How the White House learned to love the drone

[Robb]

Good, unflinching piece on the drone program. Precarious position that needs attention, frankly.

http://arabnews.com/world/article55499.ece">How the White House learned to love the drone

(snip)

The CIA won't disclose how it verifies who's who among the casualties, but former officials say drones will linger overhead, in some cases for hours after each strike so the CIA can literally count the bodies.

(snip)

To justify its extensive use of drones in targeted killings, Obama administration lawyers poured over reams of legal opinions and findings. They pointed to precedents as far back as World War Two, when a squadron of US fighter planes tracked and shot down the airplane carrying the architect of Japan's surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto.

"In a different time and place, that action might have been seen as unchivalrous or unsportsmanlike," Conrad Crane, director of the US Army Military History Institute, said of the 1943 targeted killing.

Like technology, battlefield norms "change by year, change by culture," Crane said. "But taking out enemy leaders is an important part of warfare and has been going on for millennia."

[ShortnFiery]

1. Yes, and I am both appalled and saddened by these events.

Who, in particular, gets to choose who lives and who dies?

Targeted Executions via Drone:

1) No Charges;
2) No Trial;
3) Summary Execution; and
4) Collateral Damage

= EVIL

[jaxx]

2. Saving our troops lives = good.

[ShortnFiery]

4. Killing "suspects" without trial is NOT saving our troops. If anything we are creating ...

more terrorist for every innocent "suspect" or "collateral victim" these evil "killer drones" murder.

Using drones for *targeted executions* is fomenting MORE TERRORISM against Americans both at home and abroad. No way in hell does it make ANY SENSE that this immoral act makes Americans safer.

Can anyone logically claim that killing people labeled as "suspects" without charges and or a trial is going to make Americans safer, either at home or abroad?

[jaxx]

6. Oh yes it is saving troops lives.

Those regions are not easy to get in to and we'd be sitting ducks. That sounds like bushspeak, the drones creating more terrorism. Immoral it may be, but this is the war the bushies put us in to and left us there to rot.....and to allow the Taliban to be back on top with the little Iraq interlude. It's ugly and it's mean, but it's the way it is for the moment. Those mountains should have been torn apart long ago when we had the chance. But it was left over...bush's wars.

[ShortnFiery]

7. Oh no. Perhaps some troops are not targeted "on site" but it doesn't make AMERICANS safer

either at home or abroad.

I don't know if you have noticed, but this is NOT a tightly kept secret. In decades past, the CIA has always spooked around doing all kinds of illicit stuff but the EXECUTION part of their actions was kept *under wraps.*

In other words, we are announcing our IMMORALITY and the rest of the world who is not on "our payroll" fears and/or despises the USA.

We are trashing our image throughout the world and Americans are less safe each time the CIA erroneously labels an innocent "suspect" and/or kills women and children in the immediate area.

[jaxx]

8. Will you quit with the make Americans safer stuff?

Nothing is going to make us safer, it's too late for that. The best we can do is beat them (the Taliban) down and get the hell out of there. Drones are the new war weapons, unmanned and technologically advanced. I can't think of one weapon that is a good thing for the opposing side. War is killing, that's why we should stay out of them....but these are leftovers and the work is yet to be done.

All the world doesn't hate us, and our image is improving whether you like it or not.

[ShortnFiery]

9. You just don't get it, do you? We are NOT at war in Yemen and Somalia.

This is PURE EVIL not fighting a war.

No, these killer drones are beyond the pale.

YES, as more and more innocents are inadvertently MURDERED because they happen to be ID'd as "suspects" or near those guilty (without trial) suspects) more and more men are going to join the ranks of the true killers: al Qaeda not the rag tag localized Taliban.

Yes, this is NOT just warfare, it's just plain EVIL.

[jaxx]

12. I don't think you get it.

The war games have changed. There is no country of which we are 'at war'. There are people who live within varying countries who do not have our best interest at heart. Those are the targets....the ones who aren't making America safer.

War is evil, why do you think the military runs it and the Pentagon? Because they go to school and learn how to kill and then go out and piss people off until they get their way. Never again do I ever want to see a military lifer be POTUS, for that very reason.

By the way, those ragtag Taliban are most likely embedded in with the al-Qaeda's in those regions where the drones are doing their business. Bush left them to regroup, and to be worse than the first time. Where is the putting down of the 2 wars on his watch?

[ShortnFiery]

13. Just FYI

I graduated in the upper 5% of my Military Science class and received a Regular Army Commision, January 1982. I served for four years and then resigned my commission in order to attend graduate school.

Yes, I'm aware that "War is Hell." My brother was in the 101st Airborne in Vietnam and my father was battlefield commissioned during WWII. I was honored to serve in the Army but what we are doing now is NOT just.

[jaxx]

16. Things have changed since WWll.

We don't declare war anymore, we just police the action. When bush went to starting wars with no provocation the whole shebang went south. What we have now is the result of that ignorance, one ongoing mess and one about done.

Killing is killing, somebody dies and it's really never just.

[ShortnFiery]

19. Not declaring war is a slippery slope. Especially when "terrorism" has been ...

effectively handled in Europe via MOSTLY law enforcement type agencies.

We are creating a more dangerous world by allowing our government to task-out these drones to countries we are NOT occupying. There will come a time, sooner rather than later, that the police will begin to use these to monitor the citizenry. We need to, as a nation, have a discussion whether we want unmanned aircraft to be used as a "policing action" before the decision is made for us?

Protecting America against TERRORISM has nothing to do with WARFARE.

We can keep the American people safe by better securing our borders and educating our police force networks who are already in place.

