U.S. drone kills 12 suspected militants in Pakistan

page: 1
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 03:11 PM
link   

U.S. drone kills 12 suspected militants in Pakistan


www.reuters.com

(Reuters) - A U.S. drone aircraft killed at least 12 suspected militants on Friday when it fired missiles at a compound in Pakistan near the Afghan border, Pakistani intelligence officials said.

The death toll from the strike in the Dattakhel region in North Waziristan could rise, the officials said.

Many Pakistanis say drone attacks that kill civilians are a violation of Pakistani sovereignty. The attacks are one of several factors straining ties between Pakistan and the United States.

The United States and Pakistan resolved one of their most heated disputes this week when U.S. Secre
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 03:11 PM
link   
These drone strikes just keep on coming don't they?
And these militants were just suspected...
With drones in our airspace now, it kind of makes you think.....
What would happen if one of us were to be suspected of something?

Pakistan says that these strikes are an attack on their sovereignty..
I thought we were allies.

www.reuters.com
(visit the link for the full news article)
edit on 6-7-2012 by mikemck1976 because: grammer



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 03:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikemck1976

Pakistan says that these strikes are an attack on their sovereignty..


Well, technically they are -- the attacks are unauthorized in a country with whom we are not at war, so they have a point. The US counter-point, of course, is that Pakistan doesn't do anything about these guys who fight in Afghanistan and then run across the border to hide in Pakistan, so the incursion is justified.

Some in the Pakistani government are truly angry about it, but I'm sure that there is a not-small contingent that likes the US doing it in this manner -- they get rid of the radical element in NW Pakistan, and can bluster against the US to show their people that they "aren't really" in favour of the killings.



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by mikemck1976
 


Amazing isn't it????? It seems that whomever is killed by a drone strike, is automatically considered a militant!!! Can you say propaganda? Just wait till the drones start firing on Americans................I guess it will be acceptable as long as the MSM tells us it was "militants"...........................



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 03:58 PM
link   
Sounds like we have some trigger happy nerds behind computers thinking they are playing the newest Grand Theft Auto game. I mean really these people who are flying these drones are trigger happy...They can smoke whomever they want with 0 blowback...Messed up. *shakes head*

-SAP-



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 04:04 PM
link   
My biggest problem with this is that we are not at war with Pakistan. On the other hand, I don't see Pakistan is innocent in any of this. I believe they give the US the green light and make a big fuss afterwards as a distraction.



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 04:05 PM
link   
How many of the militants were still in diapers?
I'm so tired of hearing these reports mentioned so casually - it is an everyday occurrence after all but jeez.. we really have no good idea of who we've killed until after the debris is cleared.
Our super-duper 'precision" strikes leave much to be desired in terms of collateral damage.



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 04:14 PM
link   
reply to post by SloAnPainful
 


I'm no military expert by any means, but I suspect that the nerds behind the computer screens are not the ones making the actual decisions on who/where/when to kill. They are carrying out orders from above, methinks.

Now... The ones above could be a bit trigger happy, but don't blame the drone pilots.



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Zarniwoop
 


I would assume they are too. Who knows though? I was never in the military either, but I bet 'ya not every drone strike is ordered by some commanding officer...Just giving my two cents.

-SAP-



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 04:38 PM
link   
reply to post by SloAnPainful
 


wiki says...


Former CIA officials state that the agency uses a careful screening process in making decisions on which individuals to kill via drone strikes. The process, carried out at the agency's counterterrorist center, involves up to 10 lawyers who write briefs justifying the targeting of specific individuals


Source

I assume there is not always time for this though, and that "up to ten lawyers" could involve zero of them.

Still, I don't think the grunts have any say in the matter.



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zarniwoop
Still, I don't think the grunts have any say in the matter.


I know someone who flies them, and no, he doesn't decide on his own, on the spur of the moment, what to shoot at.



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 05:59 PM
link   
What got me about this drone strike is that the militants were just suspected, not proven, not found guilty of being, just suspected.....

This is just like a police officer coming up to you or me and saying....

Officer: "We suspect you of the murder of Mr. So or So last Tuesday night, so I have to kill you now."

You: "What!? I didn't kill anyone! This must be some kind of mistake! I even have an alibi for that night! Do you have any proof of your claims against me? I'm not getting arrested or charged or even a court date!? Just killed!?"

Officer: "None of what you have to say matters now, you are a suspect, and that is enough, so I have to shoot and kill you now."

You: "NO..... WAIT!!"

Gun: "BANG!"

Fade to black....

It's senseless and wrong if you ask me.
edit on 6-7-2012 by mikemck1976 because: Grammer



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 06:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikemck1976

U.S. drone kills 12 suspected militants in Pakistan






The first step in dealing with Washington's international crimes is to strip away the double-speak that is employed at every turn. In this case, the headlines should read "U.S. drone kills 12 civilians in Pakistan".

Even tho Washington is not a signatory to the ICC, is there some way we could bring charges before them for Washington's continuous and ongoing murders of civilians?



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 06:18 PM
link   
Pakistan loudly protests the drone strikes publicly, but privately supports them. It's the old "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" thing. I'm sure the intel we get from them benefits them more than us.



en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 06:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by jcarpenter

Originally posted by mikemck1976

U.S. drone kills 12 suspected militants in Pakistan






The first step in dealing with Washington's international crimes is to strip away the double-speak that is employed at every turn. In this case, the headlines should read "U.S. drone kills 12 civilians in Pakistan".

