It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

41 men targeted but 1,147 people killed: US drone strikes – the facts on the ground

page: 2
25
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 12:42 AM
link   
The problem is, the militants dont wear uniforms.
So how do you know that the numbers are fact?

I could have a pickup with 7 guys on board.. all hell bent on butchering Christans..

drone strike comes.. all of a sudden i have 1 dead terrorists and 6 peace loving innocents dead.
edit on am1243308172015-11-17T00:43:42-06:00122015p by Agit8dChop because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 01:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978
When you are sitting 7,000 miles away and in control of such destructive weapoms, it must be far easier to press the button.

Although I am sure whoever does, has searched their soul extensively.




Obama has bragged about using these drones himself to kill people with, even though it included hundreds of children, none of his supporters chastised him for it. Maybe they are afraid of being called racists or something. And right after he pushed weapons release and a dozen kids turned into barbecue, he decried how guns were killing kids over here and so he wants to take those away. That makes sense.
Soul searching? Yep, he is always looking for some poor little souls to kill and bragging how he was getting good at it. Our dear leader. ;barf



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 04:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: purplemer
The use of drone airstrikes in the military is continuing to rise as they are being deployed more and more in battle situations. They are portrayed as a relativly safe form of hardware but the reality seems far from the truth. That is I found the numbers staggering.
Do people think its acceptable to have such a ratio kill rate of innocents. I really cant believe this type of warfare is allowed.





The drones came for Ayman Zawahiri on 13 January 2006, hovering over a village in Pakistan called Damadola. Ten months later, they came again for the man who would become al-Qaida’s leader, this time in Bajaur.


www.theguardian.com...




Eight years later, Zawahiri is still alive. Seventy-six children and 29 adults, according to reports after the two strikes, are not.


I just wonder how much the US govt would screaming their lungs out about this if this was happening them.



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 05:48 AM
link   
People controlling drones are probably doing it with the same empathy of a video gamer.
Whoever think that the illegal drone killing abroad is in any way, shape or form justified is as terrorist as the ones ordering, flying, killing and killed.

Shame on whoever think that collateral damage on assassination is ok. YOU ARE THE TERRORISTS.



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 06:54 AM
link   
a reply to: ~Lucidity

But not angry enough to expunge radical ideology/militarism from their own communities.
edit on 11/17/2015 by kosmicjack because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 07:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: kosmicjack
a reply to: ~Lucidity

But not angry enough to expunge radical ideology/militarism from their own communities.


And how exactly are they supposed to do that? They are damned if they do (if they speak out against them their families are killed by the terrorists), and they are damned if they don't (minding their own business and killed by drones).



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 07:21 AM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv

I agree.

IMHO, it has to start in the mosques. Any leaders who are teaching radical ideology should be shunned, removed by the communities they serve.



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 08:43 AM
link   
a reply to: purplemer

They sound extremely inaccurate -it's incredible this is allowed at all. What happened to the Geneva Convention and all that? "Collateral damage" they call it.





posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 11:18 AM
link   
a reply to: FamCore




They sound extremely inaccurate -it's incredible this is allowed at all. What happened to the Geneva Convention and all that? "Collateral damage" they call it.


I know slippery words are used so that such laws can be by passed. Ie torturing people without trial..

happy day to you




posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 11:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: kosmicjack
a reply to: kaylaluv

I agree.

IMHO, it has to start in the mosques. Any leaders who are teaching radical ideology should be shunned, removed by the communities they serve.


What about the people that fund them..?



new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 1   >>

log in

join