One by one, victims of drone attacks full of condemnation
- Thread starter Respect4Respect01
- Start date
TruthSeeker
PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2008
- Messages
- 6,390
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
U.S. counter-terrorism strategy to rely on surgical strikes, unmanned drones
(Carolyn Kaster / AP), June 29, 2011, By Ken Dilanian
The Obama administration has concluded in a newly released counter-terrorism strategy that precision strikes and raids, rather than large land wars, are the most effective way to defeat Al Qaeda.
Brennan, a longtime former CIA officer, spoke at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University in Washington, as the White House posted the new strategy on its website.
The strategy codifies policies the administration has been pursuing for 2 1/2 years, and much of it mirrors the practices of the Bush administration, Brennan said. But at its core is a repudiation of the thinking that sent large numbers of American troops to Iraq and Afghanistan. Al Qaedas leadership has been decimated, Brennan said, thanks not to the wars but to unyielding pressure from U.S. operations to kill the group's leaders one by one in the Afghanistan-Pakistan border region.
The more acute threats to the U.S. these days come from Al Qaeda affiliates in Yemen and perhaps Somalia, U.S. officials have said, and no one is contemplating sending large numbers of American troops to those countries.
Instead, the U.S. will pursue a war in the shadows, one relying heavily on missile strikes from unmanned aerial drones, raids by elite special operations troops, and quiet training of local forces to pursue terrorists.
Brennan said the recently announced troop reduction in Afghanistan would have no impact on U.S. counter-terrorism strategy in that country and Pakistan, where, he said, the U.S. has been delivering precise and overwhelming force against militants.
In the peculiar dance that marks the administrations discussions of this issue, Brennan did not explicitly mention the vast expansion of drone strikes the U.S. has undertaken in Pakistan since January 2009 213 of them, according to the New America Foundation, which counts them through media reports. That is because the program technically is secret, even though it is widely discussed and openly acknowledged by U.S. and Pakistani officials in private.
Later, when asked whether a policy of targeted killing was appropriate for the United States, Brennan responded that the U.S. is exceptionally precise and surgical in terms of addressing the terrorist threat. And by that I mean, if there are terrorists who are within an area where there are women and children or others, you know, we do not take such action that might put those innocent men, women and children in danger.
He added that in the last year, there hasn't been a single collateral death because of the exceptional proficiency, precision of the capabilities that we've been able to develop.
Brennan presumably was referring to covert strikes by the CIA and the Joint Special Operations Command, because in April, two American servicemen were killed by a Hellfire missile fired from a military drone after apparently being mistaken for insurgents moving to attack another group of Marines in southern Afghanistan.
Brennan's willingness to boast about the precision of the drone strikes without actually acknowledging them underscores one of the implications of the Obama counter-terrorism strategy: It will be conducted largely in secret, without public accountability. When the military makes a mistake in a drone strike, as it has done in Afghanistan, there is an investigation and some transparency.
But when it comes to targeted killing by the CIA or clandestine special operations units, government officials are able to avoid public scrutiny, citing the need for secrecy. They are willing to make claims about limited civilian casualties, but are not willing to document those claims by, for example, releasing the video taken of each strike.
While members of Congress briefed on the drone program, including Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), back the administration's claims that civilian casualties are minimal, other experts, including Bruce Riedel, a former CIA officer and Obama advisor, question how officials can be so sure.
Asked about this, the White House declined to comment.
U.S. counter-terrorism strategy to rely on surgical strikes, unmanned drones - Los Angeles Times
(Carolyn Kaster / AP), June 29, 2011, By Ken Dilanian
The Obama administration has concluded in a newly released counter-terrorism strategy that precision strikes and raids, rather than large land wars, are the most effective way to defeat Al Qaeda.
Brennan, a longtime former CIA officer, spoke at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University in Washington, as the White House posted the new strategy on its website.
The strategy codifies policies the administration has been pursuing for 2 1/2 years, and much of it mirrors the practices of the Bush administration, Brennan said. But at its core is a repudiation of the thinking that sent large numbers of American troops to Iraq and Afghanistan. Al Qaedas leadership has been decimated, Brennan said, thanks not to the wars but to unyielding pressure from U.S. operations to kill the group's leaders one by one in the Afghanistan-Pakistan border region.
The more acute threats to the U.S. these days come from Al Qaeda affiliates in Yemen and perhaps Somalia, U.S. officials have said, and no one is contemplating sending large numbers of American troops to those countries.
Instead, the U.S. will pursue a war in the shadows, one relying heavily on missile strikes from unmanned aerial drones, raids by elite special operations troops, and quiet training of local forces to pursue terrorists.
