Skip to main content

Accepting the Rule of Law

This link from Instapundit about an Iraqi General arrested for murders and other crimes is important.

I'm not sure if everyone will realize why. I've no doubt that to many this will just seem proof of how impossible things are over there.

They aren't impossible. It's not honest to look at a difficult situation, call it impossible, and excuse ones self from any further corrective action. It's not honest at all.

Democracy is a new idea in most of the middle east. Even more of a new idea, and many times more important than Democracy, is the idea of the Rule of Law.

To be free a nation has to be ruled by LAW, not by whatever leader manages to get to be on top of the heap, even if he or she got there democratically.

In order for democracy to work the people, all of them, have to be confident about what will happen when they don't win an election.

The minority has to trust the Rule of Law.

No, I'm not any kind of lawyer, and I may use words incorrectly but the concept is simple. The Law has to apply to everyone. Our leaders must not be exempt. Our governors, congresspersons, and police chiefs, must not be exempt. And do I need to say that even here in the US this is an ongoing battle? There's a reason that people become so angry when they find that a trooper got in trouble for trying to issue a DUI to the wrong official.

Iraq is hardly unique in having a culture where a position of power is a position of privilege. Saddam kept order through terror and the fact that the military and police certainly *did* kill people. The police aren't trusted. The courts aren't trusted.

But it's just not honest to look at this fact and claim nothing can be done. Something *can* be done and LTC Doug Crissman did it.


The American commander, LTC Doug Crissman, narrowly averted a possible bloodbath today when he intervened, without orders from above, and arrested the General.


People *must* know that the law applies to everyone. It will never perfectly apply, but people have to have confidence that it does apply *most particularly* to those in government, to those in power.

We'll find out more later. I hope it all goes well.

Comments

Ymarsakar said…
Once again it seems that commanders on the ground save the day, while critters back in Washington sit on their seats and talk.

Seems like such an inefficient allocation of resources.
Ymarsakar said…
I have always liked these type of stories, ever since 2003 even. I liked the combination of Iraq and American fighting, war, and political stories. Because even back then, as little as I knew of the art of war and military history, I still understood intuitively that if you wish to save Iraqis in Iraq, you must get those Iraqis to work for or with you. And whatever stories I heard to that effect, I valued, simply because I was curious. I wanted to know how it would progress. badly, goodly, etc.

A lot of the military science fiction I read had to deal with cooperating with indigenous populations. Because in those stories, the good guys NEVER have the firepower superiority of the United States, so they had to find allies and friends.

Popular posts from this blog

How Suzanne Brockman lost me.

I just finished reading the latest paperback from Suzanne Brockmann. _Dark of Night_. I'm disappointed and that's a sad thing because I've absolutely loved her series of romances about SEAL team 16 and the Troubleshooters. Aparently I'm not alone. My complaint isn't the same as most of the others... I'm great with Sophia and Dave. I even am okay with Tracey being people smart. She and Decker did seem to come out of left field. I thought Decker was great even if I thought his overwhelming conflict was pretty lame. What I didn't care for was the politics. I read for escapism, for studly dangerous men acting like men, for sex, and adventure with guns, where our military are the good guys and the SEALs are supermen and military contractor's are heroes, too. (I wonder if Ms. Brockmann realizes that the Troubleshooters ARE Blackwater?) I do not read sexy action adventure to be presented with a *cause*. It's small things but they don...

Tyranny.gov vs Tyranny.com

Compulsion is Compulsion, no matter who does it.  This is Brilliant Theft is Theft, no matter who does it. Freedom of Association has no room in it for *private* action   that takes that away Freedom of Association. If I have a business and have voluntary associations such that I choose to serve some people and to not serve others, that might make me a jerk and it might lose me business, it might make me smart and it might gain me business, but it's got to be my choice.  If I would normally serve the current disliked minority in my shop except for the fact that if I'm SEEN to serve them by the wrong people I'll have a private campaign against me as those people do everything possible to ruin me by preventing me from doing business physically or by attacking my customers or suppliers, then I am NOT free to make those choices. Does it really make a difference to losing my CHOICE to voluntarily associate if there's a law that says I may not serve "those people" o...

The Shooter

I just watched the DVD. When I saw trailers for this I wanted to see it. It's the sort of movie that I usually enjoy. It wasn't bad. In fact it was pretty good in some ways and the annoying bits weren't too hard to ignore. The end was sort of bad. Not the choices that I'd make. It took conspiracy a bit too far, away from conspiracy to "this is the way the world works." It *should* have been enough to expose the Senator and his fellows. Where was the press in this? The idea wasn't too bad. The speech his spotter's widow gave about her dead husband's choices was good. (Though why she'd go back to using her maiden name I can't imagine.) Among all those willing to look the other way were several people who were... righteous. But overall it wasn't a "conspiracy" movie. There wasn't a "conspiracy" there was only finding out the "truth" of reality. In this world president Bush re...