Drone Strikes

Jonny7

Yes, US officials and the administration are downplaying it, and there are many who are conversely up-playing it for personal and political reasons.

The fact of the matter is that the drones ARE killing innocents.

But it's a war.

Once the drones are withdrawn, the militants are still there, killing thousands.

The Pak army then has to employ conventional methods that will very likely kill many more than the current use of drones

But by that stage those foreigners who vehemently oppose the drones will likely be ignoring the civilian deaths (hands washed of issue) and the locals will have no foreign force to scapegoat

If Obama withdraws the drones, he is indirectly responsible for more deaths from militants, a more powerful enemy in the region and increased pressure on Afghanistan and civilians there.

Anyway I've made my point.

Jonny7

Be like Nutella wrote: »

What ratio is acceptable to you? 10-1, 20-1, 30-1 ?

and don't gimme 'you gota break a few eggs' logic coz that's psychopathic.

You might to seriously reexamine your logic then because your thoughts on Syria seem to run contrary

Jonny7

Pakistan says drones have killed 67 civilians since 2008

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-24742037

Literally in the same week that Sharif officially called on the US to end drone strikes

cyberhog

Call for explanation

The latest figures released by Pakistan differ dramatically from previous estimates, but no explanation was given for the apparent discrepancy.

Pakistan's previous estimate was at least 400 civilians murdered by Obama's drones with a further 200 of the total dead likely to be civilians.

How can they go from at least 400 down to 67 and not offer an explanation?

Maybe Pakistan is still secretly colluding with the US and has given in to US pressure to downplay the civilian deathtoll?

Despite repeatedly denouncing the CIA’s drone campaign, top officials in Pakistan’s government have for years secretly endorsed the program and routinely received classified briefings on strikes and casualty counts, according to top-secret CIA documents and Pakistani diplomatic memos obtained by The Washington Post.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/top-pakistani-leaders-secretly-backed-cia-drone-campaign-secret-documents-show/2013/10/23/15e6b0d8-3beb-11e3-b6a9-da62c264f40e_story.html


Pakistan has to make it clear why they have changed their estimate so dramatically otherwise I will consider the figures from independent organisations to be closer to the truth.

MonaPizza

In a revolting display of gutlessness, similar to Bush never attending a single funeral of anyone killed in wars that he sanctioned, a family (victims of American drone strikes) have addressed congress. They travelled halfway around the world from Pakistan to tell of their loss and horror.

FIVE members of Congress showed up for the address.

I thought I had seen contemptuous displays of cowardice like Powell pretending to hold vials of some farcical poison in front of the UN or Rumsfeld saying "we know where they [WMD] are. They're in the North, East, South and West somewhat (!!!)"

But this family, of whom EVERY member of Congress was aware was to address and speak of their nightmare, were further insulted by the weasels in the house not even showing up.

Brave people indeed, congressmen. Vote to kill kids and then don't have the balls to face them when they simply want to say something back.

Nauseating.

bumper234

Here is a twitter feed that lists every drone strike

https://twitter.com/dronestream

Be like Nutella

http://unmanned.warcosts.com/stream?utm_source=bravenew&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=unmanned_nd

Unmanned: America's Drone Wars
link for this documentary will only last today I think

Be like Nutella

- former Director of National Intelligence Admiral Dennis Blair

" Drone strikes are no longer the most effective strategy for eliminating Al Qaeda’s ability to attack us. Al Qaeda officials who are killed by drones will be replaced. The group’s structure will survive and it will still be able to inspire, finance and train individuals and teams to kill Americans. "



For more information on the civilian deaths and their impact:

The London Bureau for Investigative Journalism http://bit.ly/pnLj30


Reforming U.S. Drone Strike Policies: Micah Zenko January 2013

http://www.cfr.org/wars-and-warfare/reforming-us-drone-strike-policies/p29736

- Zenko puts forward a substantive agenda. He argues that the United States should end so-called signature strikes, which target unidentified militants based on their behavior patterns and personal networks, and limit targeted killings to a limited number of specific terrorists with transnational ambitions.

old_aussie

more killed in another successful drone strike.

Revenge by the CIA for the killing of CIA officers?

