President Trump should Take General Benjamin Butler’s Advice on Sayfullo Saipov and Gitmo

Readability

President Trump should Take General Benjamin Butler's Advice on Sayfullo Saipov and Gitmo

There has been a real debate on if for­eign born Ter­ror­ist Say­fullo Saipovv should be sent to Gitmo or not. The debate has been inter­est­ing because you have the sight of John McCain and Lind­sey Gra­ham, favorites of Democ­rats and the left, remind­ing said left­ists why they are still repub­li­cans, namely they are in favor of treat­ing the ene­mies of the United States as…enemies of the United States and that’s not allowed in the Demo­c­rat Party any­more (See Iran).

It is how­ever a fair argu­ment to make that he was a legal immi­grant who com­mit­ted a crime and thus should go to the jus­tice sys­tem, and in other cir­cum­stances that would be a good argu­ment, but unfor­tu­nately we are at war with ISIS and we have an excel­lent prece­dent for a sit­u­a­tion like this in via one of the most crafty pols ever to hold a General’s Rank in the US Army. Gen­eral Ben­jamin Butler.

At a time in the Civil War when Lin­coln was not talk­ing eman­ci­pa­tion in order to hold the bor­der states Ben­jamin But­ler, who tended to do things his own way, decided that return­ing fugi­tive slaves only helped the enemy and decided against it declar­ing them “con­tra­band of war”. At one point he was ques­tioned over it by a fel­low offi­cer from Vir­ginia if he didn’t feel obliged to return slaves under the Fugi­tive Slave Law. (But­ler was known to be sym­pa­thetic to the south before the war but a vapid anti seces­sion­ist.) But­ler answer was classic:

…the Fugi­tive Slave act did not effect a for­eign coun­try, which Vir­ginia claimed to be! And she must reckon one the infe­lic­i­ties of her posi­tion that inso­far at least she was taken at his word.

I think the same logic works here. If a CNN ana­lyst argues that, as a legal immi­grant, Say­fullo Saipovv retains the rights of any other per­son arrested in the United States, includ­ing the right to a civil­ian trial and is not sub­ject to being sent to Gitmo, the answer I would give the rights of a legal immi­grant do not apply to sol­diers of ISIS taken in bat­tle, which Mr. Saipovv claims to be and to para­phrase Gen­eral But­ler He must reckon one of the infe­lic­i­ties of his posi­tions that inso­far at least he is taken at his word.

If they counter that in this case as a pris­oner of way Mr. Saipovv must be treated in accor­dance to the Geneva Con­ven­tion we can reply that as the Islamic State is nei­ther a sig­na­tory to the Geneva Con­ven­tion in fact nor a prac­ti­tioner of its rules in action any mem­ber of ISIS taken in bat­tle is sub­ject to be held as an enemy com­bat­ant and sent to Gitmo if the Army or the com­man­der in chief should so desire.

And I’d bet real money that once, Pres­i­dent Don­ald Trump, who know a win­ning issue when he see it, fig­ures this out that this one is a gim­mie, he will desire it pretty damn quick.

Clos­ing thought: There was a time that I would have believed that the Har­vey Wein­stein Demo­c­rat Left would not be so tone deaf as to insist that a man who declares him­self a woman must be treated as such but a man who declares him­self a war­rior for ISIS must not. But the last few years have been an edu­ca­tion and I can’t wait to see Demo­c­rat Sen­ate Can­di­dates in Red States forced to make the choice between sup­port­ing send­ing Mr. Saipovv going to gitmo and upset­ting the demo­c­rat base or oppos­ing it and upset­ting gen­eral elec­tion voters.

There has been a real debate on if foreign born Terrorist Sayfullo Saipovv should be sent to Gitmo or not. The debate has been interesting because you have the sight of John McCain and Lindsey Graham, favorites of Democrats and the left, reminding said leftists why they are still republicans, namely they are in favor of treating the enemies of the United States as…enemies of the United States and that’s not allowed in the Democrat Party anymore (See Iran).

It is however a fair argument to make that he was a legal immigrant who committed a crime and thus should go to the justice system, and in other circumstances that would be a good argument, but unfortunately we are at war with ISIS and we have an excellent precedent for a situation like this in via one of the most crafty pols ever to hold a General’s Rank in the US Army. General Benjamin Butler.

At a time in the Civil War when Lincoln was not talking emancipation in order to hold the border states Benjamin Butler, who tended to do things his own way, decided that returning fugitive slaves only helped the enemy and decided against it declaring them “contraband of war”. At one point he was questioned over it by a fellow officer from Virginia if he didn’t feel obliged to return slaves under the Fugitive Slave Law. (Butler was known to be sympathetic to the south before the war but a vapid anti secessionist.) Butler answer was classic:

…the Fugitive Slave act did not effect a foreign country, which Virginia claimed to be! And she must reckon one the infelicities of her position that insofar at least she was taken at his word.

I think the same logic works here. If a CNN analyst argues that, as a legal immigrant, Sayfullo Saipovv retains the rights of any other person arrested in the United States, including the right to a civilian trial and is not subject to being sent to Gitmo, the answer I would give the rights of a legal immigrant do not apply to soldiers of ISIS taken in battle, which Mr. Saipovv claims to be and to paraphrase General Butler He must reckon one of the infelicities of his positions that insofar at least he is taken at his word.

If they counter that in this case as a prisoner of way Mr. Saipovv must be treated in accordance to the Geneva Convention we can reply that as the Islamic State is neither a signatory to the Geneva Convention in fact nor a practitioner of its rules in action any member of ISIS taken in battle is subject to be held as an enemy combatant and sent to Gitmo if the Army or the commander in chief should so desire.

And I’d bet real money that once, President Donald Trump, who know a winning issue when he see it, figures this out that this one is a gimmie, he will desire it pretty damn quick.

Closing thought: There was a time that I would have believed that the Harvey Weinstein Democrat Left would not be so tone deaf as to insist that a man who declares himself a woman must be treated as such but a man who declares himself a warrior for ISIS must not. But the last few years have been an education and I can’t wait to see Democrat Senate Candidates in Red States forced to make the choice between supporting sending Mr. Saipovv going to gitmo and upsetting the democrat base or opposing it and upsetting general election voters.