U.S. War Crimes: Can you imagine the terror of your town being hit by a drone strike?

[cali]

Can you imagine how many children are being damaged by these strikes? PTSD ring a bell? Can you imagine living under that threat, looking up to see if a drone is headed toward you? Signature strikes, as most of the drone strikes are, may kill "terrorists" but they kill innocents too:

On March 17, 2011 a CIA-controlled drone fired as many as four missiles at what they thought was a large group of militants in the village of Datta Khel. In fact, they targeted a peaceful Tribal Council, or Jirga, massacring over 40 tribal leaders and devastating entire communities... At Datta Khel, the CIA saw a large group of armed men gathering for a meeting and summarily nominated them for execution.

<snip>

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-greenwald/signature-strike-investig_b_3400418.html

That's called a signature strike. Strike what you think are terrorists.

Are they legal? C'mon. Add to that "double tapping", a despicable war crime which we have engaged in. It's when you hit the rescuers who go to the aid of those originally hit.

<snip>

"A number of people were wounded in the attack, local tribesman Kaleemullah Dawar told Reuters, but rescuers did not immediately respond to the victims because of fears they would also come under attack. Attacks on first responders going to the aid the victims of a first hit, known as "double tap" strikes, are a common tactic of US drone warfare.

<snip>

http://www.dw.de/drone-strike-in-northern-pakistan-kills-more-than-a-dozen-people/a-16925350

Pakistan says the U.S. is violating its sovereignty by conducting these strikes.


The U.S. lies its ass off, claiming that we don't hit civilians.

Study: US drone strikes more likely to kill civilians than US jet fire

http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/07/02/19254842-study-us-drone-strikes-more-likely-to-kill-civilians-than-us-jet-fire?lite

[SamKnause]

1. Drone Attacks

The U.S. has been the leader of global terrorism for many many decades.

[cali]

2. here's a previous thread on signature strikes

http://election.democraticunderground.com/10023048775

[KoKo]

12. That's an excellent thread to go back to for those (like me) who missed it.

Thanks for keeping up on this Cali.

[cali]

13. thank you so much KoKo

the drone killings make me crazy.

I really want to see anyone on DU defend this, but those who support the President on everything- and they exist here- are avoiding this thread as if they'd catch the plague from it.

[cheapdate]

26. Drone strikes will continue as long as there are U.S. soldiers fighting in Afghanistan,

and enemies planning, supporting, or participating in efforts to kill those soldiers. Barack Obama is responsible for the lives of roughly 40,000 American soldiers in Afghanistan.

The United States has different options for dealing with enemies in Afghanistan, the tribal areas of Pakistan, Yemen, etc. We can ignore those groups and individuals who are planning, supporting, or participating in killing American soldiers, we can launch a widespread, devastating bombing campaign, we can expand the war and launch major ground offensives into those areas, we can withdraw from Afghanistan entirely, etc.

Destruction, devastation, and civilian casualties are inescapable consequences of war. There is little, if any, practical difference between a bomb dropped by conventional, piloted, bomber aircraft and a missile fired from an unmanned aerial vehicle.

[cali]

28. bullpucky and here's why

http://election.democraticunderground.com/10023156490

furthermore, it's not nearly the simplistic equation you lay out. It's not just about protecting American troops, it's purportedly about wiping out terrorism. Of course, these drone strikes, which kill civilians as well as *terrorists*, foment more *terrorism*. And then there's that element of money; there are people making lots and lots of it due to these policies.

You didn't address either our drone strikes being on a sovereign nation which we are not at war with, or the "double tapping" policy.

[cheapdate]

34. OK

1. Among other things, the linked ABC News report confirms that drones attacks are being carried out in the region with lethal consequences to both civilians and enemy fighters and their allies. None of this is in dispute. Nor does it refute or contradict anything I said.

2. "It's not just about protecting American troops, it's purportedly about wiping out terrorism." I believe it's more about protecting American soldiers in Afghanistan. The president has set a goal of ending combat in Afghanistan by 2014. I'm sure we'd all like to see that goal acheived along with the end of drone strike by that date, if not sooner.

3. "these drone strikes...foment more *terrorism*. Yes, they do. "Blowback" it's called. Our presence alone creates more terrorists. Again, there's little, if any, practical difference that I can see between a bomb dropped by conventional, piloted, bomber aircraft and a missile fired from an unmanned aerial vehicle.


