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.
The Obama Administration is deliberately misleading Americans about the drone war it is waging in Pakistan.
Can anyone read the McClatchy Newspapers summary of top-secret intelligence reports and continue to deny it? Set aside the morality and effectiveness of the CIA's targeted-killing program. Isn't it important for Congress and the people to know the truth about the War on Terrorism? Many Americans remain furious that the Bush Administration gave Iraq War speeches that elided inconvenient truths and implied facts that turned out to be fictions. Is the objection merely that the Iraq War turned out badly? Or is misleading Congress and the public itself problematic, especially when the subject is as serious as killing people in foreign countries?
In fact, the documents "show that drone operators weren't always certain who they were killing." Under what legal theory does the Obama Administration justify that behavior? It won't tell us.
Instead John Brennan is trotted out to mislead us while acting as if he is being admirably forthcoming. "On April 30, 2012, Brennan gave the most detailed explanation of Obama's drone program. He referred to al Qaida 73 times, the Afghan Taliban three times and mentioned no other group by name," Landay writes. But the classified documents McClatchy reviewed demonstrate that, during the months about which they have information, al-Qaeda members were a minority of people killed by drones, and killing senior al-Qaeda leaders was rare.
Originally posted by benrl
Drone war fare is unethical, period.
All war fare is bad, but it takes a special kind of sociopath to be okay with blowing up people from afar with out any risk on the opposing side.
IT makes war to easy, it makes it so it seems like a winning proposition to engage in war, war is horrible and the cost SHOULD be high.
I was struck with the irony of a recent report about a US diplomat killed in Afghanistan, the reports where how courageous this women was etc... yet on the same news day 17 people (including women and children) where killed by a Cia Drone strike.
We have lived long enough to see the US become the bad guys, and we as US citizens should be marching in the street... oh wait maybe later american idol is on...
So a Gunship, that is manned, but shoots from miles away , is "good" war to you?
Originally posted by benrl
Drone war fare is unethical, period.
All war fare is bad, but it takes a special kind of sociopath to be okay with blowing up people from afar with out any risk on the opposing side.
All war fare is bad, but it takes a special kind of sociopath to be okay with blowing up people from afar with out any risk on the opposing side.
Originally posted by benrl
reply to post by Hopechest
Apperently ats members have a reading comprehension problem.
All war fare is bad, but it takes a special kind of sociopath to be okay with blowing up people from afar with out any risk on the opposing side.
ALL WAR IS BAD. Drone war is down right evil. that better?
Originally posted by benrl
reply to post by Hopechest
Id rather the soldier pulling the trigger have to look in the eyes of the children and women they are killing, but than again thats just me.
Originally posted by Sphota
Um, just a thought, and this is just occurring to me, but we only ever talk about the collateral damage as a negative point...as we should. However, this new thought provoked by this article is: why have we not thought about the intended target? It's automatically assumed the intended target is a bad guy, and only grieve the accidental children and wedding parties taken out by these drones.
The article makes clear that Brummer mentioned Al Q. Public and the Taliban as the intended targets, but the FOIA docs they got for the article only mentioned those two groups a fraction of the time. So, seeing as how only another 4 or 5 "Muslim terrorist groups" come to mind beyond the aforementioned (those specifically being in Palestine and Africa), it leaves me to wonder just who these targets are...
Pakistani government officials against the drone program?
Drug lords who stopped listening to their American handlers?
Dissident journalists?
NGO whistle blowers?
Protest coordinators?