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.

 

Obama's Drone War - He's More Deadly than Bush 43

page: 1
13
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 06:54 AM
link   
Obama's strategy (and legacy) ... drone 'em all dead and sort the pieces out later.

CNN - Drones, Obama's Weapon of Choice

Covert drone strikes are one of President Obama's key national security policies. He has already authorized 283 strikes in Pakistan, six times more than the number during President George W. Bush's eight years in office.
As a result, the number of estimated deaths from the Obama administration's drone strikes is more than four times what it was during the Bush administration -- somewhere between 1,494 and 2,618.


Global Research - Killing Civilians, Obama's Drone War in Pakistan

Washington - Nobel Peace Prize Winner Obama More Brutal Than Bush

Bush is correctly regarded as a lying, war-mongering, torturing tyrant. Is Nobel peace prize winner Obama even worse? Many governments, U.S. congressmen and other individuals have demanded that Obama return his Nobel peace prize for bombing Libya without congressional approval.

Bush got us into 2 wars to protect our strategic national interests in … er … broccoli. Obama just got us into a third war for the same reason. Bush’s decision to invade Iraq was met with large protests. Similarly, most Americans didn’t want Obama to get involved in Libya.

The Bush administration funded terrorist groups (and see confirming articles here and here). Obama is allegedly funding terrorist groups in Iran, and is now aiding the Libyan “rebels”, even though there are allegations that 1,000 of them are Al Qaeda radicals (and there are some indications that their leader is a CIA asset).


A List of Children Killed by Drone Strikes iN Pakistan and Yemen

Proponents of the drone war, including President Barack Obama, claim that drone strikes are precise and only target terrorists. A study, however, from Columbia Law School’s Human Rights Institute finds that the number of Pakistani civilians killed in drone strikes “significantly and consistently underestimated" and that as many as 98% of those killed by drone strikes are civilians.

While it is ultimately impossible to get exact numbers, this means that for every "terrorist" killed by a drone strike, anywhere between 10 and 50 civilians are killed.

Obama has authorized 193 drone strikes in Pakistan – four times the amount authorized by George W. Bush. According to Global Research, over the past 4 years Obama has authorized attacks in Pakistan which have killed more than 800 innocent civilians and just 22 Al-Qaeda officers. That constitutes at least 36 civilians per target.


Map of Obama's Drone Strikes

A map of all the reported attacks—five times as many under Obama as under Bush.


The Atlantic - The Drone War Has More Victims Than the Bush-Era CIA Scandals

"For all of the historical accounts and professed concerns over the CIA's detention and extraordinary rendition program, which involved '136 known victims,' it is time for an accounting of the CIA's drone strikes, which have killed between 3,000 and 4,000 people in Pakistan and Yemen," he writes. ....

If you objected to CIA detention and rendition in the Bush era, as I did, know that you'd have to double or triple its victims to equal the number of innocents estimated to have been killed in U.S. drone strikes.


For a while I"ve been saying Bush/Obama = same/same. I guess that was wrong. Obama's even worse. He has taken what Bush started and he has compounded it. This seems to be his M.O. with everything - drones, wars, spying on Americans, etc etc. It's a pretty darn sloppy way to run things. Sloppy and deadly.

Side note ... now that we know that the Obama administration is spying on EVERYTHING we say on our phones and everything we post online ... I wonder if I'm now on some double super secret watch list for posting this.




posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 08:00 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


Good post. I just had a conversation about Obama with someone yesterday. They weren't happy when I came out and said that he is comparable to Bush. She went on to say that he has done a lot for oppressed women in Africa and while I conceded that point (mostly because I didn't have the means at hand to substantiate those claims) I went on to talk exactly about what your op addresses. I was like, while he is helping women in Africa, he is doing far worse in the middle east by blowing up dozens of civilians for every "alleged" terrorist (because apparently he doesn't even need absolute proof that the terrorist is even there or if the target is really a terrorist or not) that he drones. I did get her to concede that he is a puppet for the ptb though.



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 08:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Obama's strategy (and legacy) ... drone 'em all dead and sort the pieces out later.

CNN - Drones, Obama's Weapon of Choice

Covert drone strikes are one of President Obama's key national security policies. He has already authorized 283 strikes in Pakistan, six times more than the number during President George W. Bush's eight years in office.
As a result, the number of estimated deaths from the Obama administration's drone strikes is more than four times what it was during the Bush administration -- somewhere between 1,494 and 2,618.

.

If you objected to CIA detention and rendition in the Bush era, as I did, know that you'd have to double or triple its victims to equal the number of innocents estimated to have been killed in U.S. drone strikes.


