Posted on 10/06/2012 12:12:41 AM PDT by bruinbirdman
The Wall Street Journal has shed light on the obscure operations of the CIA’s drone program in Pakistan; operations generally condemned by Pakistani leaders but thought to be conducted with tacit assistance from the Pakistani military. According to the report, “About once a month, the [CIA] sends a fax to a general at Pakistan’s intelligence service outlining broad areas where the U.S. intends to conduct strikes...The Pakistanis, who in public oppose the program, don’t respond. On this basis, plus the fact that Pakistan continues to clear airspace in the targeted areas, the U.S. government concludes it has tacit consent to conduct strikes.” The legality of this “tacit acceptance” rationale has been questioned by some lawyers inside the administration. Top State Department legal advisor Harold Koh believes “this rationale veers near the edge of what can be considered,” say U.S. officials, but Koh still believe the program is legal. A group of lawyers known as the “council of counsels” is apparently trying to develop a new framework for the legal legitimization of drone strikes. Complicating matters, there is a lack of international legal precedents on drone strikes to draw from.
U.S. drone attacks have decreased in frequency over the past year, down to an average of four a month as compared to ten a month at the program’s peak in 2010. The drop can be attributed to tensions in the U.S.-Pakistan relationship -- Pakistan closed a CIA drone base operating from inside Pakistan in December 2011 – and the “thinner ranks of al Qaeda after years of strikes.”(Wall Street Journal, September 26, 2012)
Very interesting. Hope it is true.
One problem led to another and Pakistan got fed up with the Taliban in Pakistan, especially those in the Tribal Areas who traversed across the border.
Finally Pakistan told everyone in the area they had a certain amount of time to evacuate or anyone left would be considered Taliban or Taliban sympathizers.
The Tribal Area became a virtual free fire zone. No one was there but enemies of Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Few recall, but when this transpired, it put the kabosh on western press references to possible "civilian" collateral damage. There are no civilians in the Area.
So the free fire zone is still in effect. Pakistan makes a few PR statements for domestic consumtion, The Obammunist kills fewer comrades on occasion for domestic consumption.
yitbos
You don’t litigate war. If you are still trying to litigate it, then either you are not yet at war, or you haven’t yet figured out that you are at war.
We have too many people in government who think victory is optional. Either get them out or get the soldiers out. Our guys deserve better.
Considering the fact drones are to be used here in the US... this is horrible. This is like congratulating the President on executing a US citizen without trial, then hoping you are not next. From fast and furious and every other “work around Congress” event, this is a criminal government.
Friggin’ skynet. End the thing now.
stakes=states
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.