Breaking: U.S. drone strike accidentally killed 2 hostages

a reply to: Indigo5

I wonder what these two "hostages" knew and would have reported once returning to the Western world? Also, how does our military know these two hostages were killed? Did they send in ground recon to make that determination? If so, why didn't they have better intel to find out if "innocents" were present before taking the shot?

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
So why isnt there a huge uproar against Obama for killing innocent civilians?

Everyone screams about how convservatives and right wingers are murdering war mongers...

Maybe because of the different Doctrines between GOP and Obama? Each innocent life lost is a tragedy, but the numbers involved in targeted strikes are massively different than what happens when you decide to send 100k's of US Troops to go invade and occupy?

He makes a habit of making decisions that cost the lives of innocent people......

Which is part of the Job Description for POTUS. He took full, unequivocal public responsibility for the mistake, something I don't recall the last administration ever doing?

Perhaps he is getting less grief than you would like because he is taking lone responsibility for the mistake? and directed the details of the strike and operation to be declassified? ...and everyone knows that there is a full CIA strike team apparatus beneath him that made the call...and yet he didn't once even allude to the mistake being anyone else's responsibility than his own?

Different! How topsy turvy

a reply to: Indigo5

a reply to: Indigo5

Where was he to claim the responsibility for Benghazi?

Yeah know where you're coming from and many Pakis are descended from Israelite tribes, esp the Pathans. But still it's a stupid move. Islams third holiest site stolen by the Jews and IDF on TV every day killing Palestinians. You gotta be brave to be a Jew and fly to Pakistan

a reply to: Indigo5

originally posted by: Bilk22
a reply to: Indigo5

I wonder what these two "hostages" knew and would have reported once returning to the Western world? Also, how does our military know these two hostages were killed? Did they send in ground recon to make that determination? If so, why didn't they have better intel to find out if "innocents" were present before taking the shot?

I am hesitant to point it out, but USAID (who Warren Weinstein worked for) is often ...ahem...rumored to be an Org. often used by CIA as cover. Example...the USAID worker that was plainly CIA recently released from Cuba...and other examples.

It's possible that the US Hostage was CIA.

I do think it is unusual for them to send in a team after a strike to confirm kills. The whole premise of the drone strike is supposed to mean it is in highly unfriendly or difficult to reach terrain...or both. Don't know if satellite or drone imagery has advanced enough to confirm faces and identities on the ground after a strike. How did they confirm this? Certainly not the terrorists word.

Unanswered questions left open for now.

originally posted by: vonclod
a reply to: ufoorbhunter

Maybe he went to represent the human race as opposed to being a jew??, your either a good person or not.

In the nicey nicey world that is true and hats off to the guy for doing good. However it's asking for trouble going out there. Especially if you are a Jew. Don't the US government try to advise Jews travelling to such places for their own safety?

a reply to: EternalSolace

Still beating that dead horse that investigation after investigation shows nothing sinister happened?

a reply to: Indigo5

Someone asked The press secretary that question just now. His words were there were two drone strikes and in the weeks after them some information leaked out that the hostages has been killed. The reason for delay in reporting this was that they had to develop that information and confirm it.

a reply to: FamCore

your welcome and i can see how you might have misunderstood.

a reply to: Indigo5

I don't buy that at all. I'm not huge on politics but from what I DO know there has been tons more that he refused to acknowledge , even when he was clearly to blame . Benghazi and fast and furious come to mind, along w his hit list of world leaders

I don't buy for one second he's any more virtuous than the GOP

a reply to: ufoorbhunter

I hear ya, I just think sometimes things don't need to be so divided or always us vs them stuff..like a role playing game..it sounds like this gentleman embraced their culture and the people accepted him, the scum who kidnapped him to me doesn't represent the feeling of the common man there or the people he was there to help/work with...I hope/wish.
Risky I agree.

originally posted by: Lgbtlivesmatter
a reply to: Indigo5

I don't buy that at all. I'm not huge on politics but from what I DO know there has been tons more that he refused to acknowledge , even when he was clearly to blame . Benghazi and fast and furious come to mind, along w his hit list of world leaders

I don't buy for one second he's any more virtuous than the GOP

You seem to have wandered from my post? The question was in regards to war policy and specifically GOP vs. Obama's policies aka Doctrines and associated costs in lives.

