Mora: Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo are ‘first and second identifiable causes of U.S. combat deaths in Iraq.’
Mora: Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo are ‘first and second identifiable causes of U.S. combat deaths in Iraq.’
Today, the Senate Armed Services Committee held a hearing on detainee interrogation. Testifying before the committee, former Navy general counsel Alberto Mora, who battled within the Pentagon to shut down the use of torture, blasted the Bush administration’s abusive detention practices as leading to the recruitment of new radicals and the deaths of more American soldiers:
[T]here are serving U.S. flag-rank officers who maintain that the first and second identifiable causes of U.S. combat deaths in Iraq — as judged by their effectiveness in recruiting insurgent fighters into combat — are, respectively the symbols of Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo.
Watch it:
Mora denounced the Bush adminsitration’s “decision to use so-called ‘harsh’ interrogation techniques” as “a mistake of massive proportions.”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
22 Responses to “Mora: Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo are ‘first and second identifiable causes of U.S. combat deaths in Iraq.’”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
On the identifiable causes chart, where do bullets and bombs rank? Engrish can be deeficult, eh?
June 17th, 2008 at 5:53 pmMora denounced the Bush adminsitration’s “decision to use so-called ‘harsh’ interrogation techniques” as “a mistake of massive proportions.”
It was a mistake, it was morally repugnant and Bush had no right to do this in our name.
http://progressiveworldreview.com
June 17th, 2008 at 5:58 pmAs repugnant as the abuses are that occurred at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay, they pale in comparison to what happened to these prisoners at Bagram and Kandahar internment camps in Afghanistan. The strategy of containing these [alleged] members of Al-Qaeda backfires when they are released and they tell others how they were unfairly treated by the Americans and those people decide to join terrorists groups in retaliation for how their family and friends were treated by the American military. Simply another example of how the inflammatory presence of the American military in Iraq and Afghanistan inflames the passions of those citizens who live in the Middle East.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/detainees/story/38775.html
June 17th, 2008 at 6:00 pmBadmoodman said:
On the identifiable causes chart, where do bullets and bombs rank? Engrish can be deeficult, eh?
Which side's? Or do think the number of American deaths would be the same if we weren't over there.
Critical thought is even more difficult.
http://progressiveworldreview.com
June 17th, 2008 at 6:02 pmBush adminsitration’s “decision to use so-called ‘harsh’ interrogation techniques” as “a mistake of massive proportions.”
More like 'WAR CRIMES' of massive proportions.
June 17th, 2008 at 6:03 pmDAMN! It has to be tough when one of the true DoD legal insiders is saying these things!
I sure hope he doesn't get invited on a 'hunting trip' by Darth!
June 17th, 2008 at 6:08 pmIt's a good thing he's "former" otherwise his a$$ would be fired by tomorrow a.m.
June 17th, 2008 at 6:10 pmPaul W Says:
Which side’s? Or do think the number of American deaths would be the same if we weren’t over there.
- - You must be new around here.
June 17th, 2008 at 6:11 pmPaul W Says:
Which side’s? Or do think the number of American deaths would be the same if we weren’t over there.
Let's see, if my math is correct, we would have lost about 4100 +/- less troops of we weren't there. Is that what you were asking?
June 17th, 2008 at 6:17 pmMora is exceptionally couragous to say this in public because he will be savaged by the Right Wing, big media, echo chambers which cover over the repugnant behaviors of the craven cowards, AWOLS, and draft-dodgers who crafted these disgusting practices.
June 17th, 2008 at 6:18 pmRepublican Noise Machine smearing of Mora begins in 3 .. 2 .. 1.
June 17th, 2008 at 6:22 pmMany years ago, I was involved with a war game for the Air Force. It was a training exercise to prove the value of brute military force and air power over an insurgent group. By luck of the draw, I ended up as the commander of the insurgent forces. My team reviewed the record of all prior games. The insurgents always attacked to over throw the country and lost.
We took a different tact. We opened a newspaper, started a union and gave aid to the poor. The government struck back hard. They did mass arrests, show trial and torture. Unfortunately, the vast majority snatched up were innocents guilty of no more than agreeing with our policies. After a few turns, we finally struck with violence aimed at the power grid and other facilities owned by corporate interests and the wealthy. Guess what, no bad public reaction. Needless to say, the political science, international country experts and military judges ended the game early. It was obvious that our side would win within the next year or two. We were the first and last insurgents to win the game. Rules were changed for future participants requiring them to attack the government within a relatively short time.
Anyone relying on asymmetrical warfare counts on the occupier to over react. We have seen this demonstrated to the nth degree in Iraq. We went from an incredible laxity of ensuring basic civil order to an incredibly repressive and abusive system to handle suspected insurgents. The funny part is that almost none were AQ. It was a very well predicted battle for political power between sectarian groups. One that could have been prevented by proper post war planning and use of existing military and police units to prevent violence. The US practice of treating all these detainees as terrorists and subjecting them to brutal treatment only created the conditions that permitted AQ of Iraq to intervene and wreak havoc.
