Thanks for the thread, KoKo.

Our war machine has become unmanageable.

It needs to be ended.

I think a fair part of the reason so much of our warring goes on is that the MIC sees it as real-world proving grounds for the ongoing weapons developments.

Pentagram - Pentagon: Both symbols of EVIL.

are not combatants or warriors. This is the 20-21st Century version of "Manifest Destiny" that excused genocide on the North American continent, and the same evil that morphed into "War on Terror." Their Terror from our War.

*not criticizing your use, as it's in quotes as it should be, with a big NO. Just my social commentary on the PC meme.

to "collateralize" and "murder". Thanks for the opportunity to spout off.

Peace.

innocent people.

As the investigator said it appears to be a deliberate targeting. Perhaps she was someone the U.S. military believed was a family member of an enemy combatant. So they may have been using terroristic tactics where you target an innocent with an initial bombing in order to bring out the actual target who comes running to the blast site and is himself bombed.

Or the 'grandmother' may have been someone the military knew was actually helping (accomplice) an enemy combatant-perhaps one of those grandchildren.

ETA: What Amnesty International is objecting to is that the people the US classifies as militants are being killed when they are not actually engaged in hostilities (as in picking okra). They also believe 'rescuer attacks' like this one might violate rules of combat. The thinking of A.I. seems to me to be that while the people who come running are not Red Cross or military medics, which are off limits as targets in a declared war, they are what serves as the equivalent in this war.

"Perhaps she was someone the U.S. military believed was a family member of an enemy combatant. So they may have been using terroristic tactics where you target an innocent with an initial bombing in order to bring out the actual target who comes running to the blast site and is himself bombed."

This is a clear case of double tapping. Hit one and the others come to help and then you can drop a bomb on them, too.

I'm completely disgusted. And, if what you say is true, that is also reprehensible. It's a WAR CRIME to target innocent civilians for ANY reason.

that the operator had a hell fire missile he needed to shoot and could not find any young men and it was coming near the end of his shift...so boom, another raghead gets it.
And every time they fire one of them a company makes some big bucks...so the pressure is on to kill someone or destroy something...
There is profit in this murder, and nothing must get in the way of the profit.

I was about to suggest something similar. We've had crimes committed by troops and contractors on the ground who simply wanted to kill some people for shits and giggles. Its not out of the question someone like that found himself behind the console of a drone. Either way, we have no idea. There are many possible explanations for why this happened, all equally disturbing.

then a Grandma Picking Okra with Grandchildren...suddenly looks like a Terrorist.

Or maybe the Military Shooter sitting somewhere way away from the Killing...had some "Thing" about "Older Women and little Children." Maybe some kind of festering hate that needed to have attention.

This needs some Thorough Investigation as to how this elderly woman and grandchildren could possibly be on our Terrorist List that is fully Vetted to make Sure they aren't being targeted without a great amount of Intelligence Information. That's according to PBO so that the Targets aren't accidental. That is what he is told by his Team in Pentagon.

And that is the kind of job they would enjoy.
I know it sounds cynical, but events in the last few decades have made me like that. It seems to me that we have lost our moral fiber.

ever does here what we are doing there. I hope no one ever tries to excuse the murder of innocents. I doubt we would take kindly to any attempt to justify the murder of our children and innocent adults.

Did the think the over 165 chidlren 'might have been' terrorists too?

If there was justification for the killing of this woman, let them produce the evidence. The very fact that there is no attempt to do so is all the evidence needed to believe this was an innocent women.

cared.

When there have been accidental targeting of innocents in the past, the military has admitted it eventually. They aren't even doing the tired 'collateral damage' schtick with this event. That's why this is odd.

ETA: To be clear, I am not excusing these actions. I think A.I.'s objections have some merit, especially discontinuation of 'rescuer attacks' when it's clearly evident the majority of rescuers would be civilians. Enemy combatants, as in any war, are normally valid targets even when attempting to get to their injured comrades. The problem, is in any other war, there are often medics and the Red Cross who fill the roll of rescuer. Since none fill that roll in this war, anyone attempting a rescue should not be a target, including enemy combatants. But compassionate thinking by the drone generals appears to be in short supply in this war.

hideouts in Nevada, brought to trial for their crimes, and duly punished.