For a while I"ve been saying Bush/Obama = same/same. I guess that was wrong. Obama's even worse. He has taken what Bush started and he has compounded it. This seems to be his M.O. with everything - drones, wars, spying on Americans, etc etc. It's a pretty darn sloppy way to run things. Sloppy and deadly.



Well . . . Islamics want us infidels dead, I did not enjoy seeing Daniel Pearl get his head cut off on TV and broadcast all over the Arab world. Arabs are not our friends, they have been an enemy of Western Civilization since year 700.

Any time we can kill them and not have our soldiers killed I am for it. These people are similar to a rattlesnake one finds in their backyard. You do not let that snake live, because eventually it is going to bite you and perhaps kill you.

I find it amusing that people who have never witnessed the Islamic atrocities committed on their own people and on the Infidel believe these people have redeemable values. I do not. I think every day those gamers who report to the container in Phoenix where they find their "joy stick" to seek out and destroy our enemy in their country instead of ours are in fact the hidden warriors in our "real war" against Islam.

Islam is not a religion, it is a political organization. The sooner Ameri-can'ts understand the difference the quicker we will stop pussy footing around and end this scourge that resides in our world.

I am sure those are whining about destroying non combatants along with those jihad mongers in the Middle East also support "honor killings", "homosexuality", and actually believes "Mohammed" was a prophet. These illiterate tribesman deserve their plight, and I am glad that the CIA is finally using our technology to rid the world of this menace.

The death of a million "believers" is not worth one life of an "infidel". Adios Amgio. John



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 08:06 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 





For a while I"ve been saying Bush/Obama = same/same. I guess that was wrong. Obama's even worse


No bush was worse because it takes much heart of stone to start an act based on lies and continue that and hand the country to some one you don't know (Obama) what horrible things he is going to do with and what end can come out of that.



I wonder if I'm now on some double super secret watch list for posting this.


Governments don't spend time on people on internet. They prefer to consider looking for those who commit real actions against the will of govt.

 


BTW , thanks for the thread. It helps many people see what is going on in faraway land.



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 08:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Faust100f
 





Any time we can kill them and not have our soldiers killed I am for it. These people are similar to a rattlesnake one finds in their backyard. You do not let that snake live, because eventually it is going to bite you and perhaps kill you.




Typical of Imperialists who find the planet as their yard.



Islamics want us infidels dead


I don't know who you are , a Christian or Atheist. Anyway Mulims don't want you dead , but if you want to play the good old victim role , it is your choice

For you and all ignorant about Jahad :

You are a Jihadi , you just don't know it



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 08:14 AM
link   
I admit Obama is bad..worse than Bush?
NAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 08:29 AM
link   
Just a question:

Are you comparing Bush's drone strikes/deaths to Obama's drone strikes/deaths? Because, for sure, Obama uses drones much more than Bush did... They are a more precise weapon than other forms and weapons of combat.

But what about overall deaths of Iraqis and Afghanis?

Iraqi Body Count:



I think looking at JUST the drone strikes/deaths is an inaccurate way of comparing Bush to Obama, especially when making a statement that one is "more deadly" than the other. Comparing the deaths from a certain weapon (drones) from one time period to another is not indicative of the "deadliness" of the war, when you consider all weapons used.


edit on 6/7/2013 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 09:09 AM
link   
And let's not forget to highlight the civilian vs militant death rates, from your first Source:



The civilian casualty rate has been dropping sharply since 2008. The number of civilians, plus "unknowns," those individuals whose precise status could not be determined from media reports, reported killed by drones in Pakistan during Obama's tenure in office were 11% of fatalities. So far in 2012 it is close to 2%. Under President Bush it was 33%.

Conversely, the percentage of militants killed has been rising over the life of the drone program. The number of militants reported killed by drone strikes is 89% of the fatalities under Obama compared to 67% under Bush.


So, Bush killed MORE civilians by a factor of 3. And Obama has killed MORE militants.

I don't like drone strikes any more than the next guy, and I'm not supporting them as I think we should be OUT of these wars altogether, but I think if you're going to compare one president to the other as "more deadly", Bush wins the prize, without a doubt.



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 10:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by mideast
reply to post by Faust100f
 





Any time we can kill them and not have our soldiers killed I am for it. These people are similar to a rattlesnake one finds in their backyard. You do not let that snake live, because eventually it is going to bite you and perhaps kill you.




Typical of Imperialists who find the planet as their yard.