Countering Terrorism should be "a police action" not a world-wide venture at empire building.

For a further breakdown of Iraq and Afghanistan please see post #17.

[dionysus]

14. CR)USIE MISSLES!1!!!

[ShortnFiery]

18. Thanks, I provided a thoughtful response to you below.

I understand that you can't help yourself with this tired-ass response. It's cool. :hi:

[Robb]

3. The issues, while weighty, are not what you're describing.

"Targeted executions by drone" is just a silly way to talk about it. It's no different than targeting by cruise missile, or 500-lbs bomb from 8K feet, or a long-range rifle shot. It's warfare.

The most serious question involves whether the CIA can legally operate these weapons in wartime. They are technically a civilian agency, and as such are not protected under international laws of warfare as combatants.

Civilian agencies cannot wage war. They cannot kill people abroad. And they cannot expect to be exempt from charges that they did so illegally, as we've seen in Spain.

[ShortnFiery]

5. No, we are operating these EVIL killing machines in Somalia and Yemen -

We can't claim to be "at war" with the whole damn world!

If that is the case get Congress to claim WWIII because these evil drones will come HOME to the continental USA.

We have to stop this NOW!

It's pure evil to MURDER people without charges and a trial.

p.s. If this is ALL a CIA endeavor, have Congress fully investigate them and cease this illicit activity.

[Robb]

10. Are you afraid of robots or something?

You aren't making any sense. Is all warfare evil and murderous? That is a position people can reasonably take.

If not, how is a drone more evil than a cruise missile? Or a bullet? You understand they are not autonomous, right?

There is reason to be concerned, but it's not what you seem to be on about.

[ShortnFiery]

11. No, I'm making perfect sense. Newsflash: The world is not the MIC's battlefield playground.

It would be one thing if they could keep these missions classified but when our CIA brags about *targeted executions* and commits these within countries that we are not at war with, then that's NOT WARFARE, it's vile and simply "murder."

Yes, if we aren't paying them off, the vast majority of nations in the world either fear or hate us. There's no in-between when you're a big ass bully and "targeted executioner."

I fear that the powers that be want to usher in WWIII. Using these vile killer drones is an ideal way to radicalize large numbers of Asian men to join al Qaeda.

Mission Accomplished! BushCo's American Crusade 2001+ is about to go World-Wide. :nuke:

[dionysus]

15. so now obama's starting WW3?

[ShortnFiery]

17. No, you know that is not what I'm implying.

However, let's pause and consider why we are in both Iraq and Afghanistan?

Iraq? We will NOT EVER go lower than 50,000 troops and many of them will be combat ready. Why? The moment we even attempt to leave, a civil war will begin to dust up. The powers that be know this so we will continue to prop up a "Puppet Regime" who is pro-USA.

Afghanistan? We are propping up and illegitimate (remember he stole the election?) leader who a former executive of UNICAL (pipeline-istan). He is NOT supportive of women's rights and controls very little of this country outside of the major population centers. Thus Hamid Karzai enjoys the title, "The Mayor of Kabul." This "leader" is ultra-corrupt and hated by all the tribal peoples within the large expanses of rural and mountainous areas.

So, why are we there? We're there to prop up our lovable thug, Hamid Karzai, because if we pull out the MIC would FAIL to make the big bucks of of all their pretty weapons and armaments. No joke, we have always had to have some MADE UP skirmishes and forays into foreign lands to keep the MIC feed and healthy. In other words, Eisenhower was spot on.

Let's ponder the Taliban? Did they attack us on 9-11? NOPE. However, because there's hardly any al Qaeda in country, we have to fight them because the are easy to *demonize* and the only viable enemy left. But are they really viable? Unlike the NVA they don't even have an organized military. Killing the Taliban other than the hard task of locating them in a harsh land is not unlike "shooting fish in a barrel."

ENTER IN use of these drones tasked for *targeted executions.* The occupation itself is seen by the rest of the world as American Thuggery in and of itself, but when you add in the killer drones and dare to send them across the border to Pakistan (a country we are NOT at war with or occupying), you're going to stir up a great deal of ANGER among many nations who don't happen to be allies of the USA.

In conclusion, by picking off the localized Taliban and thus injecting our combat troops in the middle of a civil war, we are CREATING MORE TERRORISTS each and every day. Hell, it's not lost on the average Afghan citizen that the "puppet" we are propping up is the brother of the biggest drug warlord in their country. Again, the tribal people loathe Hamid Karzai.

Good luck with winning the hearts and minds in Afghanistan. The war is over and now the MIC is just using the country for target practice.

[boppers]

20. NVA? Hearts and minds?

Wow, that's from another century.

[ShortnFiery]

21. Yes, but at least, during the Vietnam "conflict" we had an organized army to fight ...

Afghanistan is 100% unconventional warfare but we have all the coolest war toys. Yet, the Taliban are going nowhere. Not unlike the Vietnamese, they are patient and will meld back into the populace.

As the big bad USA we can bomb the hell out of them, but sooner or later, we will go broke before we control the tribal regions. The poor rag tag tribal peoples within the Taliban are more than willing to wait us out. :shrug:

[Soylent Brice]

22. times change, warfare changes. this much is very true.

new technologies and different cultures will come and go. if you want to win a war then you must be able to adapt, and be the first one to do so.

BUT

i believe we have the ability to avoid war completely, making the need for drones obsolete.

peace is the cheapest and most effective answer to any conflict.

there will come a time when the concept of war itself will be obsolete. the only way that day will come is if we alter our attitudes towards peace as a viable solution now, rather than later.