Success percentage of US drone strike is just 6%

[Munir]

Whatever the figures are...

US doesn't really care about muslims. Guantanomo, Abu Ghraib, Irac, Afghanistan, Somalia, Pakistan etc etc... If they can eliminate or let Israel do dirty buss then it is all fine. Same goes with the arrogance that the US Holbrooke presented. India was sexed up to be happy and the "free" check to Pakistan is now even restricted to whether they are friendly to India. Whether they kill Pakistani at US will. And that for 1,5 billion while they throw away bilions a day for warfare. I think we should make pretty fast a line and stop being the cheapest hooker. Zardari just tries to kiss their a... But I think the way this Obama government changed in a few weeks resulted in distrust the US even more then during Bush. Even FO said openly that they do not agree. Kyani is moving away. The military are no longer intrested in US products. Matter of time that we are no longer intrested in the US. Thank you Obama... Just like Bush you are just intrested in your ideas. Being a longterm friend or ally is gone in weeks...

 

[Rafael]

Now the point is, who is responsible for this massive killing of innocent pakistani men,women and children?? Our Govts? both ( Musharaff and Zardari), USA? AQ?

Somebody should be held responsible.

 

[foxhound]

Now the point is, who is responsible for this massive killing of innocent pakistani men,women and children?? Our Govts? both ( Musharaff and Zardari), USA? AQ?

Somebody should be held responsible.

The corrupt so called 'elite', who have no courage and are basically thieves.....sooner or later they will receive the consequences of their actions.

But I also blame the general public as well.......their is a hadith that states (not exact words, sorry) 'your leaders will be like yourselves - if you are good they will be good....if you are evil they too will be....

If you look at the current society and alot of the people are messed up...too many liars, backbiters, fornicators, adulterers etc.

People are either too loose or too extreme...no one follows the middle way (Islam as it should have been)....until the people do not change their conditions....then unfortunately it will get worse!

 

[fatman17]

ISLAMABAD: Of the 60 cross-border predator strikes carried out by the Afghanistan-based American drones in Pakistan between January 14, 2006 and April 8, 2009, only 10 were able to hit their actual targets, killing 14 wanted al-Qaeda leaders, besides perishing 687 innocent Pakistani civilians. The success percentage of the US predator strikes thus comes to not more than six per cent.

Figures compiled by the Pakistani authorities show that a total of 701 people, including 14 al-Qaeda leaders, have been killed since January 2006 in 60 American predator attacks targeting the tribal areas of Pakistan. Two strikes carried out in 2006 had killed 98 civilians while three attacks conducted in 2007 had slain 66 Pakistanis, yet none of the wanted al-Qaeda or Taliban leaders could be hit by the Americans right on target.

However, of the 50 drone attacks carried out between January 29, 2008 and April 8, 2009, 10 hit their targets and killed 14 wanted al-Qaeda operatives. Most of these attacks were carried out on the basis of intelligence believed to have been provided by the Pakistani and Afghan tribesmen who had been spying for the US-led allied forces stationed in Afghanistan.

The remaining 50 drone attacks went wrong due to faulty intelligence information, killing hundreds of innocent civilians, including women and children. The number of the Pakistani civilians killed in those 50 attacks stood at 537, in which 385 people lost their lives in 2008 and 152 people were slain in the first 99 days of 2009 (between January 1 and April 8).

Of the 50 drone attacks, targeting the Pakistani tribal areas since January 2008, 36 were carried out in 2008 and 14 were conducted in the first 99 days of 2009. Of the 14 attacks targeting Pakistan in 2009, three were carried out in January, killing 30 people, two in February killing 55 people, five in March killing 36 people and four were conducted in the first nine days of April, killing 31 people.

Of the 14 strikes carried out in the first 99 days of April 2009, only one proved successful, killing two most wanted senior al-Qaeda leaders - Osama al Kini and Sheikh Ahmed Salim Swedan. Both had lost their lives in a New Year’s Day drone strike carried out in the South Waziristan region on January 1, 2009.Kini was believed to be the chief operational commander of al-Qaeda in Pakistan and had replaced Abu Faraj Al Libi after his arrest from Bannu in 2004. Both men were behind the 1998 bombings of the US embassies in Dares Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya, which killed 224 civilians and wounded more than 5,000 others.

