• Monday, October 14, 2019

America's Illegal Drone War | Leaked list of Pakistani casualties.

Discussion in 'War Against Drones' started by Horus, Jul 23, 2013.

  1. jayron

    jayron SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    3,696
    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2010
    Ratings:
    +0 / 3,895 / -4
    Shoot down the drones if you have the balls Pakistan. No use crying. Btw, is this news even true, why no media site is reporting it? If it is false news, people posting such false propaganda must be punished for spreading hate and inciting more violence .
     
  2. Shardul.....the lion

    Shardul.....the lion SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    3,074
    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2011
    Ratings:
    +1 / 2,388 / -1
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    Pakistan should retaliate strongly against America showing solidarity to all its citizens... least they can call diplomats back in protest of killings..
     
  3. SMC

    SMC PDF VETERAN

    Messages:
    7,938
    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Ratings:
    +4 / 4,619 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Canada
    This is seriously your argument? That Pakistan should shoot down the drones if they have the balls? How about if US, in theory, attacked Canada, or UK, or even bharat? Would you be saying all the crap you're saying? What if those countries don't defend themselves against drones, you'll still be saying the sh*t you're saying?
     
  4. Black Widow

    Black Widow BANNED

    Messages:
    6,130
    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2011
    Ratings:
    +0 / 5,054 / -17

    Most of the time your ISI provide inputs for attack. Never forget your Army wanted this drone technology to do the same thing what USA is doing. This drone has killed many anti-Pakistan Terrorists as well....

    @list: who knows it can be a propaganda of terrorists. The truth is anti Kaffir forces are in Pakistan, they will attack kaffirs at there will. If USA will not kill them , they will kill all non-Muslim on earth... After all this is what happened in past, this is what planned for future...
     
  5. jayron

    jayron SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    3,696
    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2010
    Ratings:
    +0 / 3,895 / -4
    Iran shot down ZuS drones. Why can't Pakistan?
     
  6. Black Eagle 90

    Black Eagle 90 BANNED

    Messages:
    943
    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2013
    Ratings:
    +0 / 141 / -8
    I think US has to pay more and more attention in building Free of Cost Hospitals in each Province of Afghanistan with separate 10 story buildings for Male and Female and also they should develop Separate Boys and Girls:
    Nursery
    Schools
    High Schools

    That will offer Islamic way of Education that will make them better Muslims and Humans.

    But its of big shame that these above mentioned two important things can really curb the terrorist which ISAF/NATO is not working well.
     
  7. SMC

    SMC PDF VETERAN

    Messages:
    7,938
    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Ratings:
    +4 / 4,619 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Canada
    Not the point. Just because Pakistan doesn't defend itself, doesn't make it OK for the US to attack anyway.
     
  8. jayron

    jayron SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    3,696
    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2010
    Ratings:
    +0 / 3,895 / -4
    Pakistan is attacked because it is hosting anti US elements. Your sovereignty will be respected when you act more responsibly.
     
  9. fatman17

    fatman17 PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    26,985
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2007
    Ratings:
    +52 / 29,701 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    Drone strikes in Pakistan

    Leaked Pakistani document contradicts US accounts of drone strikes

    January 31, 2014 by Alice K Ross

    Published in: All Stories, Covert Drone War, Drone strikes in Pakistan


    The US description of Yahya al Libi’s death differs from the version in the Pakistani document.
    A secret Pakistani government document contradicts several of the US’s rare public statements on the CIA’s drone strikes in Pakistan.

    The document outlines over 300 drone strikes dating between 2006 and September 2013. It is compiled by local officials using a network of on-the-ground agents and informants reporting to the FATA Secretariat, the tribal administration.

    It is the fullest official record of the covert campaign yet to emerge, providing the dates, precise times and exact locations of drone strikes, as well as casualty estimates. The document abruptly stops routinely recording civilian casualties after the start of 2009, but overall casualty estimates continue to be comparable to independent estimates such as those compiled by the Bureau.

    Related story – Leaked official document records 330 drone strikes in Pakistan

    Neither US nor Pakistani officials routinely acknowledge strikes or provide estimates of casualties. But occasionally the US’s view of individual strikes emerges – usually through an anonymous official quoted in a mainstream media outlet.

