yyetttt
BANNED
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2011
- Messages
- 1,507
- Reaction score
- 0
Drone strikes in Pakistan (not to mention Yemen, Somalia and possibly other countries) have increased markedly since June 2004. According to a just-published study by two American law schools, the number of civilian deaths are far greater than acknowledged by the administration. The strikes raise serious questions as to their legality under both international and domestic law. The constant hovering of drones over local communities creates a climate of fear among the general population. Inciting anti-American sentiment, U.S. drones and their increasing strikes are an effective recruiting tool for terrorist groups.
Living Under Drones: Death, Injury, and Trauma to Civilians from U.S. Drone Practices in Pakistan (LUD) is the result of a nine month investigation by the International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic at Stanford Law School and the International Human Rights and the Global Justice Clinic of the New York University School of Law. The authors call for greater government transparency, compensation for civilians harmed by the attacks and reevaluation of US drone policy. The issues they raise warrant urgent attention by both Congress and the Executive Branch.
Separate bills now being advanced by Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Reps. Ed Markey (D-Mass) and Ted Poe (R-Tex.) seek to regulate the domestic use of drones. They are essentially privacy bills that would establish safeguards on the surveillance of U.S. citizens and residents. Meanwhile, President Obama signed an FAA bill in February that gave a go-ahead to integrate drones into the countrys airspace by 2015.
The CIAs use of U.S. drones in military actions is unregulated and only recently acknowledged by the administration. As the LUD report highlights, there is an almost total lack of transparency regarding civilian casualties and other aspects of the program. There has been notable absence of public debate on drone strikes; the presidents recent interview statements amount to no more than trust me. While the administration announces the deaths of high-level militants with fanfare, the LUD concludes that the number of such targets killed as a percentage of total casualties is only about 2%.
At the same time, the report says that US drones have killed or injured innocent civilians in numbers that defy administration claims that such casualties are exceedingly rare. The LUD report cites figures published by the independent, London-based Bureau of Investigative Journalism showing that drone strikes from June 2004 to September, 2012 killed more than 2,500 Pakistanis, of whom between 474 and 881 were civilians, including 176 children. The report condemns the CIA practice of double-tap, the second striking of a target to hit or discourage first responders.
Beyond the immediate death and destruction of the drone attacks is the constant fear that 24/7 drone surveillance creates among the villagers in North Waziristan. As one of the residents told report interviewers Strikes are always on our minds. That is why people dont go out to schools, because they are afraid that they may be the next ones to be hit. According to the report, Drones hover twenty-four hours a day over communities in northwest Pakistan, striking homes, vehicles and public spaces without warning. Their presence terrorizes men, women and children, giving rise to anxieties among civilian communities. Not surprisingly, the report later concludes that drone attacks help terrorist groups attract new recruits.
The LUD questions the legality of the drone strikes. Unless the Pakistani government has consented (doubtful based on current evidence), they clearly violate national sovereignty. Nor would a claim of self-defense satisfy international law standards under Article 51 of the UN Charter, which requires armed attack for such justification. If the actions qualify as armed conflict, they would run afoul several provisions of the international humanitarian law. Absent armed conflict, the limits of international human rights law would apply. US drone policy may also violate US domestic law, which prohibits assassination and limits executive power.
Living Under Drones is a wake up call for Congress and the president. The LUD report says that US drone policy needs serious rethinking. Americans alarmed by the targeted killings (akin to actions of a mob hit squad) and the collateral deaths, injuries and property losses suffered by innocent civilians, would go further. Congress should prohibit CIA deployment of drones in civilian areas and fix standards for drone use that comply with both international and domestic law.
How is it hurting our sovereignty if the Waziristanis dont follow our laws?? Why dont we just rain hell on the Waziristani people??
Someone needs to teach these people, its our laws or nothing
Living Under Drones: Death, Injury, and Trauma to Civilians from U.S. Drone Practices in Pakistan (LUD) is the result of a nine month investigation by the International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic at Stanford Law School and the International Human Rights and the Global Justice Clinic of the New York University School of Law. The authors call for greater government transparency, compensation for civilians harmed by the attacks and reevaluation of US drone policy. The issues they raise warrant urgent attention by both Congress and the Executive Branch.
Separate bills now being advanced by Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Reps. Ed Markey (D-Mass) and Ted Poe (R-Tex.) seek to regulate the domestic use of drones. They are essentially privacy bills that would establish safeguards on the surveillance of U.S. citizens and residents. Meanwhile, President Obama signed an FAA bill in February that gave a go-ahead to integrate drones into the countrys airspace by 2015.
The CIAs use of U.S. drones in military actions is unregulated and only recently acknowledged by the administration. As the LUD report highlights, there is an almost total lack of transparency regarding civilian casualties and other aspects of the program. There has been notable absence of public debate on drone strikes; the presidents recent interview statements amount to no more than trust me. While the administration announces the deaths of high-level militants with fanfare, the LUD concludes that the number of such targets killed as a percentage of total casualties is only about 2%.
At the same time, the report says that US drones have killed or injured innocent civilians in numbers that defy administration claims that such casualties are exceedingly rare. The LUD report cites figures published by the independent, London-based Bureau of Investigative Journalism showing that drone strikes from June 2004 to September, 2012 killed more than 2,500 Pakistanis, of whom between 474 and 881 were civilians, including 176 children. The report condemns the CIA practice of double-tap, the second striking of a target to hit or discourage first responders.
Beyond the immediate death and destruction of the drone attacks is the constant fear that 24/7 drone surveillance creates among the villagers in North Waziristan. As one of the residents told report interviewers Strikes are always on our minds. That is why people dont go out to schools, because they are afraid that they may be the next ones to be hit. According to the report, Drones hover twenty-four hours a day over communities in northwest Pakistan, striking homes, vehicles and public spaces without warning. Their presence terrorizes men, women and children, giving rise to anxieties among civilian communities. Not surprisingly, the report later concludes that drone attacks help terrorist groups attract new recruits.
The LUD questions the legality of the drone strikes. Unless the Pakistani government has consented (doubtful based on current evidence), they clearly violate national sovereignty. Nor would a claim of self-defense satisfy international law standards under Article 51 of the UN Charter, which requires armed attack for such justification. If the actions qualify as armed conflict, they would run afoul several provisions of the international humanitarian law. Absent armed conflict, the limits of international human rights law would apply. US drone policy may also violate US domestic law, which prohibits assassination and limits executive power.
Living Under Drones is a wake up call for Congress and the president. The LUD report says that US drone policy needs serious rethinking. Americans alarmed by the targeted killings (akin to actions of a mob hit squad) and the collateral deaths, injuries and property losses suffered by innocent civilians, would go further. Congress should prohibit CIA deployment of drones in civilian areas and fix standards for drone use that comply with both international and domestic law.
How is it hurting our sovereignty if the Waziristanis dont follow our laws?? Why dont we just rain hell on the Waziristani people??
Someone needs to teach these people, its our laws or nothing