4. "And then there's that element of money; there are people making lots and lots of it due to these policies" Yes, there are people who make huge profits from weapons systems and military contracts. It could be argued, as Dwight Eisenhower did more than 50 years ago, that the nature of the "military-industrial complex" is the single greatest threat to our democracy.

5. "You didn't address either our drone strikes being on a sovereign nation" Yes, I did. I suggested that as long as we have soldiers in Afghanistan, we will use any means available to nuetralize individuals and groups who are planning, supporting, or participating in killing those soldiers, no matter whether those individuals and groups are found in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, etc.

6. "...or the "double tapping" policy." I'm not familiar enough with the parameters of this alleged United States policy to speak knowledgeably about it. Deliberately targeting civilians or civilian rescue workers would be a dishonorable, deeply immoral, and probably a criminal act of murder.

[cali]

35. We clearly are not going to agree here on 1-5 and I'm not going to repeat myself

as far as number 6 goes, sorry, it's been well documented.

http://www.businessinsider.com/us-drones-bomb-civilian-rescuers-2013-7

http://livingunderdrones.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Stanford_NYU_LIVING_UNDER_DRONES.pdf

http://www.policymic.com/articles/21070/predator-drone-double-taps-highlight-possible-war-crimes-by-obama

I could post literally dozens of links documenting the use by the U.S. of "double tapping"

[cheapdate]

43. Forgive me for saying so,

but I don't believe you're really making much effort to consider my words before responding. You say that "We clearly are not going to agree here on 1-5..." despite the fact that I acknowledged we agree in whole or in part on numbers 3 and 4.

I agree with you that this discussion is ended.

[idwiyo]

3. RE: double strikes. Explains well the war crime committed by the helicopter crew in 'Collateral

Murder' video tape released by Bradley Manning. Fucking scum, all of them. Those who wrote the policy, those who approved it,, those who let it continue, those who perform the murders, and those who defend it.

[cali]

4. quite simply: yes and yes.

remember when they were going to give a medal to drone operators?

[chimpymustgo]

17. OMG - so true. Keep up the drumbeat. Knowledge IS power.

[marmar]

5. k/r

[Bonobo]

6. If "terrorism" is a real thing, this is it. US-sponsored terrorism. nt

[cali]

9. hard to argue against this being terrorism

[Katashi_itto]

7. Give it time...we will get first hand experience. If not this president

then the next.

[cali]

8. Somewhere outside Syracuse NY or in Nevada or New Mexico

men (and perhaps women) sit and watch people go about their daily lives They watch children playing soccer and women with their children.

And then they push a button an rain down hell.

Congratulations to us.

[G_j]

10. How anyone can decide it makes us "safer"

to traumatize and kill innocents "collaterally", is beyond the pale.
No amount of "we try not to" cuts it.
Its criminal.

[cali]

11. c'mon defenders, I'm saying that the U.S. under President Obama

is committing war crimes.

why aren't you in high dudgeon over this statement?

Why avoid this thread?

Too hard to defend? Too shameful?

[The Straight Story]

16. Only crimes some see are when someone on the inside exposes the crimes

And sadly our government will focus on that like a laser light (would that they would put that much effort into catching the ten most wanted).

Embarrass the US government? That's a gitmo'ing. Kill people, destroy the economy like the banks and such did? That's a bonus and a bailout.

[frylock]

42. yep. the crime in some people's minds are that the disclosure forces them to think about this..

and that it's being done for our "safety."

[Egalitarian Thug]

14. How are we supposed to have an endless war against a tactic unless we keep producing

an enemy that will use the tactic? Imagine the chaos we would cause if we stopped making new generations of terrorists through the use of terror.

[cali]

15. fuck. that is so depressingly true. there's money to be made.

[Egalitarian Thug]

19. More than the human mind can comprehend, and almost all of it unaccountable.

Where else but in the chaos of war can billions and billions of dollars simply disappear? In the words of Hans Gruber. "When you steal $600, you can just disappear. When you steal 600 million, they will find you, unless" they can't ever prove that it was stolen.

[cali]

18. I think I'll just keep kicking this.

Hey, maybe everyone on DU agrees with the OP.

Nah.

