7,511 KIDS Among US Drone Death Toll; 31X Higher Civilian Kill Rate Than Admitted

we arent using the right weapons. bio weapons to feminize and reduce birthrates to levels lower than the west would work wonders in a decade or two.

originally posted by: DAVID64
a reply to: Shakawkaw

I can agree with that. But before the Trump haters come flocking in to cry about all the dead kids, they damn well better get the score straight.

Pushed to release information about civilian deaths in drone strikes, in July 2016 the US government made the absurd claim it had killed, at most, 116 civilians in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and Libya between 2009 and 2015. Journalists and human rights advocates said the numbers were ridiculously low and unverifiable, given that no names, dates, locations or others details were released. The London-based Bureau of Investigative Journalism, which has tracked drone strikes for years, said the true figure was six times higher.
Given that drones account for only a small portion of the munitions dropped in the past eight years, the numbers of civilians killed by Obama’s bombs could be in the thousands. But we can’t know for sure as the administration, and the mainstream media, has been virtually silent about the civilian toll of the administration’s failed interventions.

You guys need to stop to deflect with pointing fingers at the Presidents you don`t like, the reality and truth stays, it´s the "greatest" country, nation "U"SA that kills, drone murders, bombs, tortures civilians around the world.

It doesn´t matter which puppet played the Potus at that time the "U"S oligarchy was or is beheaving like the most evil of all rogue states(because their actions are covered behind a wrong tv ad toothpaste smile often, playing friends and stuff, while they suck you dry and use you till there is nothing to squeeze out anymore, then they let you fall)), the "U"SA is always doing what it does and did, the only thing it is able to.

Rule with brutal power, suppression, exploitation, spying on every earth citizen they can reach with their spying tools, shooting first and "who is not on our side, whatever we do, is our enemy"-attitude, playing dirty tricks whenever possible, lying whenever possible, starting wars/regime changes/"democracy" bombings whenever possible, being a devious snake whenever possible... It only has to be profitable for "U"SA über alles, for the oligarchs and generals!

And then some(this behaviour defending) "U"S american citizens want to tell the world that it´s all the fault only of some single presidents, their personal behaviour? And not of the puppetmasters that pull the strings of these presidents, in this oligarchy and military junta?

Do you really believe that?

Come on, i bet you can see the hard reality, but can´t accept the truth!

It´s not (insert any presidents name) crimes, it´s the crimes of the nation that is home to such presidents, that makes such presidents, that shifts them into power, to have puppets the oligarchs and generals can play with, to play the same old dirty game since ever!

Stop trying to deflect the people from the hard truth and reality, with that cheap "but it was (insert any presidents name) fault!". It maybe does work on uneducated, blind and deaf people that live in caves and under rocks, but not on people that can think, see and hear, learn from history and understand the past, the presence and maybe even parts of the future for themselves. Most selfthinking people are able to recognize culprits as the culprits they are. To deflect from the nation that is doing all this it would need a better kind of deflection than that cheap:

But, but (insert any presidents name)...

At least for the rest of the world(with some little exceptions), outside of the "U"SA!

a reply to: yuppa
I said to myself, how long will it be in 2018 before someone on ATS advocates genocide? Not even one whole day

a reply to: neo96

You really had to twist and squeeze that into the argument?

It's the new year, we're all still a little hung over from the night before..... We don't need any soap box statements yet.

originally posted by: Ridhya
a reply to: yuppa
I said to myself, how long will it be in 2018 before someone on ATS advocates genocide? Not even one whole day

Genocide means killing. not limiting birth rates by modding bio chemistry. grow the hell up.

a reply to: Planette

There is a small difference between Obama and Trump.

Trump has allowed the commanders in the field to make determinations for attacks and bombings.

Obama and the White House micro-managed the attacks.


Either way, Trump or Obama, war is hell and innocent people get killed.

It's ugly and tragic.

a reply to: yuppa
There was a group sterilizing people against their will in history where it was considered genocide, but history isn't your strong suit.

originally posted by: UKTruth
Drone strikes should be banned. It is too much of an easy decision for a President / military leader to make as they have little to worry about in terms of their own people being killed. It restricts the consequences of war.

Trump is dead wrong to continue this practice.

Let's not make this a partisan issue. This is a USA issue and whether it is Obama or Trump or any other President, this stinks.

