Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

The Fatal Flaws in George Bushs War on Terrorism - as Told by those Who Have Participated in it

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-21-07 08:15 PM
Original message
Ignoring human rights helps recruit terrorists, justifies terrorism, and defeats the best thing we have going for us the fact we stand for something better: for freedom, tolerance, and laws that protect all Stephen Grey, from the last sentence of his book, Ghost Plane The True Story of the CIA Torture Program

In his book Ghost Plane, Stephen Grey, Amnesty International Award-Winning Journalist for Excellence in Human Rights Reporting, meticulously documents the illegal and horrendous system of torture and other human rights abuses that George Bush has perpetrated upon the world as part of his so-called War on Terror. That system has three major components: Known U.S. operated prisons at Guantanamo Bay and in Iraq and Afghanistan, where torture and other grave abuses of human rights occur routinely; Secret U.S. prisons throughout the world where similar or worse abuses occur routinely; and worst of all, the program of extraordinary rendition, whereby U.S. officials kidnap (or otherwise gather into their custody) men or boys and transport them to prisons in countries where few or no barriers to the most horrendous kinds of torture exist, in full knowledge that those men are likely to be systematically tortured and never released until dead, with no access to any kind of a system that attempts to determine their guilt or innocence. In his book, copyrighted in 2006, Grey estimates that 11 thousand have encountered such a fate since the onset of George Bushs War on Terror.

In the last chapter of his book, titled Conclusion: Winning the War, Grey explains how George Bushs War on Terror has only increased the terrorism risk, and he notes that it is imperative that an informed debate begins on whether the Wests approach, conducted largely in the shadows, is the right one. Introducing his recommendations for radically changing our approach, Grey says:

Ive spoken both to those who waged this war those closely connected to the CIA and the U.S. government and to those caught up in its operations, including many former prisoners. Despite describing things from different poles, Ive found that most have described a similar story. Few on either side doubt, for instance, the scale of torture implemented within many of the jails where America has sent its prisoners

I have leveled few criticisms broadly against those in the CIA As weve seen, the CIA took its orders from the White House. The men involved were handcuffed from deploying other options through political and legal restrictions.

Instead, the only conclusions I would seek to offer are positive in nature, tentatively answering the question: what should then be done instead? I have sought the advice of both those who have followed this conflict most closely and those who, through their past experience of covert and overt warfare, seem to me to offer the wisest counsel for how the West should proceed. Many of these individuals, unwilling to lose their security clearances, are not named here What follows is, what seems to me, a distillation of sound advice

But before proceeding to Greys four recommendations, here is a basic summary description of the U.S. torture program, from Greys introduction to his book:

Comparing George Bushs War on Terror with Stalins Gulag System

Please keep in mind that Grey makes every effort in his book to avoid exaggeration or any statement that might be seen as an exaggeration. Here are excerpts from his basic description of the U.S. torture program in his introduction:

As I continued my reporting in Washington, I heard whispers that there was something much bigger going on: a system of clandestine prisons that involved the incarceration of thousands of prisoners, not just the few hundred in Cuba. While the president spoke of spreading liberty across the world, CIA insiders spoke of a return to the old days of working hand in glove with some of the most repressive secret police in the world

Much later, when more pieces of the puzzle were in place, I thought of the work of Alexander Solzhenitsyn, the dissident writer. When he described the Soviet Unions network of prison camps as a Gulag Archipelago he was portraying a parallel world that existed within physical reach of everyday life but yet could remain unseen to ordinary people. After years of persecution, Solzhenitsyn described a jail system that he knew from firsthand experience had swallowed millions of citizens into its entrails. At least a tenth never emerged alive.

The modern world of prisons run by the United States and its allies in the war on terror is far less extensive. Its inmates number thousands not millions. And yet there are eerie parallels between what the Soviet Union created and what we, in the West, are now constructing.

Solzhenitsyns works were a gift to those engaged in the ideological struggle of the cold war. He described Russias darkest secrets As a relentless chronicle of human depravity, stretching to more than nineteen hundred pages, his three-part Archipelago was an uncomfortable and challenging journey for any reader, liberal or conservative. For like British author George Orwell, Solzhenitsyn described not only the evils of a totalitarian society but explored what Orwell called the double-think that persuaded ordinary human beings to ignore the atrocities perpetrated so close to their midst

With the cold war now over, it is this description of the Soviet systems surreal quality that still resonates. The Gulag was so very vast and extensive, and yet still it could be hidden in peoples minds. Ordinary citizens could persuade themselves that all was normal even as their next-door neighbor disappeared for most in society the Gulag had a dreamlike, fantasy quality because it was a world that had yet to be experienced Solzhenitsyn wrote of it as an amazing country which though scattered in an Archipelago geographically, was, in the psychological sense, fused into a continent Yet there were many who did not even guess at its presence and many, many others who had heard something vague

How much more than surreal, more apart from normal existence, was the network of prisons run after 9/11 by the United States and its allies? How much easier too was the denial and the double-think when those who disappeared into the modern gulag were, being mainly swarthy skinned Arabs with a different culture, so different from most of us in the West? How much more reassuring were the words from our politicians that all was well?

