On Hugh Hewitt’s Thursday show, columnist Mark Steyn explained there was a case of mixed signals the White House has sent regarding the mission to take out al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden. On one hand, it was a successful mission but on the other the reaction has been limp. And both of those acts send mixed signals abroad according to the columnist.
“I think this is strong horse-weak horse all in one. If you want highly trained, superbly equipped warriors on a precise, targeted mission, to go in and do what they’re supposed to do, then this is a brilliant operation,” Steyn said. “I think when you look at everything surrounding it, including the reaction in Washington, and the facts on the ground in Abbottabad, then I think it’s, we’re deep in weak horse territory, in part because our so-called ally feels it can in effect, de facto officially shelter Osama bin Laden, his three wives, and his 13 children – as the Senator said on your show the other day. And they know, the Pakistanis know they will pay no price for it. That’s real weak horse stuff. That’s serious weak horse stuff.”
Steyn also condemned the Obama administration’s decision not to release the bin Laden photograph and the way it handled his body in deference to Islamic customs.
“Well, I think in the normal course of events, if you kill some guy, a proper modicum of respect, even for a criminal, would say well, we don’t release the photograph,” Steyn said. “But the danger here is not releasing the photograph will be seen as part of the disastrous appeasement of Islam that has characterized Obama’s reaction to this. So it’s seen as part and parcel of the Muslim burial service, 45-minute Muslim burial service he was accorded, or funeral service and Obama’s prostrations, you know, and insistence America is not at war with Islam in his speech, which is true. We’re not at war with Islam. But in that case, why do you go to such lengths to demonstrate respect for Osama bin Laden as an observant Muslim? So I think the argument for releasing the picture is to show that, ‘Hey, we don’t care, this guy was a guy who attacked the United States, and here’s his corpse.’ There’s an element of the Mussolini from the lamppost thing that this whole episode could use.”
Listen:
Hewitt asked Steyn to react to indications that the policies of former President George W. Bush, which liberals once dismissed, are now being embraced by the left.
“I think you’ve got a choice here – that the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld view of the world after 9/11 more or less accorded with reality,” Steyn said. “The Obama-Biden-Harry Reid-Democratic Party showboating version of the world didn’t accord with reality. And I think this is the danger here, whether Obama is really just taking advantage from the sort of hangover of the Bush administration, or whether he understands what’s at stake here, and he would be actually willing to reverse his policy on this. I mean, the absurd thing, this joke of an attorney general the United States has at the moment, advancing the novel legal concept of national self-defense to justify this, because he’s obliged to twist himself into a pretzel, because of what he and his colleagues have said in the previous two years. I’m entirely consistent on this. I’m in favor of targeted assassination of American enemies, whether it’s done by Bush and Cheney, or Obama and Biden. I don’t have a problem with that. The Euro left are consistent. They oppose it, whether it’s a Republican or a Democrat doing it. The people who have the problem here are the American liberals who thought that Bush and Cheney were war criminals for what they did, but hail Obama’s targeted assassination as, you know, a sophisticated use of smart power.”
Hewitt cited a May 5 interview conducted by The Daily Caller’s Ginni Thomas with conservative talker Mark Levin. In that interview, Levin explained why it would be a mistake to cut defense spending and the latest news with bin Laden is the proof.
“What I find odd about this is there’s a huge problem with American government spending. These SEALs, these guys who killed bin Laden, earn about $54,000 a year,” Steyn said. “I mean, they’re not paid a lot compared to, say, the average bureaucratic deadbeat retiring at the age of 50 in your great state of California. These guys are not paid a lot. They’re worth every penny. And they’re backed up by some very sophisticated equipment. And if you are like the United States, which is not an imperial superpower, you rely on this kind of stuff, because you’ve got to be able to take off and go somewhere on the other side of the planet, and do something unpleasant that you’re the only nation in the world that can do, and get out of there fast. And I think that’s why — you know, I’m happy to have serious debates on government spending. But this refuge that the left take in the whole business, that somehow the burden here is being born by the United States, you know, the United States is the global order-maker. And if you don’t have a global-order maker, then as we see in Pakistan, you have guys like Osama bin Laden instead of just being able to have the run of Abbottabad, he’d have the run of the planet.”