We don'y need trials anymore, all that has to be done is apply the appropriate label and these murderers can themselves be murdered by edict with no need for any proceedings other than placing them on "the list".

Because the list maker is omnipotent and always correct, I see no reason to doubt these Nevada terrorist cells will be placed on the list and dispatched with extreme prejudiced leaving only corpses to be disposed of at sea.

They have the intel on the location and members of the cell so it will happen very soon, the plans and contingencies regarding the operation are likely being finalized as I type this.

Last edited Thu Oct 24, 2013, 02:21 AM - Edit history (1)

This one was 95 when she was intersected by the TSA.

Ninty-five, with leukemia.

At least they didn't drop a drone on her.



If grandmothers didn't want to be considered dangerous by the Obama Administration,
they should have been banksters.

They could have even been foreign banksters. Not one drone has been dropped on them.

They are somewhat less dangerous when weak from hunger.

Everyone says they are horrible, but the leaders shrug and continue with the drone attacks.

but continued as the curse of human "progress and civilization". Is it not instructive, that American History is often divided up by the dates of murderous wars.

Another ... The End Justifies the Means.

hoping there might be some militants in the crowd.

war doctrine train of thought of Paul Wolfowitz and Bush.

You never know this slaughtered Grandmother may have been a
terrorist propaganda tool who passed knowledge to her young
grandchildren.

Is all I can figure, because we executed people for that after WW2.

He can end it with a phone call.

... then the terrorists will feel free to pose as grandmothers.



Just ask the TSA.

You don't know whether that grandmother is holding an okra bomb or not.

Most horribly indefensible action by this administration.

I'd like someone to justify it, if they can.

one thing is certain: there is nothing the President can do to prevent these kinds of tragedies in the future, so it is wrong to hold the Administration accountable for them.

(Unfortunately this is needed: )

One of the most radical Islamist militant groups in the world is currently running rampant in Northwest Pakistan. This group harbored the terrorists responsible for 9/11 and will harbor them again should they regain power. They aspire not only to regain control of Afghanistan, but to overthrow the Pakistani government, which I needn't remind you possesses nuclear weapons. It has already killed over 40,000 in Pakistan and is responsible for 80% of civillan casualties in Afghanistan. Their ideology is far too extreme for there to be any sort of peaceful coexistence, and Pakistan is too busy posturing its military against India to bother fighting them in any meaningful manner.

THAT is my justification for the drone strikes in general. Note that I am not making justifications for this particular case, nor do I feel the need to any more than I need to "justify" incidents of friendly fire. It's a sad fact of war that innocents will inevitably get caught up. Sometimes the wrong target get's identified. Sometimes the right target is identified and missed. Sometimes the right target is identified and hit, but there was an unnoticed third party in the vicinity. We should absolutely do everything we can to avoid these tragedies and constantly reevaluate procedure and tactics to lessen the possibility, but there's no way to absolutely eliminate them, no matter how moral a military is.

Of course, my argument is only persuasive if you don't hold to the beliefs that the drones are mainly used to target random civillians of no tactical value just for giggles and that it's no big deal if the Taliban regains power, which judging from comments upthread is a slim hope.

or presumptions that are the bases of your justifications

for simplicity, you need only identify the variable in
(bad people)+X = drone strike
where anything associated with (bad people) is not a part of X

examples of what is not part of X include
most radical, Islamist, 9/11, harboring, danger, aspirations of bad people,
extreme ideology, less aggressive states

i think you will agree that your argument is only persuasive with an assumption of X
so that X must be defined

Ever tried to manage it in a hot pot? Slimy slimy slimy.

I'm glad the US is putting the skids to this rampant menace.

is no excuse or justification.

I still wouldn't bomb someone picking it.