Four recommendations on how to fight terrorism much more effectively

We must understand what we are fighting and adjust accordingly
Grey notes that George Bush has expanded his War on Terror to include almost all militant Islamic groups that use the weapons of terrorism to achieve their ends. These various groups do not by any means constitute a single entity, and they have a wide variety of motives and specific goals. By treating them all as our enemy we ignore what many of these groups are fighting for, and it creates the danger of driving these organizations into a common front against us.

Bushs war on terror may succeed tactically from time to time by capturing individual terrorists. But there are far more terrorists continuing to spring up than the numbers we are removing. In other words, the key to our war on terror should be seen not as a war against widely disparate individual terrorists rather, it should be seen as a war of ideas. Grey notes:

The lesson from this analysis is not defeatist. It does not suggest that the war on terror is unwinnable. Rather, it suggests that the key battleground is the realm of ideas; that the effort to win the hearts and minds of the Arab world, and counter militant Muslim thinking, outweighs the illusory short-term advantages of resorting to the tactics of repression Winning this war of ideas means getting the policies right. Western policies and ideas must be the ones that inspire people in the Middle East At the heart of the Western message must be the promotion of what the West does best democracy and a pluralistic society.

Defending democracy
Grey notes that the absence of democracy in the Middle East provides fertile grounds for the recruitment of terrorists. Yet, despite all the rhetoric, we are doing nothing to promote democracy there:

In his 2005 State of the Union address, President Bush committed the United States to a strategic goal of establishing democracy in the Middle East Yet, as weve seen in this account, the tactics of rendition employed in the war on terror have involved close cooperation with the worst aspects of the regimes that stand against democracy. It is a counterproductive strategy It is not difficult to see how these relationships foster the impression that our concern for human rights and democracy is shallow rhetoric As America has enlisted these regimes to become allies in the war on terror, its silken words of praise for the progress of Arab dictatorships amount to the same kind of appeasement

Much of the Arab worlds anger against the United States, an anger that recruits young men to violence is directed at some more basic U.S. foreign policies Many also feel deep anger over the U.S. treatment of Iraq confronting a wider Islamic insurgency against the West will require a radical rethinking of many of its public stances in the Middle East. Here, for instance, is an example of how intelligence analysts view the effect of these policies. A secret assessment by Britains joint intelligence committee of the effect of the Iraq invasion, written in April 2005, stated:

We judge that the conflict in Iraq has exacerbated the threat from international terrorism and will continue to have an impact in the long term. It has reinforced the determination of terrorists who were already committed to attacking the West and motivated others who were not.

The need for effective allies
By repeatedly showing his contempt for international law and through his routinely repressive and cruel policies, George Bush has squandered and reversed the good will towards the United States that was widely evident immediately following the 9/11 attacks on our country, even among Arab countries. This has been fatal to our fight against terrorism because we desperately need the support of allies throughout the world. Grey explains:

America has become unrecognizable to many of its oldest, most devoted friends abroad We need to reacquaint ourselves with some of the hard lessons of the Cold War, where we at times undercut our own long-term interests by making common cause with the wrong side simply because it was vocally anti-Communist When we make it easy to hate us, we are also hastening the next attack.

Stop the torture and abuse of human rights
Although torture produces a great deal of information, it is rarely useful information, and it is generally subject to great suspicion regarding its credibility. Furthermore, the rare instances when it produces tactically useful information are greatly outweighed by the strategically negative effects:

Torture also recruits prisoners to support greater extremism For the inmates of these dungeons, their prison experiences will be the most formative of their lives. Innocent or guilty when captured, few will emerge without a burning hostility to the United States and the West After their release from Guantanamo, and from jails across the world, what new jihad will the new generation of tortured prisoners inspire?...

But to my own mind, the reason torture is wrong to employ is not for the pain or anger it causes, nor for its poor intelligence value. It is wrong because it degrades our own societies. It must be concealed with a corroding and hypocritical secrecy, and it undermines the rule of law and our own morality.

My own take on George Bushs War on Terror and Stephen Greys book

I believe that we owe Stephen Grey and others like him a great debt of gratitude for all the work theyve done to expose the U.S. torture system for Americans and the rest of the world to see. Of all the impeachable offenses committed by the Bush and there are a great many I believe that its abuse and torture of its prisoners is the worst.