I
June 17th, 2008 at 6:25 pmOuch! That's gonna leave a mark. He's definitely off Rovers Christmas card list.
June 17th, 2008 at 6:28 pmDick Cheney said, "So?" And W said, "Huh?" Condi was shoe shopping so she said nothing.
June 17th, 2008 at 6:31 pmGreat post, as usual, JMOHR.
And what's especially maddening is the complete denial of history. Any high school "scholar" could have told them the result if they had been honest about their intentions. Occupations just don't work.
Yet, a couple times each generation, some tyrant or confederacy of tyrants thinks they can pull off a foreign occupation. I'm sure many of those are encouraged by fixed "war games". Unfortunately, once they begin with the false premise that they can win, the results are meaningless.
June 17th, 2008 at 6:44 pmI think the key word here is "former" Navy general counsel -- he fought the administration and left. Too many of them have yet to find their spines.
June 17th, 2008 at 6:51 pmI think he understated his case. Shrub's whole life has been "a mistake of massive proportions." Make that MASSIVE
June 17th, 2008 at 6:59 pmMarie Says:
I think the key word here is “former” Navy general counsel — he fought the administration and left. Too many of them have yet to find their spines.
June 17th, 2008 at 6:51 pm
Agreed. To a point. There are few dynamics which must be considered.
We need some flag officers to keep their mouths shut and prevent Lil' George from nuking someone and keep our troops alive until sane leadership brings them home.
Flag officers who publicly, and sometimes privately, disagree with Bushco are summarily removed.
There is a code of long standing that flag officers don't air dirty laundry until they retire, or, some particular person leaves office or command. Indeed, it's all but certain that Mora was forced out. Otherwise it's unlikely he would have given such testimony. Maddening as it may be, that code should not be disparaged because it's part of the bond of loyalty we need if, heaven forbid, the military must mutiny to prevent a catastrophe.
June 17th, 2008 at 7:15 pm#18-Pete
I feel that I must strenuously disagree. If flag officers receive orders that they should begin bombing innocent civilians in Iran, then they have a duty and an obligation as commanded to them in the UCMJ [sections 809, 891, 892] to obey those orders which are lawful which then means, of course, that they are obligated NOT to obey unlawful orders. Louis Font, as seen in the powerful documentary Sir! No Sir!, was the first West Point graduate to refuse to take part in the Vietnam conflict. What this country needs are more people like Louis Font and Ehren Watada and Camilo Mejia and Kevin Benderman who have had the courage to say NO to the illegal orders that they were given by their lying and deceiving governments. The loyalty that those in the military have is not to the army or their fellow comrades but to the U.S. Constitution.
June 17th, 2008 at 7:43 pmYou're right Erroll. I was not clear. I should not have used the word "mutiny". I should have said, "if military commanders are asked to decide whether, or not, to obey an order and the legality of same". My use of the word "mutiny" was meant to mean "mutiny against illegal, and/or insane, commands". In fact, I was thinking one step beyond the "Sir! No Sir!" scenario to the, "Mr. President. We aren't going to order our boys to do that", scenario.
If such a terrible, and dangerous in it's own right, thing were to happen in the U.S. military? The internal bonds of the service, and their loyalty to their country and each other, would be the only thing preventing disaster.
And, this is just a gut feeling, I think we will see more former flag officers telling the bold truth before the election. Possibly active flag offices. It seems like many are approaching the inescapable conclusion that serving this President is against the best interests of our country.
I think thee are many heroes who's names we will never hear. "Real" warriors who add balance and sanity during their Staff appointments in the Pentagon. These are the guys, maybe more so than field commanders, who would be the main line of resistance to a hypothetical "mad" policy. And they won't do themselves, or our country, any good by getting themselves canned while we are engaged in two occupations. We need them on the job when we get sane political leadership back. And we need them to minimize any additional damage Bushco can do.
June 17th, 2008 at 8:13 pmI would say the leading cause was our totally unnecessary, totally illegal, totally counter-productive invasion of Iraq.
When we round up hundreds or thousands of detainees in sweeps, when we arrest tribal enemies, or who is turned in for a reward, then we are bound to have trouble. Then we torture. Then 90% are released because they are innocent. What do you think is going to happen?
June 17th, 2008 at 10:41 pmI wish every policy maker would have read "The March Of Folly" by Barbara Tuchman. Written in the 1980s, it presents four chapters of history in which authorities pursued policies contrary to self-interest, even though there were feasible alternatives and loud warnings AT THE TIME. From the Trojan Horse, through the Renaissance popes' provocation of the Protestant secession, the British loss of the 13 colonies, all the way to Vietnam, the parallels with the Bush/McCain policy are inescapable. Read it. It will make you cry.
June 18th, 2008 at 9:38 am