The inconvenient results of Obama's drone policy

U.S. drone strike on Yemen wedding party kills 17

Anger over the American drone campaign against militants in Yemen swelled Friday with word that most of those killed in a strike a day earlier were civilians in a wedding party. The death toll reached 17 overnight, hospital officials in central Bayda province said Friday. Five of those killed were suspected of involvement with Al Qaeda, but the remainder were unconnected with the militancy, Yemeni security officials said.

U.S. drone strikes have become commonplace in Yemen, where government measures have proven ineffectual against what is considered one of the most virulent Al Qaeda offshoots in the region. However, civilian deaths like those in Thursday’s strike have inflamed popular sentiment against both the U.S. and the fragile central government.

http://www.latimes.com/world/worldn...edding-20131213,0,4137970.story#axzz2nVJsikCY

 

Gen McChrystal: US drone activity causes 'tremendous resentment'

McChrystal said there is a danger that drones will be used as an “antiseptic.”

“There's a danger that something feels easy to do and without the risk to yourself, almost antiseptic to the person shooting, doesn't feel that way at the point of impact. And so it lowers the threshold for taking operations because it feels easy, there's a danger in that,” he said.

“And then the other part is there's a perception of arrogance, there is a perception of helpless people in an area being shot at like thunderbolts from the sky by an entity that is acting as though they have omniscience and omnipotence, and you can create a tremendous amount of resentment inside populations, even not the people that are themselves being targeted, but around, because of the way it appears and feels.”

“So I think that we need to be very, very cautions: what seems like a panacea to the messiness of war is not that at all,”

http://rt.com/usa/mcchrystal-afghanistan-presence-drones-991/

 

Personally I feel there is a time to use Drones and a time not to.

The entire Drone issue stems from a certain reality and that reality is that when Winter approaches in Afghanistan Taliban and Al-Qaeda Members cross the Afghan boarder and move into Pakistan and specifically the Pakistan Waziristan Tribal Region to spend the winter there as guests of the Tribal Leaders there.

Now the Leaders of Pakistan did not want to allow U.S. Troops to be on the ground overtly in Pakistan as Pakistan has enough issues with the huge number of Islamic Extremists existing there already and to publicly allow U.S. Forces in to an area that the Pakistani Military does not even go as Warizistan is a Islamic Wild West that has it's own ancient Warlords and Tribes.

So Pakistan cut a deal with the U.S. in which Pakistan allows small U.S. Covert Teams along with Langley directed Drone Strikes to eliminate Taliban and Al-Qaeda leaders as as the deal goes when such a drone strike occurs Pakistan will PUBLICLY DENOUNCE such drone strikes but privately support them.

Now VERY RARELY a Drone Strike mistake will occur but most reports of massive civilian deaths caused by U.S. Drone strikes are VASTLY overstated...still such propaganda causes a great deal of resentment toward the United States as since such reports of massive casualties usually occur when some type of function is going on and 99% of the participants are Taliban or Al-Qaeda along with their families....well I personally won't shed a tear.

But even if we never made a mistake it would not matter as the Muslim World is going to believe what they chose to believe.

Now here is the current problem....right now we have several areas of the world where now that we have pulled out most of our forces Taliban and Al-Qaeda elements have come out of hiding and have become resurgent.

This is a MAJOR PROBLEM as we have to make it very CLEAR to the Middle Eastern Nations that they MUST do something about this because I can tell you....if anything like 9/11 were EVER to happen again....the U.S. Military response would make the Invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan look like a few kids shooting cap guns at each other because I HAVE SEEN some of the U.S. Military contingency plans that most likely would be put into effect and the results for the people in the Middle East are too terrible to contemplate.

These Middle Eastern Leaders have to get a hold on this because if WE have to go back....we are going to FINISH THIS once and for all.

AboveAlpha

 

the new government in Pakistan isn't exactly happy with our drone policy, last year the Pakistani's had an election in which the two anti-drone parties swept the election. Imran Khan's PTI party went from being a party with no seats in parliament, to being the second majority leader. The majority winner was Nawaz Sharif's (now prime minister) PML party

now that Sharif is in power he has demanded an immediate halt to US drone strikes in Pakistan, insisting that they create more terrorism and resentment with each strike... in which the US failed to comply with their wishes.. so the Pakistani government then issued a complaint to the UN, in which the UN responded by adapting an international resolution against US drone strikes

http://tribune.com.pk/story/648078/...e-un-adopts-resolution-against-use-of-drones/

In its official reaction, Pakistan immediately took credit for the unanimous resolution against drone strikes. “Pakistan successfully coordinated with like-minded states to include references to the use of drones in the resolution,” said a statement issued by the foreign ministry

Yemen's parliament also made a response to US drones by passing a vote to end all US drone strikes in their country

http://rt.com/news/yemen-parliament-bans-drones-294/

HOWEVER, this was essentially a symbolic vote, as the Yemeni president/dictator's power overrules all parliament power. The US's drone strikes are currently protested by every major human rights organization across the world, and as mentioned earlier the strikes are also highly unpopular on the global scale, particularly in the middle eastern countries where they take place.. which many people have argued is creating more terrorists and a wide ranged resentment towards the US

edit:

also, it is US policy to reduce the number of recognized civilian deaths by labeling ALL military aged males in the strike zone a "enemy combatant" until it can be proven otherwise (guilty until proven innocent)

 

I am aware of these things and I agree that Drone Strikes are creating issues....but Pakistan also knows that if the U.S. does halt such strikes THEY will be responsible for dealing with the problems on the ground...something they are not willing to take on or accept.

AboveAlpha

 

Nah, antiseptic would have been laying waste to Kabul from 40,000 feet on 9/12/01 and then flying home and forgetting all about it. Which was my recipe at the time. Boots on the ground, occupation, regime change, all just baloney.

 

That's a macho result, not a logical one.

Doing like you said would not have at least pushed the country in the right direction. Yes, there is corruption that abounds, even with us there, but you can't destroy a city and expect the population to like you. It wasn't the citizens of Kabul that attacked us on 9-11.

 

Most of the problems in Afghanistan are caused by Pakistan. Keeping hands off Pakistan means nothing is going to work for long in Afghanistan.

 

it was also our troop surge in Afghanistan that drastically increased the number of Taliban personnel flooding into that country to begin with, and in regards to Pakistan not wanting to deal with the problem themselves.. that is not entirely true, if you've ever listened to Imran Khan speak, that is exactly what he campaigned for.. to end all US aid going into Pakistan (saying it only creates corruption), and to make the war on the Taliban in Pakistan a Pakistan lead conflict rather than an American lead conflict

 

He might say this but he is lying his ass off!!!

The Pakistani Military does NOT want any part of entering the Warizistan Tribal are where the Taliban and Al-Qaeda members stay during the winter.

AboveAlpha

 

Maybe, but pushing a country in the right direction has never worked without devastating that country first. Notice how compliant Germany and Japan have been over the years. Notice how non-compliant Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq have been. Either plan to get the adversary to say 'uncle' or stay home. The only other choice is to be satisfied with retaliation.

 

Killing in the name of algorithms

An imam dies in a U.S. drone strike days after preaching against Al-Qaeda. American missiles wipe out a carload of shoppers, including a mother and her 10-year-old daughter. A wedding is ruined when a drone attack kills a dozen guests.

These are some of the most well-documented cases of civilian deaths from President Barack Obama’s secret war in Yemen. In each instance, multiple witnesses with broadly consistent accounts have told several independent parties what they saw. When media attention to one of these stories reaches a certain pitch — as the December 2013 wedding convoy strike recently did — the administration typically issues a spare, unattributed denial without further explanation or any contradictory evidence.

As a result, despite the strenuous efforts of field journalists and investigators at Reprieve — the nonprofit I work for that represents victims of the war on terrorism — and other organizations, the public lacks answers to essential questions. How do these keep mistakes happening? Why do they persist after Obama claims to have reined in his drones? Why do his officials refuse even to engage witnesses?



read the rest here-> http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/3/drones-big-data-waronterrorobama.html

 

From Aljazeera?

REALLY?

As if THAT is an unbiased source?

Have we make some mistakes...absolutely.

But such things happen in war and the U.S. limits civilian casualties to a greater extent than any Military has in the HISTORY OF WARFARE.

AboveAlpha

 

that is a completely false statement..

in fact our military probably kills more civilians than any other first world country on the planet, which is why people join these terrorist organizations who are at war with us.... but feel free to name one that does kill more that the US... or better yet.. name how many other countries have nuked civilians?

edit:

as mentioned earlier, the US counts any military aged male (which is 15 years old) as a military combatant as a way of lowering the actual civilian casualty rate

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012...can-soil-is-now-considered-a-battle-zone.html

 

can you name one war that has civilian casualties have not been reported, it's sad, but a reality of war, maybe we should ban needless wars rather then banning the weapons of war

 

The West has a free press, which is not the same as having an accurate one, but nonetheless everything gets reported sooner or later, so it's easy to create the illusion that we're just committing one atrocity after another simply by never reporting what the other side is doing, and neither are the other sides handicapped by a free press, which also means they can commit atrocity after atrocity with total impunity, and people like some in this thread can feign some sort of moral high ground they don't really have and spin what they want.

 

At least Obama and his administration never lies about how many citizens that are killed

 

Whenever the 'moralists' get around to convincing these terrorist vermin to quit hiding in civilian areas and making a point of having as many children around them as possible, using them as human shields, let us know; then we might take all the faux moralizing seriously.

 

it's not about the technology, it's how the technology is used... we're talking about a war that's been going on for over 10 years, and now with drones we're bombing nations we never declared war on (we've bombed 6 different countries under Obama, under Bush it was only 4) Instead of using military uniformed pilots, these drones are being used by the CIA, and thus the executive branch is able to work around its military power limitations

also keep in mind that the war on terror is not like any ordinary war against another country where a declaration of surrender is signed.. it is a war against an ideology.. and thus there is no surrender... it's instead an endless conflict, and the more civilians we kill.. the more people are inclined to join the ideology which has declared war against us (as has been pointed out earlier in this thread, the number of terrorist activities has gone up in every country we have us military force in)

 

If that was a valid premise, then according to it terrorists like the Taliban and Islamo-vermin in general would creating far more enemies than the U.S. is; they've killed far more innocent civilians compared to some occasional 'mistake' allegedly committed by the U.S. So much for this simplistic nonsense theory. Just admit you're shilling for an ideology yourself with dishonest propaganda, false conflations, and hubris.

 

I know right

"Hey hear the news Uncle Bill is getting married on Saturday

"Will Uncle Ukmad be there ?"

"Yes"

"I think I have a camel needs his toe nails cut that night - but you guys go anyway, I am sure you will have a blast"

 

Excellent point, because that's all U.S. policy is over there, targeting weddings and seeking out children to kill.

 

Actually.. what I'm telling you is exactly what has been explained by pentagon review panels... time and time again they've looked into the source of terrorist activity, and they have found that these organizations do not hate our freedom, they hate our policies.... and every country we have used military force in, there has been an increase in terrorist activity (as demonstrated earlier in this thread)

Terrorist attacks and deaths hit record high, report shows
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/10/28/terrorist-attacks-and-deaths-hit-record-high-report-shows/

U.S. “War On Terror” Has INCREASED Terrorism
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/10/u-s-war-on-terror-has-increased-terrorism.html

Terrorist Attacks More Than Quadrupled In Decade Since Sept. 11, 2001, Study Finds
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/04/terrorist-attacks-soar-since-september-11_n_2235483.html


..so I mean, you can still argue "no no no, these terrorists activities have nothing to do with what we do overseas" ...but the actual statistics, and the pentagon itself says otherwise

edit:

As for the US confirming these civilian casualties... again, they do not count any military aged male as a civilian, and have in fact worked with other countries in throwing reporters in jail for confirming said civilian casualties.

[video=youtube;20z6L1BhcBM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20z6L1BhcBM[/video]

 

[video=youtube;wFQwbxFPVfo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFQwbxFPVfo[/video]



U.N. rights forum calls for use of armed drones to comply with law

The United Nations called on all states on Friday to ensure that the use of armed drones complies with international law, backing a proposal from Pakistan seen as taking aim at the United States.

A resolution presented by Pakistan on behalf of co-sponsors including Yemen and Switzerland did not single out any state. The United States is the biggest drone user in conflicts including those in Pakistan, Yemen, Afghanistan and Somalia.

"The purpose of this resolution is not to shame or name anyone, as we are against this approach," Pakistan's ambassador Zamir Akram told the U.N. Human Rights Council.

"It is about supporting a principle."

The United States prizes drones for their accuracy against al Qaeda and Taliban militants. Pakistan says they kill civilians and infringe its sovereignty.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/28/us-un-rights-drones-idUSBREA2R0WW20140328

 

Over 60% of US drone targets in Pakistan are homes – research

http://rt.com/news/161376-pakistan-drones-houses-target/