I do have one important disagreement with Greys presentation, however. Nowhere in his book did he talk about the motives of George Bush and others who have perpetrated this outrage on the world. Rather, he was almost perfectly neutral on the issue of motives, and almost made it sound at times as if he believes that George Bushs approach to his War on Terror, though greatly misguided, is nevertheless well intentioned. Its the same kind of thing that we hear over and over again from our corporate news media and almost all the Democratic politicians. Even when they vehemently disagree with George Bushs policies they give him credit for good intentions.

Not that I necessarily blame Grey (or others) for that. Motives can be very difficult to ascertain; and more important, sometimes by taking a stand on a highly controversial subject one can thereby cause his or her main message to be discounted or ignored. Even Michael Moore, in his great film Fahrenheit 9-11, chose to virtually ignore the question of whether or not the Bush administration willfully allowed the 9-11 attacks to occur (LIHOP) or perpetrated them itself (MIHOP).

But I have no hesitancy myself in declaring that George Bushs motives for his War on Terror are not in the least motivated by any honorable intentions, but rather are motivated solely by his lust for power, if not by worse impulses such as sadism. Ive discussed this issue elsewhere many times, and I wont dwell on it more here, except to say why I believe that this is an issue that is important for us to discuss.

Why discuss motives?

Why is it important to discuss motives, as Dennis Kucinich courageously did when he explained to our nation that a major motivation for our Iraq war was to steal the Iraqis oil? Why not just criticize the policies and forego speculation about motives?

In the case of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney I think it should have been abundantly clear a long time ago that they have no good intention whatsoever ever. With respect to their War on Terror, their dark intentions should be quite evident, among other reasons, by virtue of the fact that they make little or no effort to distinguish the guilty from the innocent. Stephen Grey pointed to many examples in his book of innocent men being thrown into prison and tortured for months on end; Major General Antonio Taguba, charged with investigating the Abu Ghraib prison scandal, said that A lack of proper screening meant that many innocent Iraqis were being detained (in some cases indefinitely) and that 60% of civilian prisoners at Abu Ghraib were deemed not to be a threat to society; and the International Red Cross said that between 70 percent and 90 percent of the persons deprived of their liberty in Iraq had been arrested by mistake.

The Bush administration claims those whom it imprisons in their War on Terror are the worst of the worst. But how can they be believed on this? Worse yet, how can they believe it themselves? Forget about the fact that our prisoners have no access to counsel or opportunity to see the evidence against them. The great majority of them are never even charged with a crime! One of the most basic rights that we Americans were provided in our Constitution was the right to challenge the governments detention of us. Any government that routinely abrogates that right has no right to call itself anything but a dictatorship.

By hanging on to the fiction that the Bush administration is incompetent but well intentioned, though most Americans may eagerly await a change of presidential administration in 2008, they nevertheless have little or no understanding of the magnitude of the threat that this administration poses to our country, to its Constitution, and to our democracy. As long as that understanding eludes the majority of Americans our future continuation as a democracy remains in grave danger.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
JohnyCanuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-21-07 08:46 PM
Response to Original message
1. I agree, Grey seems to completely miss the point.
The neocons have absolutely no desire and no intention of winning the war on terror. At least, not until another convenient enemy is created to become the scapegoat for the war propaganda and hysteria absolutely necessary to keep the population cowed, fearful and on edge and thus willing (or even eager) to trade away more and more of their freedoms and civil rights for "safety" and "security."

"The consciousness of being at war, and therefore in danger, makes handing-over of all power to a small caste seem the natural, unavoidable condition of survival. War not only accomplishes the necessary destruction, but accomplishes it in a psychologically acceptable way.


It does not matter whether the war is actually happening, and, since no decisive victory is possible, it does not matter whether the war is going well or badly. All that is needed is a state of war should exist. (emphasis added /jc) The war is waged by each ruling group against its own subjects, and the object of the war is not to make or prevent conquests of territory, but to keep the structure of society intact. It is often necessary for a member of the Inner Party to know that this or that item of war news is untruthful, and he may often be aware that the entire war is spurious and is either not happening or is being waged for purposes quite other than the declared ones; but such knowledge is easily neutralized by the technique of doublethink. Meanwhile no Inner Party member wavers for an instant in his mystical belief that the war is real, and that it is bound to end victoriously, with Oceania the undisputed master of the entire world.

George Orwell 1984
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-21-07 10:31 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. But I believe that Grey may very well feel the same way that we do about it
I stand in awe of the great investigative work that he did to uncover this abomination.

