Been listening to the new podcast on Gallagher's war crimes trial, and I need to take issue with the basic conceit: "the series explores just how blurred the line between right and wrong has become in the forever wars."
Wrong. The line isn't blurry. 1/ podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the…
The series makes a dangerous fundamental misunderstanding of the law. Gallagher was accused of an extradjudical execution and targeting of civilians. That's not blurry or a grey area. That's a war crime. Under both IHL and the UCMJ. No ambiguity.
I keep waiting for an IHL lawyer to be interviewed on the podcast and explain this but it's episode 5 and none have appeared yet and I don't think one is coming.
The series overall is too credulous of the SEAL's self-aggrandizing mythology generally. But there are some good points. Especially the analysis of moral injury from Bill Russell Edmonds, who wrote an important book on the subject: pegasusbooks.com/books/god-is-n…
And @dtaberski is an excellent storyteller. I've really liked his previous podcasts, especially "Surviving Y2K." Getting the courtroom tapes makes excellent audio. The series is well produced. But the law issue is fundamental to the show's whole message & it's significantly off.
Listen, there is a lot of moral ambiguity in war. There are morally abhorrent actions that are legal. And I don't just mean killing "the enemy." I mean, it can be legal under IHL to kill hundreds of civilians if they are co-located with a significant military target.
That's a grey area, perhaps. But that's not the Gallagher case.
IHL provides tremendous flexibility for militaries to fight. It is written by and for armed forces, to provide the absolute minimum protection for civilians, lay out the barest bones of what is clearly over the line. Like extrajudicial executions and targeting civilians.
Taberski notes that @amnesty didn't definitively accuse the US of war crimes in Mosul. This is true. The legality of a case sometimes relies on knowing the commander's intent for an airstrike, knowing what information they had.
This is why we said US actions in Mosul "may amount" to war crimes. It's not that the line is blurry, it's that we didn't have all the information to know whether the line had been crossed in every case. amnesty.org/download/Docum…
So why does this matter? This isn't a nerdy legal dispute. This is about 20 years of war skewing America's compass. That the country thinks executing prisoners might be normal. That purposely targeting old men getting water from a river is just a "hard thing" about war, ....
... the cost of doing business, "war's hell" and all that. But it's not. Executions are not a grey zone that the country asks of its SEALs. It is a war crime. Full stop. Don't be confused. /end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
A true joy of researching the Klondike gold rush was diving into the wealth of historical imagery. So every day between now & pub, I want to share a photo. Like this iconic shot of the Chilkoot Pass: 1/
Prior to the 1897 rush, few prospectors worked the creeks off the Yukon. The indigenous people knew of the gold but had little use for it. The Russians barely left the Alaskan coast. Americans didn't arrive until the 1870s. To me these guys look made of soot and frostbite. 2/
Early settlements like Fortymile were poor miserable places. The few miners dug out barely enough gold to cover costs and stay in the country. Sled dogs weren't fed in summer (cuz they weren't working) & so stole and ate anything left unguarded, incl (in 1 story) a lit candle. 3/
Important investigation here on the strike on the Shushi cathedral in October. The ordnance scraps collected at the scene remain a bit of a mystery, but to me they point to IAI (Israel Aerospace Industries) as the likely manufacturer. (photos in thread below)
The font (particularly the "AO" and "0"), the data plate layout, the basic design, etc are all similar to other IAI products. For example, this Mikholit missile (this one labeled in Hebrew, because used domestically - Israel uses English in their exports).
We've gotten a lot of feedback on this piece. Some is in bad faith, but some is legit and from researchers and journalists I respect, so let me answer a few concerns. 1/?
(I don't feed trolls. And I ignore government bots. But if you have constructive thoughts, reply away, I'll leave it open)
Q) A lot is going on in the conflict, why is your report so short?
Because it's not a report, it's a press release. Our reports, like this recent one on Yezidi kids, is 64 pages. Our output on the NK execution vids is less than 1000 words. amnesty.org/en/latest/news…
Interesting use of web design here to explain this painting. But the pieces misidentifies the man in green, who is (my opinion) the key to it. I wrote about him in my book DISAPPOINTMENT RIVER. Warraghiyagey, the bridge between whites and the Iroquois. 1/ nytimes.com/interactive/20…
"Warraghiyagey" was Sir William Johnson, named by the Mohawk as "One Who Does Much." In the painting, he is the only main figure doing anything, running into the scene while everyone else sits and watches General Wolfe die.
Johnson was a British aristocrat who created a fur trading empire in the Mohawk Valley of upstate New York in the mid-1700s by partnering with Hendrick, the Mohawk chief.
On my run today, listening to @Tmgneff on this podcast, I thought about the various discussions I've been having with veterans since the Afghanistan Papers story came out.
I realized I had been conflating two things: was this wrong, and was this news? (1/?-book list to follow)
I realized I have almost skipped past the wrongness, long ago having become accustomed to the official dissembling, what @AdrianBonenber1 calls "the absurdity and cravenness of this chartified process." It makes me angry, but it no longer surprises. newrepublic.com/article/155918…
So it is surely wrong for the gov't to lie & mislead for decades. But is it news? This is the part I had focused on, and on this score, I stand firm. Anyone paying attention (everyone should be) knew the US military has been disingenuous since...well, let's say the post-WWII era.
Over the last week, protesters in Baghdad have died with some absolutely gruesome injuries. Every doc we talked to said it's trauma like they've never seen.
Listen, there are videos out there of these horrific injuries at the moment of impact. Do yourself a favor and don't watch them - your sleep will thank you. The CT scans from hospital afterward are bad enough, as you can see.
Why such awful trauma? Less-lethal weapons can always kill when used incorrectly, and police should never fire grenades directly at people. But this is a new level of damage. Not only are Iraqi security forces firing at point blank range, they are using a heavier kind of grenade.