Uglier Sides
A couple articles worth checking out on Afghanistan, one with an interview with someone who was an early part of our rendition programs... the other painting a far less optimistic look at the Afghanistan situation than the Obama Administration is putting forward to justify his draw down of forces.
Some Will Call Me a Torturer
...
But CAPTUS doesn’t divulge the al-Qaida plans the CIA suspects him of knowing. So the agency sends him to “Hotel California” — an unacknowledged prison, beyond the reach of the Red Cross or international law.
Carle goes with him. Though heavily censored by the CIA, Carle provides the first detailed description of a so-called “black site.” At an isolated “discretely guarded, unremarkable” facility in an undisclosed foreign country (though one where the Soviets once operated), hidden CIA interrogators work endless hours while heavy metal blasts captives’ eardrums and disrupts their sleep schedules.
Afterward, the operatives drive to a fortified compound to munch Oreos and drink somberly to Grand Funk Railroad at the “Jihadi Bar.” Any visitor to Guantanamo Bay’s Irish pub — O’Kellys, home of the fried pickle — will recognize the surreality.
But Carle — codename: REDEMPTOR — comes to believe CAPTUS is innocent.
...
It's a long article but interesting. Given the nature of the material it's difficult to say how much is accurate or if it will ever be possible to confirm or give the other side of the story.
UN Shreds US Claims on Afghanistan
So this is what “fragile and reversible” progress looks like in Afghanistan: violence is up 51 percent since this time last year, thanks to a hurricane of insurgent suicide attacks, assassinations and bombs, undermining U.S. military claims that it’s breaking the momentum of the Taliban.
The closest thing the war has to a report card comes in the form of a new quarterly report from the United Nations. And the American troop surge appears to be dangerously close to flunking. According to the U.N., not only is violence on the rise, but so are civilian casualties. Compared to the spring of 2010, civilian deaths and injuries are up 20 percent, with 1,090 dead and 1,860 wounded. Over 435,000 Afghans are displaced by the war, a 4 percent rise.
The U.N. report directly contradicts an emerging talking point in the U.S. military. Lt. Gen. John Allen, the incoming war commander, told a Senate panel on Tuesday that “violence is five percent lower so far this year in comparison to last year,” (.pdf) a statistic that David Ignatius attributes to Gen. David Petraeus in his Wednesday column. Not only is violence not going down, if the U.N. is to believed, it’s going way up — far from a war effort that’s arresting Taliban momentum.
...
Obviously far from encouraging. Certainly not the greatest stories I wanted to stumble upon on a long weekend for Independence Day. Sort of ruined the mood of my otherwise patriotic history-nerd fun.
Any thoughts, comments, etc. Feel free to share. I'm a bit overwhelmed to process it all.


2 comments:
Very good article. Well written. A skeptic like me is always looking for holes. But in the first page of this article he clearly conveys:
* the John Yoo memorandum outlining where the official line was. (the official answer)
* that he and his associates never felt that they could or should act with impunity. (what actually happened
* the way he articulated 'no black and white hats', the 'gray world', 'motivations and actions are sometime contradictory'.
All of these points passed my BS meter with flying colors. This guy is clearly on the level. This is a powerful piece with no real right or wrong answers. Only a great study of what can happen, what situations you might be thrust into, how it played out, what you might have done if you were in the same situation, and most importantly... what can I learn from this?
It appears he did have a case of 'fall in love' with the 'target'. But you know what, I'm not sure that's a bad thing. Dignity and respect allows you to look yourself in the mirror each morning. He's not really denying it as well, he carefully articulates that he came to conclude that the measures employed were counter productive, and that there was not as fully developed of a method for the Agency to conclude they 'got it wrong' as opposed to amping up the pressure to finally get someone to acknowledge preconcieved notions. I also like that he refused to speculate how many 'innocent men' are swept up by the CIA for enhanced interrogation.
Thanks for the article.
CometBaby
I'd argue, but I think you hit the nail on the head.
Post a Comment