The argument that the terrorists will disguise themselves as innocuous people, such as a knitter, is beyond ludicrous. Quite frankly, every airplane ought to have a couple of middle-aged knitters on board, complete with knitting needles. No one would get past them.

Several years back, when I was still willing to put up with the bullshit of the TSA, the first time I flew after they started allowing the tiny embroidery scissors no board and I was happily embroidering in the gate area and on the plane, it was amazing how many people came over to me to admire my handwork and to express wondrous gratitude that such "dangerous" things as the embroidery scissors were now permitted.

just more accountability.

Mistakes happen. And in war, mistakes are terrible things.

This is the reason why drones are used. Statistically speaking they are the least mistake-prone form of warfare. Even soldiers on the ground, with guns, and in constant terror for their lives, are far more mistake-prone.

That said, this is the first report in which there is actual acknowledgement of the complexity of the situation, which gives it a credibility that you don't see in typical anti-American screeching. ( And naturally, such acknowledgement comes from someone actually on the ground. They understand that drones are being targeted against Al Qaeda, and having suffered under Al Qaeda, recognize the motives. In addition, the Pakistan army doesn't use drones when attacked, they use indiscriminate artillery. ) So when a report like this says that U.S. drone strikes should be scaled back, eliminated, or at least publicly justified - it's not something so easily dismissed. The President should call for a review of these policies, and seriously consider giving different ones a try.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

What is the process when killing with drones? Who makes the final decision? They are doing this in my name and I believe I have a right to know.

I wonder if the Nazi tried the "it was a mistake" defense at Nuremberg.

Please look it up some time.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

the planing or execution of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. At least as I read it. Maybe I missed the section you are referring to.

Do conservative Democrats support cutting SS and Medicare? Just curious.

It needs maybe to go to the Supreme Court...but, I shudder at that. Because I do not feel this court can overcome it's RW Obsession to come to FAIR Decisions.

The Republicans dont care. While they want to impeach him for giving poor children health care, they are happy as clams that he is killing non-white people with drones.

How much did it cost the taxpayers to kill that grandmother. Do we need to cut SS and Medicare to be able to continue killing innocents?

And we have DU'ers right here in DU City, that stand side by side with Republicans when it comes to drone killing.

on This Issue of Importance?

Is it NOT and "Issue of Importance for Other DU Community" as it is for THIS DU"er?

Am "I" SUCH AND OUTLIER...that I don't BELONG in this COMMUNITY any LONGER?

That's really what I'm wondering as a Lifelong Dem VOTER?

Reputable organizations have been keeping tally of the innocents we've murdered for years.

You also present a false choice. It is not "kill with drones" or "kill with troops." There are many other options.

Finally, I may be misunderstanding you. Considering your chosen screen name and your sign off, I apologize for taking your satire seriously.

obvious after awhile. Then I realized I was looking pretty silly responding as if he was serious - my bad -

...only you and your small crowd would state that supporting President Obama is "Sean Hannityesque".

Wait. You're doing satire! Of a lunatic leftist, like one of the straw-men caricatures of Democrats that Sean Hannity likes to use!

Blaming the U.S. for going after Osama bin Laden and his ilk.

Now it makes perfect sense!

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

you are too young to remember an America before Ronald Reagan. The whole world is shocked and appalled by this drone policy, Every single credible human rights organization and every single independent reporting agency on the face of the earth without one exception are shocked and appalled by the drone policy.. Every single international legal body in the world without any exceptions are shocked and appalled by the drone policy. I have a feeling again - if you are not pulling my leg - that you are not familiar with the wider world outside of a very myopic American-centric view. And if you are not pulling my league - which again I still think you must be - Nobody can be that ignorant - I have a feeling that you are not a person who thinks about things very much. Things are true, because - well - just because. .

In every single nation in which drones are used, there is tacit approval of the practice by the leadership of those nations.

Don't believe me? Read Dawn about Pakistan's approval - sometimes even guidance - of the drones. Those articles can still be found by googling.

