen a recession because of a constant , never ending war culture. The economist Nouriel Roubini warned that attacking Iran would lead into a global recession, because if Iran cuts off oil supplies; it would raise crude prices by 30%.