Islamics want us infidels dead


I don't know who you are , a Christian or Atheist. Anyway Mulims don't want you dead , but if you want to play the good old victim role , it is your choice

For you and all ignorant about Jahad :

You are a Jihadi , you just don't know it



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 11:11 AM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Faust100f
Any time we can kill them and not have our soldiers killed I am for it.

The point of the thread is this .... that those being killed are (mostly) not terrorists. Also - Obama, who got elected in part because Americans thought he'd use drone attacks more carefully but the fact is he's tossing them around a lot more than Bush 43 ever did.



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by mideast
No bush was worse because it takes much heart of stone to start an act based on lies and continue that and hand the country to some one you don't know (Obama) what horrible things he is going to do with and what end can come out of that.

No .. Obama's worse. He's using drones in a much more fluid manner and much more often .. he's killing MANY more people (did you see the list of children who died?) ... and he got elected in part because he said he'd be much more careful with drones than Bush was, but that turns out to be a lie. He's really much more deadly.



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 11:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by luciddream
I admit Obama is bad..worse than Bush?
NAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!

The statistics don't lie.
Let the hope-ium clear from your field of vision so you can take a look at the statistics.



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 11:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 

Obama has used drones more even though he said he'd be more careful and he gave the impression he'd use them less often. Obama has killed more. He kills 36 civilians for every one terrorist. Obama is more deadly.

A List of Children Killed by Drone Strikes iN Pakistan and Yemen

Proponents of the drone war, including President Barack Obama, claim that drone strikes are precise and only target terrorists. A study, however, from Columbia Law School’s Human Rights Institute finds that the number of Pakistani civilians killed in drone strikes “significantly and consistently underestimated" and that as many as 98% of those killed by drone strikes are civilians.

While it is ultimately impossible to get exact numbers, this means that for every "terrorist" killed by a drone strike, anywhere between 10 and 50 civilians are killed.

Obama has authorized 193 drone strikes in Pakistan – four times the amount authorized by George W. Bush. According to Global Research, over the past 4 years Obama has authorized attacks in Pakistan which have killed more than 800 innocent civilians and just 22 Al-Qaeda officers. That constitutes at least 36 civilians per target.



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by mideast
Typical of Imperialists who find the planet as their yard.

Oh come on ... there are PLENTY of Muslims and radical Muslims alike who would love a Caliphate. The radical extremist terrorists are actively attempting to work for that.

... Anyway Mulims don't want you dead ,

Anyway ... many do.

That being said ... on the topic of Nobel Peace Prize awardee B.H. Obama being deadly ....
What he is doing with the drones isn't exactly the same thing as the impression that he gave
us that he'd do. He is, at the very least, continuing the Bush drone doctrine. And it's a
very realistic statement to say that Obama's Drone War is more deadly than Bush43s.

And the thing is ... I'm looking at 2016 ... HIllary or Chris Christie ... and I'm thinking that
they'll continue the Bush/Obama presidency. More same/same ....



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 11:49 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


You're still only comparing drone strikes and ignoring the overall deaths from ALL weapons since the start of the war. It's a "spin" piece.

If we compare deaths by about any other weapon, we'll get a totally different story... See the chart in my last post. Bush caused MANY more deaths than Obama and no spin will change that.



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
You're still only comparing drone strikes and ignoring the overall deaths from ALL weapons since the start of the war.

The title ... Obama's drone war ... it's about the drones.
Obama kills 36 civilians for every one 'bad guy'.
Mr. Peace Prize is one deadly dude.


It's a "spin" piece.

Um ... no. It's statistics. The thing is ... you just dont' like the stats.
Your guy doesn't look so good when the light of truth shines on him.



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 11:55 AM
link   
If we're talking about only drone strikes then yes, more people have died as a result of Drone strikes since Barack Obama took office in 2008. If we're talking about overall numbers then Bush Jr takes the cake easily.

The Iraq war took the lives of over 100,000 Iraqi civilians since 2003, add 4488 dead U.S Soldiers

But hey this is another Obama hit piece so it must be parroted!



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 11:57 AM
link   
reply to post by muse7
 


So it's cool if one guy kills X number of people because some other guy killed X^Y number of people?

Hows about its not cool that either guy has killed / is killing people?



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by muse7
If we're talking about only drone strikes then yes, more people have died as a result of Drone strikes since Barack Obama took office in 2008.

There ya' go. The articles were about the drone strikes. It's Obama's weapon of choice.
His kill ratio is 1 'bad guy' for every 36 innocent civilians. He's a deadly deadly dude.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<<   2 >>

log in

join