PESHAWAR, Pakistan (AP) — A U.S. drone strike killed the leader of the Pakistani Taliban Friday, intelligence officials said. The death is a major blow to the group a day after the government said it started peace talks with the militants.
Two Pakistani intelligence officials in North Waziristan also confirmed his death as did two Taliban commanders who said they had seen the remnants of the militant commander's mangled body.
The strike killed four other suspected militants, according to the two Pakistani intelligence officials.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/01/hakimullah-mehsud-dead_n_4192320.html

Be like Nutella

US drone strikes killed 400 in Pakistan, says UN

http://www.independent.ie/world-news/americas/us-drone-strikes-killed-400-in-pakistan-says-un-29673225.html

bumper234

MonaPizza wrote: »

In a revolting display of gutlessness, similar to Bush never attending a single funeral of anyone killed in wars that he sanctioned, a family (victims of American drone strikes) have addressed congress. They travelled halfway around the world from Pakistan to tell of their loss and horror.

FIVE members of Congress showed up for the address.

I thought I had seen contemptuous displays of cowardice like Powell pretending to hold vials of some farcical poison in front of the UN or Rumsfeld saying "we know where they [WMD] are. They're in the North, East, South and West somewhat (!!!)"

But this family, of whom EVERY member of Congress was aware was to address and speak of their nightmare, were further insulted by the weasels in the house not even showing up.

Brave people indeed, congressmen. Vote to kill kids and then don't have the balls to face them when they simply want to say something back.

Nauseating.

Even more shocking is Obama was meeting the CEO of weapons manufacturer lockhead martin while this family told their story.


http://m.aljazeera.com/story/201311193857549913

Unre4L

Media reporting that American drone killed the Taliban leader on his way to a peace talk with Pak government, who are protesting at the timing of the bombing.
This is sheer display of American backstabbing. For all these years they dont touch him as he bombs the **** out of Pak civilians but the moment they plan peace talks, Americans bomb him. Now Taliban are promising revenge attacks...on Pakistan.

Interesting thing is that similar event took place in Afghanistan as they planned talks with Taliban.

Meanwhile Obama happily talks of leaving Afghanistan by 2014. What a mess to leave behind and its fully intentional.

Successor to the dead guy was named the same day. Only difference is that there will be no more peace talks. Only blood and American accusations that Pakistan is not doing enough (bleeding).

Jonny7

Unre4L wrote: »

For all these years they dont touch him as he bombs the **** out of Pak civilians but the moment they plan peace talks, Americans bomb him. Now Taliban are promising revenge attacks...on Pakistan.

Actually they've been after this guy for a good while (after killing his predecessors), even the Pakistanis had a bounty on his head

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/03/hakimullah-mehsud

bumper234

Jonny7 wrote: »

Actually they've been after this guy for a good while (after killing his predecessors), even the Pakistanis had a bounty on his head

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/03/hakimullah-mehsud

This does not take away from the fact that yet AGAIN the American government has gone against the wishes of a sovereign government and murdered people.

Jonny7

bumper234 wrote: »

This does not take away from the fact that yet AGAIN the American government has gone against the wishes of a sovereign government and murdered people.

The wishes? Pakistan allows the drone strikes.

bumper234

Jonny7 wrote: »

The wishes? Pakistan allows the drone strikes.

Do you know something the Pakistani interior minister doesn't?

Khan called the drone attack "murder" to the peace effort, but hoped the process could continue. He said he warned the U.S. ambassador previously that American drone strikes should not be carried out while Pakistan was trying to hold peace talks and no Taliban leader should be targeted.

When asked whether he thought the U.S. was trying to deliberately scuttle the peace process, the minister responded: "Absolutely.""The efforts have been ambushed," the minister said

http://www.wsvn.com/news/articles/world/21012123586939/pakistan-slams-us-for-killing-taliban-leader/

Be like Nutella

Robert Grenier, head of CIA’s counter-terrorism center from 2004 - 2006
Ex CIA station chief Pakistan

“We have been seduced by [drones] and the unintended consequences of our actions are going to outweigh the intended consequences.”

“We have gone a long way down the road of creating a situation where we are creating more enemies than we are removing from the battlefield. We are already there with regards to Pakistan and Afghanistan”

Nabeel Khoury, the deputy chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy in Yemen from 2004 to 2007

“Drone strikes take out a few bad guys to be sure, but they also kill a large number of innocent civilians,”

Barbara Bodine, U.S. ambassador to Yemen 1997 to 2001.

