During an interview with Fox on Monday, Ben Carson tried to appeal to the Republican base by suggesting the rules of war are political correctness and place too many restrictions on our troops.
As Congress debates President Obama’s request for authorization to use military force against ISIS, Ben Carson weighed in. Like others in the Republican Party, Carson favors putting “boots on the ground” but he also wants to pretend that there is no such thing as a war crime.
Our military needs to know that they’re not gonna be prosecuted when they come back, because somebody has, said “You did something that was politically incorrect.” There is no such thing as a politically correct war. We need to grow up, we need to mature. If you’re gonna have rules for war, you should just have a rule that says no war. Other than that, we have to win. Our life depends on it.
Of course, by advocating no rules in war, Carson is also calling for the legalization of torture, genocide, bombing schools hospitals and places of worship (including Christian ones). Moreover, the taking of human shields, carpet bombing and other forms of indiscriminate killing of civilians would be legit if Carson had his way. It would be okay to recruit children and rape would be re-legitimized as a ”tool of war.” Not to mention burning prisoners of war in cages and putting the video on social media for its propaganda value.
The renowned neuro-surgeon knew exactly what he was saying and who he was saying it to.
Carson’s attempt to reduce rules against genocide, torture, blowing up Churches and other places of worship to “political correctness” is really about appealing to the same John Birch Society “real Americans” Rmuse described in The Koch Agenda Brings Pain and Woe to People in Republican Controlled States.
Carson pushed all the far rights’ buttons, by reducing the world’s condemnation of genocide, torture and other war crimes to political correctness and inferring the rules of war are just about “gubmint” trying to make our troops lives harder.
As appealing as Carson’s message might be to people who seek simple answers to complex issues, Carson’s proposal would, in fact, place our troops in greater danger because the rules of war include a framework of protections to assure that prisoners of war are treated humanely would cease to exist.
If you ask Carson and those who agree with him if eliminating the rules of war means they are ready to close Guantanamo Bay, they would respond with a resounding no and they would use the alleged violations of the rules of war as one of their reasons.
In other words, Carson’s real position is that there should be rules of war, but an exceptional America shouldn’t be “burdened” with following them.
Ms. Woodbury has a graduate degree in political science, with a minor in law. She is a qualified expert on political theory with a specific interest in the nexus between political theories and models and human rights.
Based on her interest in human rights and the threats that authoritarian regimes are to them, Ms. Woodbury’s masters thesis examined the influence of politics on the enforcement of international criminal law was cited in several academic studies.
Published work includes case summaries for the War Crimes Research Office.
She has an extensive background doing legal research in international and domestic law.
Ms. Woodbury’s work for politicusUSA includes articles on voting rights, the right to asylum and other civil/human rights.