Interactive Drone Strike Map -- US Operations In Pakistan

The US has launched drone strikes in Pakistan over 330 times with up to 3,247 casualties - including up to 852 civilians. Based on a comprehensive database of drone strikes, this map shows where those strikes happened. Click the red dots to see what happened and how many were killed.

tis was an interesting find this morning.

A friend linked me this Interactive Map from the Guardian showing all the drone strikes in Pakistan that the US have done.

All the ones we know about anyway.

So, what say you ATS?

Are drone strikes justified? Is the US really fighting terror in Pakistan or are they usurpting the rights of a Sovereign Nation?

~Tenth

The government has proven to not be trusted. With that said I don't trust what and why they want to use them.
If I could trust the government and believe that there is no other solution then you gotta do what ya gotta do to protect your freedom and Constitution.

Where's all the outrage from the left? Where's the U.S. media on this? Sadly they would rather be partisans.

reply to post by tothetenthpower


I have a few questions...

1. How many of those have been done while Obama has been in office VS the Previous administrations record?

2. Why are most if not all are on Pakistani soil?
3. Why does Pakistan still allow it and [Secretly wants it] If they are so publicly outraged?
4. If Pakistan is so outraged why have they reopened their territory for Supply runs?

Bonus Question: What's the Pakistani's ISI contribution been to all the fun and games?

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by tothetenthpower

 

I have a few question...

1. How many of those have been done while Obama has been in office VS the Previous administrations record?
2. Why are most if not all are on Pakistani soil?
3. Why does Pakistan still allow it and [Secretly wants it] If they are so publicly outraged?
4. If Pakistan is so outraged why have they reopened their territory for Supply runs?

Well according to wiki there are some stats on how many have been done in what year.

As for your other questions, I don't know.

I think however, that after all is said and done, the next target for the Imperial arm of NATO will be Pakistan.

~Tenth

2004 1
2005 2
2006 2
2007 4
2008 33 End of Bush

2008 33
2009 53
2010 118
2011 70
2012 28 Obama

"imperial Nato" ?

The last 2 US adminstrations where one can see which one was obviously worse.

Many of the airstrikes in question were initiated by Pakistan after having confirmed and provided the information to US about the position of the pakistani soldiers and that the pakistani soldiers having fired on the US soldiers first. Frankly I'm surprised but I guess some crazy politics that I wouldn't understand is that why is the US apologizing for the pakistani's mistakes?
LINK1
LINK2

The government of pakistan has its own issues with the terrorists (ofcourse their own creation) where they have to rely on the US to take out their rotten bunch/expendables when the bigger picture of US aid is in question (last week it received/approved 1.1 billion to pakistan).
LINK3
So you see Pakistani government themselves are involved in the dirty games but surely the US will be blamed for each and every single drone stike even if many of them were called for by their government.

Are they justified in what sense? The fact that drones are being used or the fact that we are killing people in other countries?

Very loaded question...If one is to say its justified people will argue that civilians are getting killed and that we should not be in Pakistan etc etc. If you say the drone strikes are not warrented you will get the people crawling out of the wood works calling you anti-american or pro-terrorist.

I will refrain from offering my opinion but will leave you with this "Does the ends justify the means?"

maybe they will think twice before harboring the people the US is hunting.
I bet we see a dramatic drop in drone strikes now the main target has been neutralized. I am all for it ,pakistan wasn't doing jack to mop up this safe haven. we could do without the civilian losses