    The secret document shows that Pakistani officials sometimes filed a rather different assessment from the US’s occasional public statements.

    For example, in June 2012, the CIA launched the latest in a series of attempts to kill Abu Yahya al Libi, al Qaeda’s second-in-command. Congressional aides told Los Angeles Times reporter Ken Dilanian that after the strike, the CIA showed video of the strike to politicians who are charged with overseeing the drone programme. This showed a missile killing ‘just one person’ – al Libi.

    But contemporaneous media reports, as well as later field investigations by Amnesty International and the Bureau, found a far higher casualty toll. These found that the attack was a sequence of three strikes,
    including an attack on rescuers. Amnesty found that 10-16 died in total. Six were civilians who had come to rescue the injured after the initial blast.

    A named CIA spokesman strongly rejected the allegation that lawmakers might have been shown only partial footage of the strike, calling the claim ‘baseless’. But the Pakistan government document records 10 deaths.

    Related story – Bureau investigation finds fresh evidence of drone strikes on rescuers

    The Pakistani document also contradicts the US account of a strike in 2011. Drones attacked a large gathering of men who had gathered in a public space in Dattakhel one morning in March 2011. The Pakistani government was quick to protest that the attack had killed tribal elders who had gathered for a jirga – a traditional form of mediation.

    US officials speaking on condition of anonymity have poured scorn on this claim. ‘These people weren’t gathering for a bake sale. They were terrorists,’ one told the New York Times the day after the strike.
    The New York Times later published the results of the Bureau’s first field investigation into drones, naming 19 individuals killed in this strike. An unnamed US official who briefed the paper continued to insist the dead men were legitimate targets.

    ‘The fact is that a large group of heavily armed men, some of whom were clearly connected to al Qaeda and all of whom acted in a manner consistent with AQ-linked militants, were killed,’ he said.

    Related story – Get the data: Pakistani government’s secret report on drone strikes

    The leaked Pakistani document stops regularly recording civilian casualties in January 2009, but occasionally uses ambiguous language that suggests non-combatants were among the dead. For this strike, the document appears to privately echo what the Pakistani government was already saying in public: ‘The attack was carried out on a Jirga and it is feared that all the killed were local tribesmen.’

    A US official, speaking on condition of anonymity, told the Bureau yesterday: ‘While we will not be commenting on the details or locations of purported counterterrorism operations, there is a wide gap between US assessments of civilian casualties and non-governmental assessments.’

    He added: ‘There is no credible information to substantiate claims that US counterterrorism actions have resulted in the deaths of hundreds of innocent civilians, but there are parties interested in spreading such disinformation.’

    In the case of the jirga strike, multiple international organisations - including a field investigation by Associated Press - have identified civilian casualties, and Pakistan’s army chief complained about a high civilian death toll. The case has been used as a basis for a complaint to the UN Human Rights Council and a legal challenge in England.

    The US government has protested over the claims of civilian casualties but has never indicated who it was targeting.

    The same New York Times article contains a third example. The anonymous official rejected the Bureau’s description of a separate strike, on December 6 2010.

    Journalists reported that a drone fired on a vehicle carrying three alleged militants as it drove through the village of Khushali. ‘The sources say one militant was able to escape from the car and hide inside a nearby shop. The drone then fired two more missiles at the shop killing the militant, as well as two civilians inside,’ CNN reported.

    Presented with this finding, the unnamed official told the New York Times: ‘There were two strikes that day, and neither matches the claim. One targeted a car, killing two militants who had visited several Al Qaeda compounds that day; the other killed a handful of militants, including a top AQ [al Qaeda] terrorist.’

    But again the document appears to contradict this, noting: ‘At about 1840 hours US Drone carried out missile strike at a shop in village Khushali Tori Khel, Tehsil Mirali, North Waziristan Agency’.

    Chris Woods, who ran the Bureau’s drones project at the time and is now writing a book about armed drones, said: ‘When the Bureau first challenged CIA claims of zero drone civilian casualties in 2011, anonymous US officials used the New York Times to disparage some of its findings. An official denied, for example, that a shop had deliberately been targeted in December 2010. This secret FATA document, never intended for public release, indicates that a shop was indeed hit that day.’