There were 36 recorded cross-border US predator strikes inside Pakistan during 2008, of which 29 took place after August 31, 2008, killing 385 people. However, only nine of the 36 strikes hit their actual targets, killing 12 wanted al-Qaeda leaders. The first successful predator strike had killed Abu Laith al Libi, a senior military commander of al-Qaeda who was targeted in North Waziristan on January 29, 2008. The second successful attack in Bajaur had killed Abu Sulayman Jazairi, al-Qaeda’s external operations chief, on March 14, 2008. The third attack in South Waziristan on July 28, 2008, had killed Abu Khabab al Masri, al-Qaeda’s weapons of mass destruction chief. The fourth successful attack in South Waziristan on August 13, 2008, had killed al-Qaeda leader Abdur Rehman.

The fifth predator strike carried out in North Waziristan near Miranshah on Sept 8, 2008 had killed three al-Qaeda leaders, Abu Haris, Abu Hamza, and Zain Ul Abu Qasim. The sixth successful predator hit in the South Waziristan region on October 2008 had killed Khalid Habib, a key leader of al-Qaeda’s paramilitary Shadow Army.

The seventh such attack conducted in North Waziristan on October 31, 2008 had killed Abu Jihad al Masri, a top leader of the Egyptian Islamic group. The eighth successful predator strike had killed al-Qaeda leader Abdullah Azzam al Saudi in east of North Waziristan on November 19, 2008.

The ninth and the last successful drone attack of 2008, carried out in the Ali Khel region just outside Miramshah in North Waziristan on November 22, 2008, had killed al-Qaeda leader Abu Zubair al Masri and his Pakistani fugitive accomplice Rashid Rauf.

According to the figures compiled by the Pakistani authorities, a total of 537 people have been killed in 50 incidents of cross-border US predator strikes since January 1, 2008 to April 8, 2009, averaging 34 killings per month and 11 killings per attack. The average per month killings in predator strikes during 12 months of 2008 stood at 32 while the average per attack killings in the 36 drone strikes for the same year stood at 11.

Similarly, 152 people have been killed in 14 incidents of cross-border predator attacks in the tribal areas in the first 99 days of 2009, averaging 38 killings per month and 11 killings per attack.

60 drone hits kill 14 al-Qaeda men, 687 civilians - GEO.tv

----------------------------------------------------------------

Now Imagine, just 14 AQ leaders killed and how much would have joined them after they lost their families???

i would seriously question the validity of the source "Geo-TV"! pls spare me and dont insult my intelligence!

 

[ajpirzada]

let them kill more innocent ppl and we ll see more ppl goin to afghanistan to fight invaders. i dont understand y does america complain when ppl from pak go to afghanistan to fight them. if they kill my family or relatives ill definately go as ill have no other reason left to live my life

 

[fatman17]

ANALYSIS: Analysing drone attacks —Najmuddin A Shaikh

Where army operations have been successful, and Bajaur is a prime example, the collateral damage in terms of displacement of the population has been terribly high. More than half a million people from Bajaur have left their homes and have received little assistance in the settled districts to which they have fled

Increasing discontent in Pakistan over the purport of President Obama’s AfPak policy has many elements.

Let’s begin with the reiteration of an old Obama position: “And we will insist that action be taken — one way or another — when we have intelligence about high-level terrorist targets”.

This has been correctly interpreted as meaning that drone attacks in the tribal areas would continue despite Islamabad’s position that they violate Pakistani sovereignty and are counter-productive. Pakistan has consistently argued that the collateral damage makes this war an even harder sell for any government in Pakistan, causes further alienation and increases support for the common enemies of Pakistan and the United States.

Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi’s statement at the joint press conference with Richard Holbrooke and Admiral Mike Mullen that Pakistan would neither accept nor offer blank cheques has been widely welcomed as is his assertion that there is a gap between the Pakistani and American positions on the drone attacks and that Pakistan would continue to get the Americans to see the light. Pakistan, it is being said, is now behaving like a self-respecting nation that would not yield to the bullying of a superpower.

And yet, what is the truth about the drone attacks? That such attacks violate Pakistan’s sovereignty is unquestionable. No nation has the right to enter our territory or air space, let alone carry out aerial operations without our permission. But do we control this territory? Do we really know how much collateral damage is caused and how counter-productive it is?

For many months I have read carefully every account that has appeared about the drone attacks in our newspapers. Invariably we are told that the “local Taliban” surround the area of the incident, remove the bodies for burial and take the injured to hospitals of their choice and then let the press know what the collateral damage has been.

Independent corroboration, clearly, is not possible since there is no local authority present, no reporter has access to the area and the local populace is too cowed to offer an account of the incident that differs from what the Taliban have said. We have to fall back on damage assessments offered by the Americans.

We claim that for every innocent civilian killed in these attacks ten new Taliban recruits are created and our effort at dialogue is frustrated. And yet have we asked ourselves the question why among these very people ten new anti-Taliban fighters have not emerged for each of the hundreds perhaps thousands of tribal Maliks and elders that the Taliban and their foreign cohorts have slaughtered even more mercilessly than the drones.

