U.S Drones

[The Great Montrose]

The High court has rejected an attempt by a Pakistani man to force the UK government to reveal if it is providing intelligence for US drone strikes.
Noor Khan, whose father died in a drone strike in Pakistan, said the UK could be committing a war crime by helping the CIA to identify targets.
The government neither confirms nor denies any role in assisting with operations against al-Qaeda.
The court said it could not force the government to reveal its policy.

Full article from the BBC news website here.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20807934

What are peoples thoughts on the use of drones by the U.S ? And thoughts on the High Courts decision?

Personally I feel like drones cause the deaths of many inocent people.

[removeduser_487563287433]

Obviously the Government cannot discuss all our intelligence operations.

[The Great Montrose]

Obviously the Government cannot discuss all our intelligence operations.

But this mans father has been wrongly killed, along with many others. I mean surely you'd want to know?

[Adar]

But this mans father has been wrongly killed, along with many others. I mean surely you'd want to know?

How do you know that it was wrongly?

[The Great Montrose]

How do you know that it was wrongly?

Well he was one of 50 killed at a meeting of tribal elders not terrorists, plus we could speak more generally about the amount of innocents killed

[removeduser_487563287433]

Well he was one of 50 killed at a meeting of tribal elders not terrorists

They claim.

[Adar]

Well he was one of 50 killed at a meeting of tribal elders not terrorists, plus we could speak more generally about the amount of innocents killed

I recall a similar strike where the targets where a mixture of terrorists and elders. Was it that one or another one?

[Adar]

The good thing about drones is that they kill a lot of guilty people.

A debatable thing about drones is that they also kill the family, servants and friends of a lot of guilty people.

A terrible thing is when people aim them at the wrong target.

The aiming part is an issue regardless of the technology platform.

[removeduser_487563287433]

Sentimentalism is not how countries are run, not how we protect ourselves from terrorists. I regret if any innocent civilians were killed, but it does not change that fact.

[AqD]

Sentimentalism is not how countries are run, not how we protect ourselves from terrorists. I regret if any innocent civilians were killed, but it does not change that fact.

Haven't we all realized regret or pretending to regret is just ?


I wonder what you would do if someone you care about is unjustly killed by a government?

[conon394]

Personally I feel like drones cause the deaths of many inocent people.

As does any application of force by the Military or Security services right down to the Police.

The real question is are drones better than the alternatives the US might be using.

Since Pakistan is still mostly a functional country the question to ask is why the Pakistan government allows drone strikes. It seems to me the first course of action for any citizen there if they dislike drone strikes would be to demand the government stop allowing them, or demand that their government look at the possibility of wrongful death and expect aid as a result. Certainly a pointless effort to make the UK to tell anything about its intelligence operations seems well pointless. Or you could seek to have your government petition in US courts for redress which at least is logical - but likely also fruitless unless you can make a clear case that Person X was killed by a situational drone hit and not one based on any Intel at all which I think the SCOTUS would be loath to do in any case.

[conon394]

Well he was one of 50 killed at a meeting of tribal elders not terrorists, plus we could speak more generally about the amount of innocents killed

Do you think there would be fewer deaths if the US was using Gunships or B2s?

Any citizen X of country Y whose country has a working air defense system - first needs to ask why more or less undefended targets are operating freely in his countries airspace.

[The Great Montrose]

These strikes are killing innocent people, very well they may kill a few terrorists aswell as them but think if this was round the other way and innocent americans had been killed along with a few terrorists would people stand for it then? I'm quite sure they wouldnt

[Kraut]

These strikes are killing innocent people, very well they may kill a few terrorists aswell

The other way round. Most of the drone kills are terrorists or insurgents, only a minority makes up the collateral damage.

[mrmouth]

There were threads on this already where it has all been discussed.

The particular narrative that some people are operating under is no different than the Fallujah narrative where most of the city was destroyed and thousands of Iraqis were killed with white phosphorous. The fact that journalists were in the city and have provided photographic and video evidence to the contrary doesn't change the minds of human rights supporters and litigators who make being willfully ignorant, an art form.

And Fallujah actually went on to become a story of unimaginable success.

UPDATE: Glenn Greenwald thinks that because I was embedded with the U.S. military and al-Fadhily wasn't that my work is less credible. Specifically he insists that al-Fadhily's claim that 70 percent of Fallujah is destroyed is more credible than my claim to the contrary.

If the city were 70 percent destroyed it would look much like Dresden did after the fire-bombing. I could not possibly spend a month there without noticing, especially since I moved to a new location inside the city every day. You can believe that I would publish pictures of vast destruction in Fallujah if it existed because that's exactly what I did when I recently went to Ramadi and Lebanon. I do have a track record of that sort of thing. I have no reason, good or bad, to treat Fallujah any differently.

It would be truly amazing -- if not impossible -- if I could spend so much time in Fallujah and not notice that 70 percent of it was destroyed.

http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/001546.html

The issue with tracking the drone numbers is significant. You have a particular activist journalism website in the UK that went around and polled people in the tribal areas and posted their findings. Often these people are directly related to anti-government types that fight the Pakistani government or cross an international boundary to kill foreigners - both Afghans and Westerners. And of course the majority killed, as is the case with Islamic radicals, are fellow Muslims.

There have been multiple other groups who have tracked the strikes and who they have killed and I think that those numbers hold more weight for obvious reasons.

This site is tracking those results, which are being updated constantly. And the site in particular is not a fan of the drones so they have nothing to gain from being dishonest. And here is Yemen.

So are civilians dieing? Yes. It is indeed the best of a bad set of options to deal with people who are sheltering in tribal regions where the governments cannot, or chose not to act.

And this is probably the best article I have read on the subject:

Human rights groups say drones are loathed in both Pakistan and Yemen, but many locals in tribal areas welcome them

[conon394]

These strikes are killing innocent people, very well they may kill a few terrorists aswell as them but think if this was round the other way and innocent americans had been killed along with a few terrorists would people stand for it then? I'm quite sure they wouldnt

I'm not actually denying that what I am saying is the other ways the US might follow the same policy goal - dictated by the fact Pakistan cannot or will not control its boarder are likely to kill far more innocent people.

Do you really think if the US handed Pakistan a list of all the Taliban and Al Qudia Type militants it could name in Pakistan that it should expect them to be pursued, captured and handed over? Does Pakistan allow NATO forces to pursue it enemies into Pakistan in areas where the Government exerts little to no control (except for the Intelligence service)

From the individual citizen in Pakistan who is opposed or hurt their recourse should be with their own government, or with the US not a rather silly court case against the UK.

[removeduser_487563287433]

Source on "thousands killed with WP"?

[Odenat]

Source on "thousands killed with WP"?

Here's the numbers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drone_attacks_in_Pakistan

[removeduser_487563287433]

Here's the numbers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drone_attacks_in_Pakistan

Oh great, numbers for something utterly ing different, well done there.

[Odenat]

Oh great, numbers for something utterly ing different, well done there.

Didn't u ask for the numbers of people killed by drones ?