“Drones are a weapon of terror in many ways, and the kind of hostility this is going to breed may not be worth the counter-terrorism gains”

Be like Nutella

Assertions by Obama administration officials, as well as by many scholars, that these operations comply with international standards are undermined by the total absence of any forms of credible transparency or verifiable accountability. The CIA’s internal control mechanisms, including its Inspector-General, have had no discernible impact; executive control mechanisms have either not been activated at all or have ignored the issue; congressional oversight has given a ‘free pass’ to the CIA in this area; judicial review has been effectively precluded; and external oversight has been reduced to media coverage which is all too often dependent on information leaked by the CIA itself. As a result, there is no meaningful domestic accountability for a burgeoning program of international killing. This in turn means that the United States cannot possibly satisfy its obligations under international law to ensure accountability for its use of lethal force, either under International Human Rights Law or International Humanitarian Law. The result is the steady undermining of the international rule of law, and the setting of legal precedents which will inevitably come back to haunt the United States before long when invoked by other states with highly problematic agendas.

The Above is a quote from a paper by former UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions Prof Philip Alston, which can be downloaded from the link below.

The CIA and Targeted Killings Beyond Borders, Prof Philip Alston
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.c...act_id=1928963

Targeted Killings: The US, the UN and Accountability by Philip Alston
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crtAuI50vgs

Jonny7

bumper234 wrote: »

Do you know something the Pakistani interior minister doesn't?

Nope, he's doing his job brilliantly - expressing shock and outrage whena drone strike happens... whilst tacitly in the knowledge that they allow, even help plan, such strikes.

Gets the look good condemning the "Great Satan" whilst at the same time, they knock off another rather unpleasant chap from a group who have a penchant for blinding Pakistani school children and strapping bombs to teenagers.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/top-pakistani-leaders-secretly-backed-cia-drone-campaign-secret-documents-show/2013/10/23/15e6b0d8-3beb-11e3-b6a9-da62c264f40e_story.html

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/apr/12/musharraf-admits-permitting-drone-strikes

Of course, if it was an Indian drone, well I wonder how many minutes it would last in Pakistan airspace.

Be like Nutella

Yes it is true that some of what we are calling here 'the Pakistani government' have tacitly allowed the US to do 'some' of the strikes. That is true.

To repetitively focus on that element of this subject just shows you are not willing to deal directly with the fact that hundreds of US drone strikes in Pakistan have killed more than 500 civilians, killed mostly low level terrorists and not made the US any safer than it would have been without these drone strikes.

The US administration has sold the drone strikes to both congress and the US population on the basis that drone strikes kill terrorist leaders and make the US safer which is completely untrue and you know it.

That you agree with the military tool of drone strikes to kill Taliban militants who would cross into AG and kill AG/US troops is drawing your own positives from the use of drone strikes... but is NOT the stated goal of the US drone strike program.

The 400+ drone strikes which the US has carried out have been targeted killings in one form or another, which is illegal under US and international law.

The lack of clear information concerning civilian deaths and the legal contortionism which the US admin has employed since journalists and human rights groups forced this debate into the public, only in the last couple of years, has brought the issue away from the physical reality that the US has been engaged in a messy immoral poorly executed assassination campaign which abused the tool of robotic drones flown by 22 year old so called pilots who operate from total safety with 6 months training from 7000 miles away.

The inability to properly report upon and investigate this targeted killing program is what allows it to continue. I guarantee that IF the actual strike files on at least 50 of the most heinous drone strikes which have killed 20+ people EACH were uncovered to the public, and to congress, showing the open eyed mass slaughter of innocent civilians and family members of the supposedly intended targets - then this program would have been shut down a long time ago.

The CIA run this quasi paramilitary kill program using SOCCOM and JSOC and they own the drones. The CIA is an out of control kill squad now and needs to be slapped back into its box - back to its remit. The only reason the CIA took the lead on this as we know well is that they don't have to answer to anybody if they don't want and their oversight is and has traditionally been laughable. Obama was given an option when he came into office by John Brennan and co which was:

you can't put US troops in harms way any more. We can't go into Pakistan where AQ hide in the mountains but we have to be 'seen' to do something against so called 'Global Terror' so your only option is to use drones - we'll do it through the CIA and nobody will be able to report properly on it so we can get away with it for a few years before the treehuggers start making enough noise and then we'll just change our strategy i.e. slow down the strike freq and maybe reduce the number of blind kills i.e. signature strikes - that was the option they gave him and he took it with both hands even though it went against everything he stood for in his career as a constitutional lawyer. He chose what he thought was the best choice of a bad selection.

He thought that assassinating anyone who even looked like a terrorist in some far away Pakistan mountain region would physically make the US safer and he was wrong... and now he has to answer for it. Him and the 'drone priests' who took him for the ride.

That's the reality.