The truth is that the government and our security forces have not been able to reassure the people of the region that they would protect them against the Taliban if they stood up to offer resistance and the local populations, like the people of Swat after an initial period of resistance, have decided that they do not have the means to prevent the small but well-armed Taliban and Al Qaeda groups from exercising control and imposing their reign of terror in the region.

Where army operations have been successful, and Bajaur is a prime example, the collateral damage in terms of displacement of the population has been terribly high. More than half a million people from Bajaur have left their homes and have received little assistance in the settled districts to which they have fled. The army has reached a truce with the Taliban in the area on terms that seem to suggest a Taliban acceptance of the State’s right to impose its writ. But even this has not been enough to convince the Bajaur people to return to their homes; nor, as far as one can tell, has this led to the return of the local administrators and the commencement of development work.

Why did the Bajaur displacement occur?

I think it would be fair to say that the area had to be softened up by ground artillery and aerial bombardment before troops could move in. The collateral damage was high because Pakistan has precious little by way of precision guided munitions in its arsenal and ordinary bombs and shells kill many more than the people they are aimed at. Perhaps as we acquire more sophisticated equipment and training we will be better able to avoid such collateral damage in our bid to reassert the government’s writ.

But how do you, in the meanwhile, avoid a Bajaur situation and still disrupt Taliban and Al Qaeda dominance of the area.

Let us think at least that the drones may be one way of doing so and rather than the current emphasis on protecting Pakistan’s sovereignty the government should be explaining that this is what the drones are seeking to achieve and that we are trying to acquire the know-how and equipment to do this ourselves.

This is what our conversations with the Americans on this subject should also focus on. Better intelligence sharing, better equipment for and training of our forces and such better coordination as would put us in the driver’s seat with regard to choice of targets and drone targeting. By this I mean that we should be able to target those who are specifically carrying out operations against Pakistani security forces as also those who are attacking NATO forces in Afghanistan.

There has been a great deal of talk about the expanding drone attacks to Balochistan where the Americans believe the leadership of the Afghan Taliban have found safe haven and from where they are said to plan operations in Afghanistan. Balochistan is not the badlands of the Tribal areas and the highly urbanised areas there cannot be treated as such.

I think this is a redline that the Pakistan government has drawn and which the Americans will not cross. I believe that all this talk has been generated to suggest that the Pakistan authorities need to be more aware of American and Afghan concerns on this account and to use their own means to tackle this problem.

While advising the government one would also like to suggest that its spokespersons must also lead the way in convincing the people that Baitullah Mehsud’s claims notwithstanding his suicide bomber attacks in Pakistan are not just retaliation for drone attacks but part of a wider plan to create the sort of instability which allows obscurantist forces to make a bid for power or cause Pakistan to fall apart. One hopes that that in doing so the government will take account of what has been happening under its nose.

There are disquieting reports about the growing influence of extremist forces in parts of the country that should theoretically have the greatest revulsion towards extremism. In Sindh, where the Sufi interpretation of Islam — love and tolerance — has been dominant there has been graffiti according to press reports in which satellite dishes, cable TV and VCRs are described as “three signs of the approaching doomsday”.

A TV channel was forced to cancel a musical show in Nawabshah after the local court issued a restraining order at the behest of a religious party. More recently, with the approval of the local police, a musical dance event was cancelled in Shahdadkot district again at the instance of a religious party. The PPP, a strongly secular party is in power in Sindh; its ally the MQM is even more determinedly secular and yet this happens.

Why is the police acting in this fashion and why is the government not defending freedom of expression in the courts?

Up North it is now almost commonplace to see reports such as the one from Mansehra two days ago about the killing of three female workers of the National Rural Support Programme presumably by militants and presumably because they were like other NGO representatives spreading vulgarity by having males and females working together. No reports have yet surfaced about any arrest in connection with the killing of three people last year when militants stormed the office of an NGO in that area. Is this what we will see coming to the rest of the country?

Our free media makes these facts public and, in the absence of a clearly enunciated and forcefully implemented policy of nipping such ominous trends in the bud, civil society remains largely quiescent. What then should the rest of the world think about the direction in which events are moving in Pakistan and what then is likely to happen? Food for thought!

The writer is a former foreign secretary

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan

 

[Vassnti]

In fact, 14 AQ leaders/ 701 = 2%, which is less than 6%. So that figure of no more than 6% is entirely plausible.

So acording to the Geo TV everyone arround those 14 were a cluster of civilians, no bodyguards no subordinates no drivers or other taliban? Amazing how geo has no credibility untill it is attacking the US