[Douglas Carpenter]

20. I have a feeling if Iran carried out a drone strike in Corry, PA or where I live now on Saipan it

would not inspire good will toward Iran. But since the decisions on who to strike and where to strike are carried out in secret by secret panels - they surely must know what is best.

[cali]

21. kick, because today we droned again- against the express wishes of

the Pakistani government

[Dreamer Tatum]

22. I'm sure some Pro will come knock some Sense into you soon

About how much better Obama's drone strikes are than Bush's.

[cali]

25. new and improved, with lots and lots of links!

[Romulus Quirinus]

32. so many links.

Kind of a self-referential sausage.

[snooper2]

23. So you have moved on from "they listening to all me calls!" LOL

117K, you think you are one of the 117K?

Maybe it's +1 now with all your posts....they reading you!

[cali]

24. I have no idea what you are attempting to say, but I know

that I never said anything close to what you claim is a quote of mine.

Make stuff up much?

And just a pitiful response to the facts in the op.

but hey, thanks for the kick. I want this in your face and the faces of those like you.

[Arctic Dave]

27. The children have a legitimate PTSD traumas.

If I read another whiny troop PTSD story about some asshat who volunteered to go to war and terrorize an entire country I'm going scream.

Hey, assholes, did you once stop and think what you did to those people? No? Of course not you selfish little shitstains, you just wanted to play army.

[Recursion]

31. And... yet another thread passes from insightful to satire

Well done.

[Arctic Dave]

33. No, just looking at it realistically.

Seriously, fuck those guys and their whining.

Whaaa, I had to bust some door a O'dark thirty and I didn't know what was behind it. Fuck that. What do you think the families who's door got kicked in thought.

Fucking cowards.

[polly7]

29. K&R. nt.

[Arcanetrance]

30. Change the D to an R behind the president name this place would be singing one single tune

against the government and what it's doing.

[WatermelonRat]

36. If my town were full of militants, a drone flying by would be the least of my worries

We should certainly do our best to minimize civillian casualties, but it's unrealistic to expect none to occur. No matter how well-intentioned an army is, mistakes are going to happen. During D-Day in WWII, more French civillians were killed in the course of gaining a beach-head than in this entire drone campaign, and yet we seldom see that operation characterized the way the drone war is. While every innocent killed is a tragedy, I think it's important to note that civillian casualties are relatively low here considering the nature of the conflict. That doesn't mean we should just write them off and never review our methodology, but it should be kept in mind when considering the situation.

[cali]

37. I'm sorry but that's just ill informed.

First of all, most people in those villages are interconnected in a tribal way. literally. Secondly, we are drone bombing a sovereign nation who has explicitly withdrawn any consent.

Secondly, it is well documented that the U.S. is "double tapping" which is a war crime.

Thirdly, the comparison to D-Day is wholly specious.

Lastly, civilian casualties have not been low.

[WatermelonRat]

39. Numerically, no, they haven't been low

In terms of comparison to similar conflicts, including Pakistan's own incursions into militant-held territories, yes they have been low. When fighting non-uniformed guerillas, there's always a hazard to people living in the area. It obviously makes for a difficult situation where we want to avoid innocents being caught in the crossfire but at the same time can't leave the Taliban unopposed.

The WWII reference was to give a sense of scale, and to emphasize the comparative restraint being shown here.

[Fumesucker]

38. Your town is full of militants

Or are there no vets and/or current military living in your community?

[WatermelonRat]

40. That argument rests on the assumption of equivalency between veterans and the Taliban

There is justifiable criticism of U.S. military policies, but the idea that it is in any way comparable to the Taliban is not just factually wrong, but downright vile.

[Fumesucker]

41. You never mentioned the Taliban

The term was "militants" which could mean many things.

[Democracyinkind]

47. "Militants" meaning "people killed by drones"....

[reusrename]

44. If everyone would just quit talking about it everything would be just fine.

la la la la lla la lla la lla.........

[Mojorabbit]

45. K and R nt

[Skittles]

46. I was in a department store with my mum

we were walking around when she suddenly grabbed my arm saying, "WE HAVE TO GET OUT OF HERE!" She hurried me outside and was breathing funny - I thought she might be ill but it turned out to be a rubber smell in the shoe department - it reminded her of the gas mask she put on when the bombs started dropping....she had asthma and could not breath well in them. This incident happened over 50 years after the war (WWII)