Out of the 4000+ men women and kids blown to bits by drones since 2004 how many of those people represented a clear and imminent risk to the USA?

There isn't any serious or respected opinion out there in the press or within government or within the think tanks who think that even 100 materially important 'hard to replace' AQ leaders/commanders have been taken off the battlefield that cannot be replaced easily. And what's better as a recruitment drive then the strewn bodies of kids after a drone strike of the double strike on first responders after an initial strike???

The very image of a drone recruits vengeful family members and young impressionable males to turn Jihadist against the US directly.

cyberhog

Be like Nutella wrote: »

Yes it is true that some of what we are calling here 'the Pakistani government' have tacitly allowed the US to do 'some' of the strikes. That is true.

The US administration has sold the drone strikes to both congress and the US population on the basis that drone strikes kill terrorist leaders and make the US safer which is completely untrue and you know it.

I agree and I also think it is important not to understate the part Pakistan is playing in the drone strikes becasue the lies from both sides are fueling the hatred between the two countries.

Two-Faced Allies: Pakistan and the U.S.


It’s an old script. Regardless of whatever cooperation is involved, both countries always find it more useful to paint the other as the villain. The Pakistani government, which in reality is playing a central role in the war on terror, gets to paint itself as the victim of a bullying superpower.

Meanwhile, American officials keep pointing to Pakistan’s “double game” for most of their failures in Afghanistan, while downplaying the fact that, without Pakistan, this war would have been impossible to wage in the first place.

The real root of the dysfunction is not so much deceit between allies as the lies both governments have told their own people. Pakistani and American leaders have systematically and purposefully misled their own publics about the nature and details of their partnership. Each country has used the other as a strategic and convenient punching bag.

The stark disconnect between reality and rhetoric now makes both governments’ pronouncements sound absurd. There have been more than 300 American drone strikes in a remote corner of Pakistan. And while Islamabad continues to denounce these strikes, Pakistani citizens see thousands of trucks carrying huge shipping containers on the highways every day, bringing supplies to the American military in Afghanistan. Likewise, Americans have learned that billions of dollars in aid is still flowing to Pakistan, despite the fact that Osama bin Laden was living a mile away from Pakistan’s main military academy for years.

The resulting confusion is making Americans and Pakistanis hate each other. A Pew Research Center poll in July found that America is more disliked in Pakistan than anywhere else. A Gallup poll a few months earlier found that the countries most disliked by Americans are Pakistan, Iran and North Korea.

The lies that were meant to hold Pakistan and America together in a time of war, are now imperiling the alliance they were meant to protect.

Read More: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/05/opinion/two-faced-allies-pakistan-and-the-us.html?_r=0

bumper234

Imran Kahn saying he will block NATO supply routes until drone strikes end in Pakistan


http://mobile.businessweek.com/news/2013-11-21/imran-khan-vows-to-block-nato-pakistan-supply-route-over-drones


Former Pakistani cricketer Imran Khan vowed to permanently block a supply route to U.S. forces in Afghanistan starting tomorrow as he seeks an end to drone strikes in the country’s northwest, where his party holds power.

Jonny7

I presume as soon as the drone strikes stop Khan will put as much focus onto the militias that are killing many more of his countrymen - I sincerely hope he isn't capitalising on the selective focus on drone deaths which are relatively minor in comparison to casualties inflicted by Pashtun militias rampaging further south

Either way, Khan will have to deal with the Pak authorities whom have authorised the drones strikes, and, like Khan at the same time decry the drone attacks..

Politicking at it's very best

Jonny7

Be like Nutella wrote: »

Out of the 4000+ men women and kids blown to bits by drones since 2004 how many of those people represented a clear and imminent risk to the USA?

The large majority (virtually all in the last two years) have been Taliban/militia leadership and members.

These are the same who kill local Pakistanis for not adhering to strict religious rules, they decapitate elders who don't fall into line with them, they throw acid at and shoot school children. They brainwash and then strap bombs to teenage boys to use them as suicide bombers - whom are then sent to blow up mosques and places of worship in towns and villages who oppose their presence.

The militias and Taliban are crossing from Pakistan into Afghanistan where they seek to impose the pre-2000 rule of the Taliban - which involves attacking Afghan villages and towns, killing NATO troops and organising terrorist attacks

They are attacking NATO convoys crossing the Khyber and also conducting large attacks in Pakistan resulting in massive casualties

They aren't exactly popular with Pakistan whom they are currently locked in a war with

However, it's an invisible war and few outsiders care of it's current status, nor it's implications.

