Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Out of sight, out of mind, the story of US drone strikes in Pakistan.

page: 1
11

log in

join

posted on May, 16 2014 @ 04:33 AM
link   
OUT OF SIGHT, OUT OF MIND.

The link, contains a visual presentation of the number of US drone strikes in Pakistan.

Found the site to be interesting from the perspective of how many of these events are occurring at any given time.

An estimated 3000+ people have been killed in this manner.

From the Site.


Since 2004, the US has been practicing in a new kind of clandestine military operation. The justification for using drones to take out enemy targets is appealing because it removes the risk of losing American military, it's much cheaper than deploying soldiers, it's politically much easier to maneuver (i.e. flying a drone within Pakistan vs. sending troops) and it keeps the world in the dark about what is actually happening. It takes the conflict out of sight, out of mind. The success rate is extremely low and the cost on civilian lives and the general well-being of the population is very high. This project helps to bring light on the topic of drones. Not to speak for or against, but to inform and to allow you to see for yourself whether you can support drone usage or not.
edit on 16-5-2014 by benrl because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 16 2014 @ 04:49 AM
link   
Just some thing to note, the red bodies are Children and Civilians.

The grey, are "combat aged males" and the white all 50 of them, high profile terror targets.

Change a term, and suddenly males teenager and up become combatants, instead of collateral...



The category of victims we call “OTHER” is classified differently depending on the source. The Obama administration classifies any able-bodied male a military combatant unless evidence is brought forward to prove otherwise.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 04:52 AM
link   
Its a pretty little graph that's for sure..



But what are you telling me? That Obama sits in the white-house with a map of churches and schools, and deliberately advises his generals to fire? Id say the CIA is more than capable of issuing a strike, wouldn't you?

How about we look at this under a positive light.. its good to see a president doing something on the offensive instead of waiting around like Bush to get hit? Imagine if he had of spent 12 months bombing Tora Bora in 2000 to eradicate Osama.. and a few schools!

No that's not right is it ...

Considering the speed in technological advances with the drone, It makes sense that 10years ago there weren't many strikes. 10years ago what type of drones were the US and CIA operating in foreign nations airspace? I'm guessing that's an even lower statistic!



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 05:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Agit8dChop

Perhaps oversite and re-addressing of policy that allows the executive branch to hold such power as to wage such wide scale continuous operations, that lead to mass causality , when no official deceleration of war has been made.

3200 dead with zero accountability ?

I think we need to revisit the checks and balances that are supposed to prevent unilateral action by the executive, things that we brushed aside out of fear of what might happen.

At the point we do not bat an eyelash at 500 civilian dead is the point we may be in the wrong on this issue.
edit on 16-5-2014 by benrl because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 05:10 AM
link   
a reply to: benrl

I made a thread about this last year, here.

S+F nevertheless. This needs to be reposted until these crimes end.

I emphasised this part at the time, because it is particulary disturbing:

The category of victims we call “OTHER” is classified differently depending on the source. The Obama administration classifies any able-bodied male a military combatant unless evidence is brought forward to prove otherwise. This is a very grey area for us. These could be neighbors of a target killed. They may all be militants and a threat. What we do know for sure is that they are targeted without being given any representation or voice to defend themselves.

So much for the presumption of innocence.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 05:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: ColCurious
a reply to: benrl

I made a thread about this last year, here.

S+F nevertheless. This needs to be reposted until these crimes end.

I emphasised this part at the time, because it is particulary disturbing:

The category of victims we call “OTHER” is classified differently depending on the source. The Obama administration classifies any able-bodied male a military combatant unless evidence is brought forward to prove otherwise. This is a very grey area for us. These could be neighbors of a target killed. They may all be militants and a threat. What we do know for sure is that they are targeted without being given any representation or voice to defend themselves.

So much for the presumption of innocence.


Well, I'll be.

I was appalled back than,

I guess with all the absurdity the past year it slipped my memory completely.

Who can keep up,

Sad thing is, year later, and can we say anything has gotten better on this issue.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 05:40 AM
link   
I really hate drones that are use for direct combat.

Its the literal personification of cowardice.

Since the dawn of time and war you risk a guy to kill a guy thats just how its done.


Send a casio watch strapped to a model plane with a missile on it is not war thats being a yellow son of a bitch.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 05:56 AM
link   
Lets not forget either the "high profile" targets they have killed multiple times. I also swear they just make the stuff up about the "named" target. I mean, who can honestly corroborate it? We just have to take their word.

The whole thing about groups of "military aged males" is ridiculous and so widely encompassing, it almost makes anyone a legitimate target, in the eyes of the drone operators and their "Intel" handlers.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 05:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Britguy

didnt you hear?

If you accidentally kill some guy woman or girl, just say they were high profile and its all okay.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 07:53 AM
link   
They seem to think all that are around even one terrorist are potential terrorists, no matter were they children etc. Drone is on the way, we gonna git that one bastart even if we have to blown up God knows how many ppl with him, that does sound rather similiar to other groups that i heard about, thats right terrorist them self. How would these civilian ppl see you guys there? Not the ones you actually want to kill of to protect your country.. but those who got their family members blown pieces becouse they walk in wrong spot etc.. In a way you guys should just drop biggest bomb now than wait some years and get your enemies grow up, becouse they will start coming soon enought to america for more warfare and there seem to be ppl in america who would propably like that very much, even some false flag terrorist strikes would be very lucritive for certain parts of your leaders, to get drones in americas air for protection, less freedom, more control etc.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 12:16 PM
link   
anyone remember in somalia with all those kids who were shooting at UN troops too? They would give kids guns and tell them to go shoot at them. Just because you are a kid dont mean if you shoot at someone you arent gonna get killed in return. And since 2007 it seems the numbers of civilians has dropped alot.



posted on May, 17 2014 @ 03:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: benrl
Sad thing is, year later, and can we say anything has gotten better on this issue.


Indeed.
A year later, and this is still a rather unpopular topic. Almost like a taboo, avoided and ignored- even here on ATS (for the most part).





new topics

top topics



 
11

log in

join