And he ends with a set of recommendations for combatting terrorism that is 180 degrees away from the direction that Bush is pursuing -- a set of recommendations that would do our country a great deal of good if pursued.

It is very difficult for me to believe that he truly thinks that Bush and Cheney are sincerely trying to combat terrorism by what they are doing.

Rather, I believe that he accurately recognizes that attributing bad motives to an American president is a taboo subject in this country (unless it's a Democratic president), and that if he did that he would lose credibility with a large segment of "moderate" Americans. As it is, he appears so politically neutral that his credibility is much enhanced, and it seems likely that Americans of all political persuasions take his revelations and his recommendations seriously. Remember, even Michael Moore didn't advocate for MIHOP in Fahrenheit 9/11.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
JohnyCanuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-22-07 05:04 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. You could very well be right. n/t
It is very difficult for me to believe that he truly thinks that Bush and Cheney are sincerely trying to combat terrorism by what they are doing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-22-07 02:25 AM
Response to Original message
3. In the last pages of his book, Grey comes very close to characterizing Bush/Cheney for what they are
In the years after 9/11, the administration had tried to create a system that was outside the rule of law, and yet such an attempt was utterly at odds with the very founding principles of the United States.

He then goes on to note how Buhs's torture program with its manifold abuses of human rights was repeatedly rebuffed by our Supreme Court. Then:

President Bush responded to the Supreme Court and declared henceforth all prisoners would be protected by Geneva and all would have their day in court. He finally admitted that the CIA did indeed have secret prisons... The President repeated his torture mantra: The United States does not torture. It's against our laws and it's against our values..."

Bush's supposed concessions were a "Jekyll and Hide routine"... The CIA could continue with what Bush called its "alternative set of procedures"... Bush also proposed a set of "get out of jail free cards" for the CIA. All its practices since 9/11 were to be declared fully legal and its operatives were to be indemnified from prosecution...

Among the biggest untruths from the White House was the claim that... CIA jails were empty... Yet, as I have outlined, the number of alleged terrorists arrested since 9/11 numbered in the many thousands... Bush still offered neither apology nor compensation for the innocent caught up in the system...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-22-07 10:07 AM
Response to Original message
5. Comparison of George Bush's system with the Nuremburg Tribunals
From Grey's book:

Sixty years ago the Allied powers constituted the Nuremberg Tribunals to pass judgment successfully on the most heinous of Nazi crimes. And they did so despite granting rights to prisoners, such as the right to hear the evidence against them, that went far beyond those offered to today's terrorist suspects. The cimes of Al Qaeda were great -- but they were nothing like those of Hitler and his murder squads.

I would love to hear Bush and Cheney try to respond to that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
bleever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-22-07 02:36 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. "I would love to hear Bush and Cheney try to respond to that."
Preferably from the docket, as defendants.

Another excellent piece. Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-22-07 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Thank you bleever --
You are right -- impeachment alone is way too good for those sleazy scumbags.

Nevertheless, at this point I would settle for impeachment alone -- with the hope that they would later be nabbed by the International Criminal Court.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Poiuyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-22-07 04:01 PM
Response to Original message
8. Excellent post
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-22-07 05:13 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Thanks -- I have to say that Grey's book
is the most informative one I've ever read on the Bush/Cheney secret torture system.

Too bad it hasn't gotten a lot more coverage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-22-07 07:00 PM
Response to Original message
10. Some excellent reviews for Grey's book
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
OneBlueSky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-23-07 02:01 AM
Response to Original message
11. another knockout post, time for change . . . thanks for your consistently excellent . . .
overviews of important issues, complete with links . . . I know it takes a lot of work and a lot of commitment, so I just wanted to express my gratitude for your efforts on behalf of truth and change . . . k/r . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-23-07 02:51 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Thank you very much OneBlueSky
I enjoy doing this a great deal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
HCE SuiGeneris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-23-07 11:07 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. It heartens me to see this kind of information
Edited on Sat Jun-23-07 11:09 PM by BushDespiser12
see the light of day. Great post TFC!

K & R

How sad that this didn't get more exposure, and I was too late to give it a Rec.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
SpiralHawk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-23-07 03:36 PM
Response to Original message
13. "It's not a war on terrorism, so stop saying that" - Commander AWOL
"Please get it right: it's a republicon crony oil-profits CRUSADE -- and all honest and patriotic Americans know it"

- Commander AWOL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Gold Metal Flake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-23-07 11:00 PM
Response to Original message
14. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-23-07 11:12 PM
Response to Original message
16. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
NastyRiffraff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-23-07 11:29 PM
Response to Original message
17. Another book to add to my reading list
Thanks for the honest review, and analysis. K&R!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Nov 20th 2017, 06:16 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC