Posted on 04/16/2013 7:55:17 PM PDT by RC one
The U.N. Special Rapporteur on drones, British lawyer Ben Emmerson, recently visited Pakistan and told me: "The consequence of drone strikes has been to radicalize an entirely new generation."
The New America Foundation estimates that in Pakistan, drones have killed between 1,953 and 3,279 people since 2004 -- and that between 18% and 23% of them were not militants. The nonmilitant casualty rate was down to about 10% in 2012, the group says.
A study by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism estimates that since 2004, Pakistan has had 365 drone strikes that have killed between 2,536 and 3,577 people -- including 411 to 884 civilians.
U.S. President Barack Obama has maintained the strikes are necessary for defeating al Qaeda and the Taliban, but others including Emmerson have their doubts.
He said: "Through the use of drones you may win the immediate battle you are waging against this particular faction or that particular faction ... but you are losing the war in the longer term."
Emmerson's legal insights will form the basis of his report to the U.N., expected later this year. For the United States, at least, it could make for a damning read.
Emmerson says the drone strikes are illegal under international law as they violate Pakistan's sovereignty and fly in the face of Pakistani government calls for them to desist -- and that they also legalize al Qaeda's fight against America.
He said: "If it is lawful for the U.S. to drone al Qaeda associates whereever they find them, then it is also lawful for al Qaeda to target U.S. military or infrastructure where ever (militants) find them."
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
Boston could be about most anything.
Best to eschew muzzies domestically and internationally.
Terrible idea to arm them in Syria through that arms dealer Ben Gahzi.
Are they really bringing their relatives onto the field when we target them in their homes? We get intel that says so and so is going to be someplace at such and such a time and there will be innocents in the vicinity and then Obama gives the order to proceed. It isn’t as if they’re chaining up women and children around a barracks building or something. We are the visitors. It’s their home field and there are innocents all over the place and we determine that it’s OK to kill them if it gets us so and so. You’re trying to church it up so you can morally justify it. Ignorance is bliss as they say.
I’m not crying and I’m not your sweetheart cookie; furthermore, I served too and in the infantry so don’t throw your service in my face and expect me to get all weak kneed.
It may be true that they have been radicalized, but they overlooked one tiny thing.
*I’ve* been “radicalized.
Especially when they blew up my friend in the basement of the E-ring of the Building on 9/11.
Eff them. HHC’s husband.
dunno bis:
Congressional Research Service Feb. 13, 2013
“Pakistan has in recent years taken a number of steps to increase international confidence in the
security of its nuclear arsenal. In addition to overhauling nuclear command and control structures
since September 11, 2001, Islamabad has implemented new personnel security programs.
Moreover, Pakistani and some U.S. officials argue that, since the 2004 revelations about a
procurement network run by former Pakistani nuclear official A. Q. Khan, Islamabad has taken a
number of steps to improve its nuclear security and to prevent further proliferation of nuclearrelated
technologies and materials. A number of important initiatives, such as strengthened export
control laws, improved personnel security, and international nuclear security cooperation
programs have improved Pakistan’s security situation in recent years.
However, instability in Pakistan has called the extent and durability of these reforms into
question. Some observers fear radical takeover of a government that possesses a nuclear bomb, or
proliferation by radical sympathizers within Pakistan’s nuclear complex in case of a breakdown
of controls. While U.S. and Pakistani officials continue to express confidence in controls over
Pakistan’s nuclear weapons, continued instability in the country could impact these safeguards.
For a broader discussion, see CRS Report RL33498, Pakistan-U.S. Relations, by K. Alan
Kronstadt. This report will be updated.”
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/RL34248.pdf
Ever see the show Bomb Squad Afghanistan?
Go watch an episode and then come back here and spout that!
I take it very seriously over here!
As you were..
Thanks for the info and link.
all I’m saying is that Boston could just as easily be retaliation for these drone strikes as it could be for taxes, or the second amendment, or whatever other right wing cause the media wants to attribute it to. I really didn’t want to discuss the morality of it but that seems to be the direction everyone wants to go with it. What. ever.
/johnny
I’ll be sure to do that.
I dislike people who hijack my threads and make them about something they aren’t.
Listen, sunshine.
I read thru the entire thread and it seems to me that it is you that is hung up on the “morality” of it all.
I am not going to listen to how anybody sez they are justified. They are not.
I recall reading an article very soon after 9/11 how native Afghans took a Russian helicopter pilot’s head and played football with it.
Civilized? Retaliation?
The problem is that we have been trying to win hearts and minds that can’t be won over. And any bleating about “drone strikes” when our guys are getting blown up on the road to East Bumbonkastan ain’t going to change that.
I had an office mate for several years who was of Syrian extraction (thankfully, that ended this year). “moderate” Muslim. One excuse after another as to why what the US was doing was bad. He hated the Israelis.
No amout of buying him lunch (or anything else) would change his mind.
And yes, he voted for Obama.
There is a certain level of psychosis which is hard to overcome.
HHC’s husband.
Bon appetit!
only after being dragged down that path. Fact is though, you’re right, I’m just not going to gloat over dead kids. If you mant to, go ahead though. we’re done here.
Why are they operating out of their homes? The traditional way of war involves moving away from family in order separate military from civilian targets. After a few decades of this, they might finally learn that we don't give a damn about hitting the human shields they think they've assembled around them.
You don't like killing people with drones. I'm ok with it in some places.
I didn't hijack your thread. I spoke to it. And disagree strongly with your conclusions.
Cope.
Or mash that big red 'report abuse' button and get me kicked.
/johnny
If you want to beat your chest and cheer about dead children, go ahead. I won’t. And I didn’t post this to give you the opportunity to do that.
And I don't actually care why you posted the thread. I'll speak to the issue and give you my opinion. It's worth what you pay for it.
/johnny
I do dislike whiney appeasers.
/johnny
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.