Be like Nutella

"The large majority (virtually all in the last two years) have been Taliban/militia leadership and members."

You're very incorrect about the 'total' number killed so far by drones

but correct about the number killed in the last 24 months yes.

Would you like to account for the majority who were killed before the last 24 months? because I can support the general consensus that a massive proportion of those killed before the last 24 months, which represents the vast majority of the total, were civilians who were mostly killed during signature strikes over a 3 year period.

Go look at the facts and come back before we get into a pointless unsupported argument.

last 24 months - yes you are correct - before that? no you are patently wrong and demonstrably so. I'm not going to do the work for you the studies have been done go read them... nobody does see thats the problem right there.

Jonny7

Be like Nutella wrote: »

because I can support the general consensus that a massive proportion of those killed before the last 24 months, which represents the vast majority of the total, were civilians who were mostly killed during signature strikes over a 3 year period.

The statistics show otherwise

New America Foundation statistics correlated by the below
http://natsec.newamerica.net/drones/pakistan/analysis

The purpose of this database is to provide as much information as possible about the covert U.S. drone program in Pakistan in the absence of any such transparency on the part of the American government. This data was collected from credible news reports and is presented here with the relevant sources. It was updated with information from the latest Pakistan strike, which occurred on November 1, 2013.






The Bureau of Investigative Journalism statistics
http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/category/projects/drones/

• Total strikes: 370
• Total reported killed: 2,548 - 3,549
• Civilians reported killed: 411 - 890
• Children reported killed: 168 - 197
• Total reported injured: 1,177 - 1,480
• Strikes under the Bush Administration: 52
• Strikes under the Obama Administration: 318

The Long War Journal
http://www.longwarjournal.org/pakistan-strikes.php

bumper234

Jonny7 wrote: »

The statistics show otherwise

New America Foundation statistics correlated by the below
http://natsec.newamerica.net/drones/pakistan/analysis

The purpose of this database is to provide as much information as possible about the covert U.S. drone program in Pakistan in the absence of any such transparency on the part of the American government. This data was collected from credible news reports and is presented here with the relevant sources. It was updated with information from the latest Pakistan strike, which occurred on November 1, 2013.






The Bureau of Investigative Journalism statistics
http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/category/projects/drones/

• Total strikes: 370
• Total reported killed: 2,548 - 3,549
• Civilians reported killed: 411 - 890
• Children reported killed: 168 - 197
• Total reported injured: 1,177 - 1,480
• Strikes under the Bush Administration: 52
• Strikes under the Obama Administration: 318

The Long War Journal
http://www.longwarjournal.org/pakistan-strikes.php

So almost a thousand innocent people killed and almost 200 of those were children. Do you think that this is an acceptable number of innocent people to continue drone strikes? What did those 200 children do that they were such a threat to America that they deserved to be blown to bits?

Jonny7

bumper234 wrote: »

So almost a thousand innocent people killed and almost 200 of those were children. Do you think that this is an acceptable number of innocent people to continue drone strikes? What did those 200 children do that they were such a threat to America that they deserved to be blown to bits?

I am countering the point that a large majority of those killed were civilians not militants.

For instance, Pakistan claims 67 civilians have been killed since 2008, with some 2160 militants killed.

bumper234

Jonny7 wrote: »

I am countering the point that a large majority of those killed were civilians not militants.

For instance, Pakistan claims 67 civilians have been killed since 2008, with some 2160 militants killed.

Ok I'll ask in a different way. How many dead children is an acceptable number? What's that magic number of dead innocent children before you would say "hold on this is wrong"

Jonny7

bumper234 wrote: »

Ok I'll ask in a different way. How many dead children is an acceptable number? What's that magic number of dead innocent children before you would say "hold on this is wrong"

I can understand opposition based on US intereference in Pakistan but not an overall concern for civilians lives

Civilian deaths caused by drones or by militants?

One is far higher than the other and largely ignored

It's a nasty conflict, and with the drones removed, the Pak army will use conventional weaponry, which will cause many more deaths and injuries to innocents, something that Emerrson pointed out in his recent UN report

I have a suspicion that for some, once the drones are pulled that the conflict will vanish and so will their concern for civilians..

I don't support the drones because I believe they'll always be used as a scapegoat for Pakistan's real problems - and that in the long term that scapegoating has very real effects (recruitment from the Madrassa's, sympathy for the Pakistan Taliban)

However, drones are the most humanitarian way to fight the militants