    He continued: ‘The CIA’s ongoing role in the Pakistan drone campaign appears to be the greatest obstacle to much-needed transparency in cases such as this.’

    The US official told the Bureau: ‘US counter-terrorism operations are precise, lawful, and effective. The United States takes extraordinary care to make sure that its counterterrorism actions are in accordance with all applicable domestic and international law, and that they are consistent with US values and policy.’

    But other observers criticised the US policy of releasing information through selective leaks rather than a more routine disclosure policy.

    Mustafa Qadri, the Amnesty International researcher who investigated strikes for the organisation’s report, Will I Be Next?, said: ‘Ultimately the US bears primary responsibility for disclosing the full extent of its drone program, the facts about how many have been killed and the factual and legal basis for these deaths.’

    Follow Alice Ross on Twitter and sign up to the drones newsletter.
     
  10. Solomon2

    Solomon2 BANNED

    Messages:
    19,426
    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2008
    Ratings:
    +14 / 9,886 / -51
    Country:
    United States
    Location:
    United States
    This has been discussed at PDF before. Please look at the data; some of it is suspicious, like the solitary "drone strike" that just happened to kill 80 children. How a single drone armed with at most two missiles that each carry less than 10kg of explosive can do that isn't easy to explain, as usually drone strikes kill 4-18 each.

    How easy is it for the Pakmil to blame mistaken air strikes on U.S. drones? Who would catch them if they did?
     
  11. fatman17

    fatman17 PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    26,985
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2007
    Ratings:
    +52 / 29,701 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    Drone strikes in Pakistan
    Most US drone strikes in Pakistan attack houses

    May 23, 2014 by Alice K Ross and Jack Serle
    Published in: All Stories, Covert Drone War, Drone strikes in Pakistan


    [​IMG]
    Students gather at the site of a suspected CIA drone strike on a seminary in Hangu district
    (Reuters/Syed Shah)

    Domestic buildings have been hit by drone strikes more than any other type of target in the CIA’s 10-year campaign in the tribal regions of northern Pakistan, new research reveals.

    By way of contrast, since 2008, in neighbouring Afghanistan drone strikes on buildings have been banned in all but the most urgent situations, as part of measures to protect civilian lives. But a new investigative project by the Bureau, Forensic Architecture, a research unit based at London’s Goldsmiths University, and New York-based Situ Research, reveals that in Pakistan, domestic buildings continue to be the most frequent target of drone attacks.

    The project examines, for the first time, the types of target attacked in each drone strike – be they houses, vehicles or madrassas (religious schools) – and the time of day the attack took place.
    It reveals:
    • Over three-fifths (61%) of all drone strikes in Pakistan targeted domestic buildings, with at least 132 houses destroyed, in more than 380 strikes.
    • At least 222 civilians are estimated to be among the 1,500 or more people killed in attacks on such buildings. In the past 18 months, reports of civilian casualties in attacks on any targets have almost completely vanished, but historically almost one civilian was killed, on average, in attacks on houses.
    • The CIA has consistently attacked houses have throughout the 10-year campaign in Pakistan.
    • The time of an attack affects how many people – and how many civilians – are likely to die. Houses are twice as likely to be attacked at night compared with in the afternoon. Strikes that took place in the evening, when families likely to be at home and gathered together, were particularly deadly.
    [​IMG]Researchers analysed thousands of reports including contemporaneous media reports, witness testimonies and field investigations to gather the data on drone strikes in Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas (Fata). The data is also presented in an interactive online map, showing the location and targets of each strike.

    The research reveals a continued policy of targeting buildings throughout the CIA’s campaign in Pakistan, despite an instruction in Afghanistan from the International Security Assistance Force (Isaf), the body which commands foreign operations in the country, that forces operate under the rule that ‘all compounds are assumed to house civilians unless proven to be clear’.

    This rule has been in place since at least September 2008 when, according to a leaked classified report, Isaf introduced a Tactical Directive that ‘specifically called for limiting airstrikes on compounds to avoid civilian casualties when Isaf forces are not in imminent danger’.