Brennan said the recently announced troop reduction in Afghanistan would have no impact on U.S. counter-terrorism strategy in that country and Pakistan, where, he said, the U.S. has been delivering precise and overwhelming force against militants.
In the peculiar dance that marks the administrations discussions of this issue, Brennan did not explicitly mention the vast expansion of drone strikes the U.S. has undertaken in Pakistan since January 2009 213 of them, according to the New America Foundation, which counts them through media reports. That is because the program technically is secret, even though it is widely discussed and openly acknowledged by U.S. and Pakistani officials in private.
Later, when asked whether a policy of targeted killing was appropriate for the United States, Brennan responded that the U.S. is exceptionally precise and surgical in terms of addressing the terrorist threat. And by that I mean, if there are terrorists who are within an area where there are women and children or others, you know, we do not take such action that might put those innocent men, women and children in danger.
He added that in the last year, there hasn't been a single collateral death because of the exceptional proficiency, precision of the capabilities that we've been able to develop.
Brennan presumably was referring to covert strikes by the CIA and the Joint Special Operations Command, because in April, two American servicemen were killed by a Hellfire missile fired from a military drone after apparently being mistaken for insurgents moving to attack another group of Marines in southern Afghanistan.
Brennan's willingness to boast about the precision of the drone strikes without actually acknowledging them underscores one of the implications of the Obama counter-terrorism strategy: It will be conducted largely in secret, without public accountability. When the military makes a mistake in a drone strike, as it has done in Afghanistan, there is an investigation and some transparency.
But when it comes to targeted killing by the CIA or clandestine special operations units, government officials are able to avoid public scrutiny, citing the need for secrecy. They are willing to make claims about limited civilian casualties, but are not willing to document those claims by, for example, releasing the video taken of each strike.
While members of Congress briefed on the drone program, including Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), back the administration's claims that civilian casualties are minimal, other experts, including Bruce Riedel, a former CIA officer and Obama advisor, question how officials can be so sure.
Asked about this, the White House declined to comment.
U.S. counter-terrorism strategy to rely on surgical strikes, unmanned drones - Los Angeles Times
Greater China
FULL MEMBER
New Recruit
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2011
- Messages
- 91
- Reaction score
- 0
Pakistani families of people killed in U.S. drone strikes plead for justice.
A video by RussiaToday:
A video by RussiaToday:
Last edited by a moderator:
Jihad
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2008
- Messages
- 2,079
- Reaction score
- 0
No brother, look at these pictures, look at them with pain and agony, it breaks my heart as much as it breaks yours.
I clench my fist in anger, for that only the people of Pakistan are to blame for this misery, they have, in masses, supported and shown sympathy for the current PPP-led government.
The only thing it has done is create friction within our national institutions, The ISI/Army versus the Government of Pakistan and back and forth, while there is a certain war going on and the Americans are increasing the drone strikes on our SOIL for crying out loud.
I wish these pictures would show up everywhere in Pakistan, it's cruel I know, but how long will our people remain silent and realize that burning a few vehicles, tyres, or destroying public property is not the way to get our voices heard.
Increase public awareness among Pakistanis, young and old, over what is going on and that we are losing our men, women and children over these drone strikes. Enough is enough, the effectiveness of these strikes in NO way justify the huge amount of innocent deaths.
God forbid how the western media would have reacted would these children be of American/western origin, oh all hell would break loose.
Now these innocent little children, who had as much of a right to a great future as all of us, have been annihilated basically because our people and our establishments allow the Americans to strike their hearts out on our mainland.
Nobody cares about these kids....they're just "civilian casualties and happen to be in the collateral damage"
To the people who remain skeptical of these deaths and the truth behind them, and I've seen mainly some Indians on this thread, seriously, even my pet dogs would understand and feel some sort of pain by looking at these pictures, there should be no doubt in mind that these children are the victims of these drone strikes, and what use do they have if innocent civilian casualties are far greater than the actual taliban targets?
LeGenD
MODERATOR
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2006
- Messages
- 15,813
- Reaction score
- 162
- Country
- Location
You want to fight the US? Please go ahead and do so. Who is stopping you?
But don't be surprised if even your neighbour does not comes out to help you in your jihad. People have other things to worry about. In Pakistan, large number of people are struggling for Roti, Kapra, and Makaan. They don't give a damn about what US is doing in the region. These people already feel alienated within their own country. This is the thing that we should worry about first.
When you are a leader, you have to think out of the box. Your decisions can have consequences. You need to think very carefully and weigh the pros and cons of every decision you make. A smart leader will not jeopardize the fate of his nation to save the @ss of others.
How about making Pakistan an independent and strong country in real sense? Willing to wage this jihad?
Remember: Pakistan is a victim of its own internal weaknesses. Enemies are simply taking advantage.
Similar threads