Even tho Washington is not a signatory to the ICC, is there some way we could bring charges before them for Washington's continuous and ongoing murders of civilians?




I agree with you 100%.
That is what I hoped our ATS members would have picked up on, the whole reason I posted this thread.



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by jcarpenter

Originally posted by mikemck1976

U.S. drone kills 12 suspected militants in Pakistan






The first step in dealing with Washington's international crimes is to strip away the double-speak that is employed at every turn. In this case, the headlines should read "U.S. drone kills 12 civilians in Pakistan".

Even tho Washington is not a signatory to the ICC, is there some way we could bring charges before them for Washington's continuous and ongoing murders of civilians?





Or maybe it should read "US terrorist use drone to murder 12 people in Pakistan"

Have ever notice the US does this sort of thing to some country that can not fight back but they never do anything like this to some one like Russia. If they tried this crap with Russia just how long do your thing it would be before Washington DC got turned into a parking lot?



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 06:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by mikemck1976

Pakistan says that these strikes are an attack on their sovereignty..


Well, technically they are -- the attacks are unauthorized in a country with whom we are not at war, so they have a point. The US counter-point, of course, is that Pakistan doesn't do anything about these guys who fight in Afghanistan and then run across the border to hide in Pakistan, so the incursion is justified.

Some in the Pakistani government are truly angry about it, but I'm sure that there is a not-small contingent that likes the US doing it in this manner -- they get rid of the radical element in NW Pakistan, and can bluster against the US to show their people that they "aren't really" in favour of the killings.
incorrect any country that 'may' harbour terrorists is open, i want ireland nuked off the map.



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 06:40 PM
link   
If canada started shooting their Triple sevens across the border at civilians They deemed suspected terrorists, you would be upset too would you not? You would consider it an attack on your sovereignty too would you not? Would you think an acceptable reply to such a statement, could be " I thought we were allies?"

If Canada suspected someone in the USA a terrorist, being allies the appropriate protocol would be contact the US Authorities/government, and arrange either a joint operation to collect/eliminate the threat on US soil, rather than make the call themselves,launch an attack with out prior warning/authorization and an investigation before hand.

Irregardless of whether or not the suspects were indeed terrorists, Pakistan should have been informed, involved in the investigation, and the corresponding movement against the suspects. I'm sorry guys, but the USA isn't the ruler of the world, your word isn't above local, or world law, and it's going to come back to bite you in the ass. Your allies, are starting to wake up to the way you operate. The USA, promotes the image of freedom, and justice for all, when in fact it's more, follow our rules or we will shoot first and ask questions later because after all if we say you're guilty, you are. We aren't going to give you a trial, and if we do, we will be certain you are found guilty of the offenses we accuse you of, and more that we hadn't just to make sure we get to shut you up permanently.

I can't help but make the same comparison over and over again, Nazi germany had their people believing they were the strongest, and untouchable. Yes, they attacked most of Europe, and were successful in squashing lesser nations, and taking what they wanted. How ever, it wasn't long before the world woke up to their ways, and proved to their hypnotized asses they weren't untouchable, nor as glorious as they believed.

How many nations are we up to now that the US has forcefully, changed and enslaved for resources and the preservation of The US imperialism? Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Korea, Vietnam, and next is Syria, and Iran. Not to mention the nations, bought and swayed through propaganda and worthless digital money. The day will come when the results don't match the propaganda. On an economic and social level the people are already beginning to see through the wool. How much longer before the falsified glory of US might, falls to pieces. The American image isn't what it used to be. It's sad, but in reality the US is no better than the boogeymen they claim to be saving the world from. Nazi Germany in reality is the closest Country I can compare the US too. Soviet Russia was better off than the current American Regime. China is blowing the US out of the water economically and in military advancements. The richest nations in the world, have all been targets of US invasion, and unfortunately I think the twist to the whole syria/Iran war isn't only the oil, minerals, and financial stability it's to drag the Chinese or russians on to a foreign battle field, as surely it's the only way to even the odds, and make the war seem in their favor until the last moment when foreign soldiers bring the fight to the US of A itself.

I'm aware of how many civilians in the US are war vets, and how many of them own guns, and how many of them love their country, but if enough of them do not support those in charge are they really going to fight to protect them? It's a sad day when you realize the options are, Go to a war you want no part in, or defend our home from the people they pissed off who've brought it to us. Really #ty, when you realize it's already to late isn't it? I'll leave it at that. The moment to act has passed, now we're stuck along for the ride. We were had guys, they fooled us all and we we're had. I'm not going to fight, I don't care who it is. I will not fight, I will die honorably defending my family/friends if I have to but this isn't the land I know and love anymore. I know who the enemy is, and sadly I'm their prisoner. We all are.



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 06:41 PM
link   
Every single person a drone strike kills is a militant, and if you think otherwise you're a baby hating, unamerican.



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 06:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ilyich
Irregardless of whether or not the suspects were indeed terrorists, Pakistan should have been informed, involved in the investigation, and the corresponding movement against the suspects.


I believe that the reason this is not being done is that it was, in the past, and the targets "mysteriously" disappeared between the time that Pakistani military/intelligence was informed and the time action was to have been taken.





new topics
top topics
 
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join


Haters, Bigots, Partisan Trolls, Propaganda Hacks, Racists, and LOL-tards: Time To Move On.
read more: Community Announcement re: Decorum