    A definition
    In both Afghanistan and the tribal areas of Pakistan people tend to live in buildings that are often described as ‘compounds’. Mansur Mahsud, director of Islamabad-based organisation the Fata Research Center, describes the way people live in these areas: ‘One compound is used by many families, like brothers and first cousins, although every family has their own portion or space in the compound. The compounds in these agencies are quite big – most would measure half an acre or more. Normally you will find 20-25 people living in one compound, and in some cases you will find more than 50.’

    When drones attack buildings in Pakistan, the target is typically described in media reports as a ‘compound’ – and often as a ‘militant compound’. But these are usually domestic structures, which are often rented or commandeered by militant groups.

    A British commander told the Daily Telegraph in 2012 that the UK had stopped using the word ‘compound’: ‘We’re trying to get it into the guys’ heads that this is not compound no 28, it’s 34 Acacia Drive – so you don’t hit it,’ he said.

    A Ministry of Defence spokesman told the Bureau this is not official policy, but is ‘very much aligned to our teaching and thinking’. The UK does not carry out drone strikes in Pakistan.

    A US official told the Bureau: ‘US counterterrorism operations are precise, lawful, and effective. The United States takes extraordinary care to make sure that its counterterrorism actions are in accordance with all applicable domestic and international law, and that they are consistent with US values and policy.’

    While, over the 10 years of the drone campaign in Pakistan, strikes on houses have been more dangerous for civilians, in the past 18 months there have been no confirmed reports of civilian casualties in any attacks – despite a rise in the proportion of strikes that hit houses.

    Mahsud says this is partly due to changes in behaviour on the ground. In the early years of the drone campaign, sympathetic locals would sometimes host the militants as their guests, he said, and carry on living in their properties. But the threat of drone strikes means that now, when militants come to stay, civilians usually leave.

    There is little locals can do about the prospect of their buildings being damaged, he adds: ‘You cannot say no to the Taliban in Fata.’

    The research also reveals that on average more civilians die when a building is targeted than when a vehicle is hit.
    [​IMG]
    It is also possible that more civilians die in attacks on buildings than the reporting indicates. The Bureau’s Naming the Dead project has found that the deaths of women are particularly vulnerable to being underreported.

    Women and children
    Women and children are more likely to stay indoors and therefore less likely to be seen ‘by [a] drone operator monitoring the structure,’ says Susan Schuppli, senior research fellow at Forensic Architecture and the project coordinator. Women and children’s ‘relative seclusion within private space makes them particularly vulnerable to becoming an unknown casualty when a strike occurs’, she said.

    Forensic Architecture interviewed a woman who survived a 2010 drone strike. Originally from Germany, she had moved to Pakistan with her husband and his brother. She and a female friend were in the house one evening, when a group of men sitting in the courtyard was attacked. Her son, aged two, was outside the compound walls with his father, who had gone to smoke a cigarette.

    ‘While we were eating, we heard a very loud bang. The house shook and a lot of earth fell on us from the roof… everything was covered in thick smoke,’ she told researchers. In the courtyard, she saw ‘a big black hole where the rocket hit’, where the men had been sitting to eat.

    Everything was burned, she continued. There were ‘pieces of cloth, and metal from the rocket … everywhere there were bits similar to the pieces of flesh of the three men, which were scattered everywhere.’
    Her brother-in-law was killed, along with at least four others.

    The US official told the Bureau: ‘The US government only targets terrorists who pose a continuing and imminent threat to the American people. Period. Any suggestion otherwise is flat wrong. Furthermore, before any strike is taken, there must be near-certainty that no civilians will be killed or injured – the highest standard we can set.’

    Drone strikes are just one of many threats to property in Fata. Localised violence – between rival militant groups, and between the Army and militant groups – is a frequent occurrence, killing civilians and destroying buildings. Since December the Pakistan military has carried out several large-scale bombings on suspected militant targets, including in urban areas. Scores of civilians have reportedly been killed.

    At least a quarter of drone strikes in Pakistan hit vehicles – cars, motorbikes and pickup trucks, according to the research, and these attacks were significantly less likely than average to harm civilians. There have been no confirmed civilian casualties in strikes on vehicles at night.
    [​IMG]
    ‘Civilians usually avoid going out at night, because Taliban militants do not allow people to venture out of their homes at night without a valid reason,’ said Mansur Mahsud, of the Fata Research Center.