This is not a Fast and Furious thread, nor another Benghazi thread....

The question was asked why he is not getting hammered for this as hard as some posters would like.

I simply pointed out that he took responsibility for it quickly and unequivocally and actually was the person that chose to declassify this and make it public.

Doesn't mean he is more "virtuous than the GOP"...I am just offering an explanation to a question...That's not really a partisan thing.

The bleary eyed Benghazi! Fast and Furious! ...responses have become the epitome of useless, irrelevant derail in political threads. Off topic...and that too is a non-partisan, objective observation.

expendable assets. collateral damage. oops, our bad. etc etc ad nauseum...

originally posted by: SubTruth
a reply to: Indigo5

These drone strikes are inhuman and should be banned by the Geneva convention. War needs to suck for a reason when one side no longer feels pain it is not war anymore.

Very interesting point. Drones and robotics are advancing at an insane clip right now. The dystopian future of robots hunting down people doesn't seem so Science Fiction lately when you really examine the state of technology and where it is heading.

a reply to: Indigo5

especially when you consider that there are people that are pushing thinking ones,AI.

i don't think Asimov's Laws will last very long.

Three Laws of Robotics

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

If they can build one of these, they can build an army...synched with a drone? Hunting from both ground and air?

We have to figure out some new rules IMO and not just for drones.

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
So why isnt there a huge uproar against Obama for killing innocent civilians?

Everyone screams about how convservatives and right wingers are murdering war mongers...

But not a word when crap like this happens under Obamas watch, and its NOT the first time.....


He makes a habit of making decisions that cost the lives of innocent people......

I will start the uproar. Obama is a murdering war monger. Bush was also a murdering war monger. Whoever is the next president. Either a democrat or a republican. Will be a murdering war monger. Anyone who tries to claim that their party is holier than thou is just dumb. All our presidents will be murdering war mongers for the foreseeable future. I do not see the establishment democrats and republicans, the ones who sling mud at each other in public, while dining together and taking money from the same corporations in private, being ousted this election. So the cycle continues unabated.

Sad, but sometimes hostages die in rescue attempts or are killed during strikes at the people holding them. It's not as if they always know exactly where they are. It's one of the very real risks of being a hostage.

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: WeRpeons
The U.S. can bomb a home which is under surveillance for days and occupied by leaders of Al Qaida or ISIS, but they can't bomb terrorist training sites? I would think outdoor training sites would be much easier to find than targeting terrorist leaders.


I also wouldn't doubt the U.S. bombed it even though there were two hostages inside. Ooops, we made a mistake. Two hostages are worth sacrificing when you can kill two terrorist leaders?

Spot on dude, trying to figure that out myself, we USE to bomb their training sites and completely wipe the damn things out...

WHy the hell we arent still doing this I have NO idea......

First of all, today’s terrorist training camps are not what they used to be. Sprawling al Qaeda camps complete with such amenities as firing ranges, like Tarnak Farms near Kandahar, Afghanistan, where Osama bin Laden is believed to have plotted the 9/11 attacks, are largely a thing of the past.

Today, al Qaeda outsources most of its training to Pakistani outfits like Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and Lashkar-e-Taiba (LET), the group believed to be behind the 2008 Mumbai attacks. The camps these groups run are often small, just one or two buildings, and temporary — such groups stay on the move to avoid detection by satellite or intelligence agents. These groups are believed to be increasingly sharing resources when it comes to training. According to some estimates, there are about 40 militant training camps around Pakistan.

webcache.googleusercontent.com...:QhCIJKVXwIIJ:foreignpolicy.com/2010/05/10/what-do-you-learn-at-terrorist-training-camp/+&cd=10&hl =en&ct=clnk&gl=us