America's murderous drone campaign is fuelling terror
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/may/29/americas-drone-campaign-terrorMore than a decade after George W Bush launched it, the "war on terror" was supposed to be winding down. US military occupation of Iraq has ended and Nato is looking for a way out of Afghanistan, even as the carnage continues. But another war the undeclared drone war that has already killed thousands is now being relentlessly escalated.
From Pakistan to Somalia, CIA-controlled pilotless aircraft rain down Hellfire missiles on an ever-expanding hit list of terrorist suspects they have already killed hundreds, perhaps thousands, of civilians in the process.
At least 15 drone strikes have been launched in Yemen this month, as many as in the whole of the past decade, killing dozens; while in Pakistan, a string of US attacks has been launched against supposed "militant" targets in the past week, incinerating up to 35 people and hitting a mosque and a bakery.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)So it must be nurtured and encouraged to grow, that's what the drone strikes are for, creating new enemies.
If we stop killing people overseas then they will eventually forget about us and get on with their own lives, can't have that, it wouldn't be prudent.
2on2u
(1,843 posts)future and the past.
Kolesar
(31,182 posts)existentialist
(2,190 posts)and creates 11 new terrorists and 25 new terrorist sympathizers, it is counterproductive.
Therefore it is a losing strategy.
I made this point before on DU and got flack for arguing the point because by making the point I supposedly missed the moral point which is that such drone strikes are immoral so the argument on the point of effectiveness should not even be considered.
I reject that criticism.
The drone strikes may be immoral; I won't argue against that.
If they are also counterproductive, however, then the counterproductivity adds magnitude to any morality arguments.