Trading five of your best players for Alec Rodriguez
may seem like a good deal, but what if Alec Rodriguez turns out to be, well, Alec Rodriguez? You
look like a gullible fool. Not to
mention what it does to your line-up. Your
only hope, in that case, is to find someone who still wants Mr. Rodriguez. A
little kid, for instance. The problem there is that kids are usually smarter
and less gullible than you think. You don’t have that problem with Congressmen.
They’re never smarter or more sophisticated than you think.
I don’t want to get into parties or petty distinctions - being a Senator, for example. Instead, let my comments stand for everyone who has criticized the recent trade of five Guantanamo Bay prisoners for U.S. Army Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl. They are all feeble children treating the life of a U.S. soldier as if it were part of a sports trade.
“He isn’t worth five prisoners.” “We already have a sergeant.” “We’re getting rooked.” “We should have asked for money and a prisoner to be named later.” You might expect this reaction from the usual cast of dressed-up Snopeses, who have represented large parts of the country for a long time. Surprisingly, they are joined by members of both houses, who, otherwise, are supporters of the President. These people should know better. Instead, they protect their privileges against Presidential incursion with an unashamed vigor. The only possible excuse is that as members of a debased institution, Senators and Representatives are forced to grub for respect like convicts trying to dig their way out of prison with a spoon. Even worse than the foregoing behavior are attempts to discredit Sgt. Bergdahl.
Do we really want to go there? Do we really want to open up that can of worms? First, there’s the issue of credibility. Remember “Swiftboating?” If you don’t, ask Secretary of State John Kerry to explain it. You may also want to speak to former U.S. Army Private First Class Jessica Lynch. Not only was her military service – and supposed “heroics” – treated as a political football, but it began with her being rescued as a Prisoner Of War being held by the Iraqis. And those are lies! What about the truth? I’m not even talking about wartime atrocities, I mean the enormous, growing and, heretofore, ignored problem of sexual violence against women and men in the service. Unless we want the truth about the armed forces and are willing to face the consequences, we shouldn’t go peeking into anyone’s record.
Besides, what alternative is there to saving Sgt. Bergdahl? Leave one man behind? Is that the new army motto? Or is it more personal, leave this guy behind? "I never liked him, anyway." "He's only a sergeant." "He's been a prisoner for five years, he's damaged goods." "Suppose we rescue him and he dies? Then we really look like suckers."
Unless being a POW is not as bad as it seems. If it were really bad, wouldn't prisoners die instantly? Compared to that, five years looks like a lifestyle. If only there was Senator, a well-known and highly-regarded Senator, who had been a POW for five years. I'm sure he could provide valuable insights. On second thought, maybe not.
Can any good come from this whole tragic episode? Once you've seen one set of grieving parents try to throw another one under the bus, what can you believe in? Let's assume that the five prisoners released from Guantanamo are guilty. (Not legally guilty, of course. They've never been charged or put on trial, but they look guilty and, let's face it, they didn't check into Guantanamo voluntarily, so someone thought they were guilty, right?) The very idea of finding guilty people in Guantanamo Bay means the system works! Okay, five out of an estimated several hundred is not a great record, but no one bats a thousand. Compared to an average of, say, .200, it' not bad. If we were trading prisons, I'd go for it.
No comments:
Post a Comment