Ah, er, um - from Vietnam's Gulags. More than 8000 of 'em.
That's more people than we hold Gitmo, and these Vietnamese prisoners were all guilty of lesser offenses than the fellas we're holding in Gitmo. Many, in fact, were just people who wanted religious freedom.
Somehow, I musta missed all the Leftwing protests over their captivity. And, I guessed I also missed the news item about when the ACLU filed a suit in the Hague and Germany to get them freed... Heh!
This is just another example of an old truth: the Left only dislikes the authoritarian regimes which aligned themselves to the USA. Ho Chi Minh, Pol Pot, Kim, Fidel, Allende, Mugabe, Che, Chavez - they're all "OKAY" to Lefties because they were all anti-American.
This PROVES that to the Left anti-Americanism TRUMPS human rights - and even our national security.
Sure: the USA DID make some unsavory allies during WW2 and the Cold War (WW3); that's just good strategy: we used Stalin to defeat Hitler, and we used other authoritarians to defeat the USSR.
Now that the Cold War is over - and the USA is the ONLY SUPERPOWER (or HYPERPOWER, to use a French term coined during the CLINTON ERA!) - the USA is freer to attack totalitarianism everywhere, but we still need some help from non-democrats in the GWOT - the war against neojihadism, or "WW4." Musharraf, the Saudis, and Putin come to mind as unsavory allies we need right now.
The test in these alliances is theur utility: whether they're really really helping us in WW4, or not; tolerating these authoritarian regimes must be dependent on how well they help us achieve our greater goal of defeating neojihadism.
The Left has no such "test" when it come to their continued support for tyrants and tyranny (or THEIR criticisms of our efforts in WW4) - which further proves that their chief aim remains hurting the USA, and not human liberation or universal human rights.
IOW: THE ANTI-WAR LEFT IS NOT FOR PEACE; THEY'RE ON THE OTHER SIDE. (More HERE.)