July 30, 2014--POW/MIA

El Bohio, our favorite place in Florida for a Cuban breakfast, is right across the road from the Lantana post office.

Sipping my cortadito, I noticed that right below the American flag, the post office was flying the POW/MIA flag.

"Is that legal?" I asked, pointing.

"I'm not sure about the legality," Rona said, "The post office is no longer an official part of the federal government and so I don't know what rules they have to follow regarding flags."

"I don't know exactly why I'm saying this, but it gives me the creeps. Look at the image--a silhouette in black of a prisoner with his head bowed and behind him a guard tower and a string of barbwire."

"It gives you the creeps?"

"That's how I feel. I mean, I think this flag was designed and first flown during the Vietnam War when the North Vietnamese held many prisoners and certainly there were bodies of soldiers that hadn't been discovered or their remains expatriated. But . . ."

"That was, what, 40 years ago and you still see lots of these flags all over. What's that about?"

"I don't know, but I know it's not flying in downtown Manhattan,"

"You hardly see American flags there. Somehow any show of overt patriotism to some--I hate to admit it, liberals and progressives--is considered suspect. Too pro-America. Minimally not cool."

"Remember how when Barack Obama was first running for president he was criticized for not wearing a lapel flag?"

"Or covering his heart when reciting the Pledge of Allegiance?"

"Or," I added, "excoriated by rightwing extremists for not saying 'under God' during the Pledge."

"Crazy. Since there are lots of videos of him saying just that."

"So that's in part why the POW/MIA flag agitates me."

"And what's the other part?"

I thought for a moment. "You know, I don't know."

June 2, 2014--Negotiating With the Enemy

"Now you're the one who sounds like a Republican." I was happy to have the opportunity to turn the tables on Rona.

"You mean because I'm against the prisoner exchange with the Taliban?" I just smiled. "Well, I am against it so I that makes me a Republican, so be it."

"I'm just fooling with you," I said. "Some Democrats are raising questions too."

"Mainly those facing tough reelection challenges in November. Some of the same one who early on called for General Shinseki's resignation because of the VA debacle."

"I can see your point. At least, to some extent."

"You mean you're OK with us negotiating with the Taliban?" Rona asked, "The enemy?"

"I know that was the GOP talking-point way of discussing this on the Sunday talk shows."

"But they conveniently forgot that a Republican president, Richard Nixon, with Henry Kissinger, negotiated secretly for years with the Vietcong, the enemy, before finally making a deal to end the war in Vietnam."

"And, another Republican president, Eisenhower, agreed to negotiate with the enemy, the North Koreans, to end that war."

"To end wars, unless you can get away with demanding unconditional surrender, like at the end of World War II, you always negotiate with whom your fighting."

"And even with Japan, in WW II, we negotiated with them about keeping the emperor. Many in the U.S. wanted him deposed, but we allowed him to remain. So what's your problem this time?"

"I have a problem with exchanging prisoners before a larger deal can be struck with the Taliban."

"I have some trouble with that too," I conceded.

"A couple of things. First, I don't like the idea that we agreed to release five very bad guys who have been imprisoned in Guantanamo--hold off for a moment about that issue--allowing them to go to Qatar of all places. The deal calls for the Qatar government to keep an eye on them and not allow them to travel for a year--you know how much that agreement's worth--in exchange for an American soldier who has been held as a prisoner of war for five years."

"Among the five Taliban, according to the Times, which I have right here, so let me read what it says--two at least are 'senior military commanders said to be linked to operations that killed Americans and allied troops as well as implicated in murdering thousands of Shiites in Afghanistan.'"

"Correct. One was the head of the Taliban army. Bad enough guys to be held at Gitmo without trial for more than 10 years but OK to release for one American soldier. Which brings me to my other point."

"Which is?"

"About the soldier. When you sign up for combat, and all our troops are volunteers, you know the risks. You could be wounded, killed, and even taken prisoner. And the deal is that if you're captured you're likely to be held until the war is over, a full truce is worked out, and all prisoners are then exchanged. And in the particular case, to make matters worse, he may have been a deserter, going over to the Taliban side."

"But, Susan Rice and Chuck Hagel, on the same Sunday shows, implied that this may be a prelude to a larger agreement with the Taliban. We've been trying to engineer something like that for years."

"Which would be a good thing," Rona said, "But why can't we wait until a deal is struck, or at the minimum, when we're real close to having one, before exchanging prisoners? This feels very premature and, who knows, very political."

"Political?"

"You know, with the VA mess and the resulting bad political news for the Obama White House, maybe they wanted to do something that would show dramatic concern for the troops."

"And if the released Taliban get back into the fray, how many more Americans will they maim and kill? How good for our troops would that be?"

"Fair point. But I have another idea. Admittedly a crazy one."

"Shoot," Rona said.

"While we busy exchanging prisoners, why not release everyone we're holding in Guantanamo? You know, all 150. That way Obama would get to fulfill at least one of his campaign promises--to shut it down."

"Now, you're going too far."

"At least, I don't sound like a Republican!"