Monday, October 01, 2007

Bush's Global 'Dirty War'

By Robert Parry
October 1, 2007

George W. Bush has transformed elite units of the U.S. military – including Special Forces and highly trained sniper teams – into “death squads” with a license to kill unarmed targets on the suspicion that they are a threat to American military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to evidence from recent court cases.

Though this reality has been the subject of whispers within the U.S. intelligence community for several years, it has now emerged into public view with two attempted prosecutions of American soldiers whose defense attorneys cited “rules of engagement” that permit the killing of suspected insurgents.

Read on.

4 comments:

Bob said...

A fine piece. I think it would be fair to add that we have adopted many of the tactics of the Israeli Defense Forces and key US military personnel have been trained in those tactics by the Israelis.

Very early on Bush authorized targeted assassinations and one of the first killed was an American killed in Yeman while traveling with the target. A common act by the Israelis.

We also make a liberal use of aircraft to bomb and strafe indiscriminately in order to avoid
ground force casualties. I've often wondered what the per terrorist killed cost is, it must be horrendous. And we've shot over 1 billion small cartridges in Iraq, about 50 for each Iraqi.

There is also the long tradition in our forces of a disrespect for indigenous populations, going back to the Spanish American war. We call them gooks, haji's whatever.
Our troops seem to be trained to
view them as less then human.

We are a criminal nation and those that support it are criminals.

ETSpoon said...

Really, much blame for the current state of military affairs must be laid at the feet of the anti-war movement.

As you know, the anti-Vietnam war movement was at the forefront of the push for an All Volunteer Force in the Seventies. The AVF was concocted by the godfather of the so-called free-market economy, Milton J. Friedman.

Since then its descendants have vigously fought any call for the institution of a Universal National Service, that will include a draft for military service. Now we are witness to the unintended consequences of a "Let those who want to be there, be there" military.

The AVF is far from being a representative cross-section of America. As army and Marine Corps recruiters trawl the poorer sections of America's inner cities and rural communities our military more resembles the thrill-seeking, kill-crazy banana republic, armed forces of Central America. One day in the not too distant future, these young men will be re-integrated into the civilian population as police officers, security guards, prison guards and even firefighters and postal employees. It is not by accident.

If the current crop of peaceniks are appalled by the level of brutality of exhibited by today's police, they must remember it is they and their Vietnam era antecedents who bear partial responsibility.

In the words of the late David Hackworth: Volunteers tend to go with the flow and seldom blow the whistle on military stupidity, flawed tactics and self-serving leadership. And draftees don't hesitate to make waves and tell the truth.

kevin said...

the dirty war strategy was discussed extensively during the 1980s by pentagon and defense intellectuals. at the time, they were committed to establishing a permanent global war of counterinsurgency against a variety of perceived us enemies.

they were concerned the us public was not ready to learn what the us government had to do in its name. with the alleged al qaeda operation of 9-11 creating the perfect storm establishment intellectuals on the right had been dreaming about since the end of the Cold War, the dirty war concepts went from being largely hidden from the american people to largely institutionalized through the work of the executive branch and Congress. 9-11 was a nice event to consolidate their global strategy. makes you wonder about why the 9-11 truth movement remains on the fringes of progressive media coverage of public expressions of opposition to the so-called permanent war on terror.

kevin said...

as for blaming people who believe in anti imperialism for us wars of aggression, this is the height of nonsense. the reason congress and the executive do not want a military draft is because they want to pursue their visions of pre emptive warfare without an aroused and conscious public. the use of mercenaries serves this purpose. everyone (outside of the political culture of ignorant America) knows putting more us troops in iraq would not lead to a us victory. and a draft in the usa would only help re-awaken a passive disinterested public. us politicians fear an educated and involved public. the less democratic participation the better, in their view. 2006 elections revealed the risk of pissing off the public. the democratic party's failure to block bush's escalation of the war in iraq since those elections reveals the bipartisan imperial consensus is in play. blaming anti-war movements for more us wars of aggression is truly one of the funniest arguments i have heard in a long time. then again, pro war rhetoric has shown a proclivity to argue for the absurd as if it was the most obvious thing in the world. most iraqis want the usa to leave, most also believe it is ok to attack usa forces. but here we have every politician (minus kucinich and a few others) saying it is time for the iraqis to step up do the work the usa has been doing in its name. what utter nonsense. the usa has no moral authority or credibility in iraq. the sooner it leaves the better.
go ahead and blame the anti war movement for the lack of a draft. but stop the nonsense of blaming the tragic failure of us foreign policy in the middle east on the anti war movement.