That has to be one of the most absurd things I continue to hear! I think we can all agree that military actions are going to happen...I don't see world peace happing anytime soon...so that being said, why would you choose to put people in harms way and risk loosing much more expensive equipment if you have the option not to? The use on RPA's is the way of the future like it or not... for no other reason than the economics of it...its WAY less expensive to operate this way than any legacy way of combat

a reply to: wileel

Because its an easy copout to just blow snip up with marginalized sense of consequences.

How did they even figure 30,000 targets, for example?

This all sound more like they're just trying to meet quotas all of this.

originally posted by: Ridhya
a reply to: yuppa
There was a group sterilizing people against their will in history where it was considered genocide, but history isn't your strong suit.

Sterilization means ALL BIRTH STOPPING. I never said stopping all birth i said REDUCING NATURAL RATES through Genetic manipulation Via a Bio logical agents. You seen Mass effect 3? Bio weapon called the genophage. Used to turn down the birth rates,As in no egg fertilization about 80 percent of the time. Im sure we have something like that in a DARPA lab somewhere.

You just like to call anyone a Nazi. Remember the US government also did some of this and wowie zowie..it was not genocide then.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: wileel

Because its an easy copout to just blow snip up with marginalized sense of consequences.

How did they even figure 30,000 targets, for example?

This all sound more like they're just trying to meet quotas all of this.

Ok, I'll concede that the sense of consequences may be diminished more than back in the day when we hacked each other to bits with axes and stared into the eyes of your enemy...but those days have been gone for a LONG time. There is absolutely no difference to sense of conquests releasing a weapon from 30k feet over target or 6k miles away, its the same process and same emotions. RPA drivers don't take releasing a weapon any less serious than a traditional pilot.

I don't know about 30,000 targets was this only RPA numbers or all coalition aircraft? If we are talking about a long period of years, say 10 years for example, doing some basic math I can see that being feasible. 30,000 over 10 years would be 57 a week...considering how much we fly its not a big stretch at all

Help me understand the quota comment...

So is Trump directing the drones or is the CIA?

We know Obama was directing them, as he stated so many times on the record.

a reply to: neo96

You are such an a hole.

originally posted by: jjkenobi
So is Trump directing the drones or is the CIA?

We know Obama was directing them, as he stated so many times on the record.

Lets get real...the PRESIDENT doesn't direct "drones", his schedule is a little busy to direct the amount of flying we do. I'm sure he has some input on the operations (what and where) but that's all, there are whole teams that plan and handle the details. Also, OGA (other government agency) and military RPA operations are completely separated and have different "directors"

I have no doubt in certain situations like the Bin Laden raid he (the President) was much more involved and if he wanted to see feed from the op as is was happing (via RPA) they would get him the shot he wanted to see.

Strikes will continue to soar as precedent is set for no accountability/liability..

As they should, it's effective. I still have a hard time understanding why people to spend more money and risk more lives/equipment...where is the "no accountability/liability" again?

a reply to: Planette
Is your check cut in Russian, or Chinese currency?? Just wondering. I suppose it could be Iranian as well.

a reply to: DAVID64

www.nbcnews.com...

The Obama administration put in place a rule that no drone strike could take place outside a war zone unless there was a "near certainty" that no civilian would be harmed. Obama also put the White House in the decision loop on most strikes against high-value targets. And, outside a war zone, the military or the CIA had to show that the target posed an imminent threat to the United States.

No one is blaming trump for the drone strikes done by obama. We are blaming trump for HIS drone strikes.

A flurry of strikes in Yemen in recent weeks, against targets that had long been previously identified, was made possible by declaring parts of Yemen a war zone, the official said. The Pentagon no longer had to show that the targets posed an imminent threat to the U.S. or declare a near certainty that no civilian would be harmed.

a reply to: scraedtosleep

Yea but there are some people in this thread that defended Drone strikes under obama that are now upset by trumps drone strikes. Those are the hypocrites that irritate me at least..

a reply to: Irishhaf

I am anti war in all cases except defense.

I think an international law against the use of weapons on drones should be passed in the U.N.
Treat it like a war crime the way we do with chemicals.

Not all the people posting here defended obama drone strikes.
And none of us should be defending trump drone strikes now.