    The Bureau’s analysis found that strikes on mosques and madrassas – religious schools – are the deadliest. At least eight strikes have hit such targets, killing over 17 people on average in each attack. At least 99 civilians have reportedly been killed in total.
    [​IMG]
    The funeral for victims of the October 2006 attack on the Chenegai madrassa (STR/AFP/Getty Images)

    The figures for strikes on mosques and madrassas are skewed by a particularly bloody strike that hit a religious school in Chenegai, Bajaur on October 30 2006, reportedly killing 81 people. But even excluding this event, strikes on madrassas and mosques remain far more deadly – including to civilians – than those reported to have hit other targets. Excluding the Chenegai strike, the civilian casualty rate is nine times that of strikes on vehicles – 2.7 for each strike on average.

    But here, again, the care taken over the past year to avoid civilian casualties appears to be bucking these historic trends.

    The Chenegai attack flattened the building and killed scores of civilians. By contrast, last November a drone strike targeted a madrassa in Hangu, in the first drone strike to hit beyond Pakistan’s tribal regions. The attack took out a single room.

    Although there were reportedly up to 80 students in the building, the strike killed at least six men, allegedly militants.

    Opposition party leader Imran Khan claimed in a press conference that four children died in the attack, but at the time of writing the Bureau had been unable to confirm any civilian deaths.

    An unnamed US official later denied to the Washington Post that the strike hit a madrassa, saying it targeted ‘a compound associated with the Haqqani Network’ near the madrassa.

    The difference between these two strikes hints at how the US has adjusted its tactics over the course of the campaign.

    US drones fire Hellfire missiles and the much more powerful GBU laser-guided bombs. The Hellfire is a product of the Cold War, designed to destroy Soviet tanks. But the US has adapted the drone-mounted versions, lowering the explosive yield twice, according to Chris Woods, investigative journalist and author of forthcoming book Sudden Justice: America’s Secret Drone Wars.

    Reducing explosive power ‘makes a great deal of sense’, Woods adds. ‘A missile designed to bore through thick Soviet armour when used against mud-brick houses in Pakistan is going to have pretty catastrophic effects.’

    Specialist weapons
    The US has added new Hellfire variants to its drone arsenal, according to a former drone pilot. These new variants include specialised missiles for attacking vehicles, others with a delayed fuse designed to smash through walls and detonate inside buildings, and anti-personnel missiles with a metal sleeve that splinters on detonation.

    When drone strikes started in Pakistan, the CIA only had access to small fleet of slow Predator drones, carrying up to two Hellfire missiles. But when the CIA acquired larger, more powerful Reaper drones, larger and more powerful bombs was added to their armoury.

    Meanwhile, the GBU-12 and GBU-38 laser-guided bombs have at least five times the explosive power of a Hellfire and, according to Woods, are ‘used when they want to be sure of a kill,’ particularly ‘when high-value targets are involved’.

    The data shows the constantly shifting nature of the drone campaign, as the CIA and their targets adapt their tactics and behaviour in a game of cat-and-mouse.
    [​IMG]
    ‘When vehicles used by militants began to be targeted frequently, militants decreased their use of vehicles to avoid drone strikes,’ Mahsud says. ‘Now in many areas, militants travel on foot from one place to another.’

    The Bureau has not recorded a similar change in Yemen where vehicles are the most common target. The US has been striking al Qaeda with drones since 2002 when it killed six alleged militants in a strike on a car.

    The drone strikes on vehicles in Yemen do kill civilians. However, they are generally targeted when in sparsely populated areas, outside urban spaces. This appears to be a conscious effort to reduce collateral damage. In general the attacks in Yemen are reportedly less lethal for civilians. In Yemen on average one civilian is killed in every other strike whereas in Pakistan, on average more than one civilian is killed in each strike.

    ‘As we’ve seen in Yemen, the CIA is careful in what it chooses to target – for example the deliberate focussing on moving vehicles between towns to limit the potential for collateral damage,’ said Woods. ‘What is so shocking to think about in Pakistan is that the CIA has continued to target homes in villages even up until 2013.’

    Additional reporting by Jacob Burns.
    Follow Alice K Ross and Jack Serle on Twitter. Sign up for the drones newsletter and subscribe to the podcast.