That is, by the way, why they were so upset about us killing Osama bin Laden. Unlike with drones, we didn't tell them ahead of time and get their okay. So they got angry.

As for the rest of your "shocked and appalled" business, of course anti-American groups are "shocked and appalled". They always are.
Just as anti-Semites are "shocked and appalled" at Israel. All the time.
The terrorist actions that prompted the responses are ignored. Because it's inconvenient for haters.

However the U.S.'s combinations of carrots and sticks have been steadily tamping down on wars worldwide, so that the total worldwide casualty rate from war, as a percentage of the population, is the lowest it's been in recorded history.

We do have failures, of course. But that's usually in places where we don't have much influence. And your laughably calling me ignorant, I am absolutely certain you are not even AWARE of the worst war in the last 20 years. One in which there were more civilian casualties in a single *month* than the entire Palestinian-Israeli and U.S. drone program of all combatants *combined*.
You're not to be blamed for this, of course. The U.S. wasn't involved, so it received no press attention.

When you look out on the whole planet with a strong anti-American confirmation bias, you can certainly find groups willing to criticize America. But that isn't the same thing as actually knowing anything about the world, which is much more complicated than fits in any rigid ideology, cowboy-American or anti-American.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

every argument against Israeli policy can only be explained as anti-Semitism. Those on the receiving end of the bludgeon have only themselves to blame. And every single independent and credible human rights organization in the world are simply anti-American and anti-Semitic hate groups.

...would ever do something bad, because otherwise he isn't "true" Scotsman.

And no "independent" and "credible" human rights organization fails to attack the U.S. and Israel, because otherwise they're not "independent" or "credible", of course. It's a terribly convenient way to get validation when you're not interested in actually solving problems, and want to divide the world into absolute blacks and whites, where you and everyone you identify with are on the side of the angels, of course. Terrorists can do no wrong and those who respond can do no right.

I'm sorry, but the outrage-a-holics are outraged? Typical. And not particularly moving either.

The convincing thing about this particular article was not the clear tragedy of the mistake in targeting, which is what the Soy Latte and Chomsky crowd is crying over, it was in the specific complaints being made by the people of the valley: that the terrorists run rampage in their communities, that their own government uses indiscriminate shelling that causes many more civilian casualties than the U.S. does, and that they are never given any information to understand if attacks the U.S. makes are justified (when they don't incorrectly target grandmas). Clearly, they want it all to just stop. I would as well.

But this leads to some serious questions: 1] If the U.S. stops drone attacks, will the terrorist groups use the valley as a staging ground, provoking a much worse response from the Pakistani military? (Sure...*our* hands are then "clean", but the result is more civilians dead when they get shelled.) 2] Can anyone get an NGO brave enough to go in there and bring education, like Malala suggested to Obama? The Taliban is already murdering polio-vaccinators in the region and has promised to shoot her if she returns. 3] Alternatively, is it possible to somehow issue a "justification" for every attack we make? "XYZ was making a car-bomb." It seems to me though that we'd be compromising our sources, who have to live there, after all.

Sure, the easiest thing would be to just walk away. But that's what we did in Afghanistan after the Soviets retreated, creating the power vacuum that led to the rise of Mullah Omar, etc. Anti-Americans attack the U.S. for having done that, since consistency in critique isn't exactly their strong suit. But I think in that instance, there is the general belief that it was a mistake. 9/11 taught us that these regions can't be simply left to fester. The conundrum is how to effectively drain the swamp.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

I've gotten caught by it before, so I'm acknowledging it now before the egg on my face.

It doesn't sound like any OP that Obama would have approved.

I think we have rogue wing nuts in the military trying to help their party out and do the damage so it can get blamed on Obama. Just like the shutdown. Doing whatever it takes from the day he got into office to disgrace his term, now terms of service as President.

He supports this. Fully. Unconditionally. Whenever we talk about this, the answer is: "This is justified. End of discussion."

Troops can do the same type of damage, worse. Abu Ghraib. Fallujah. AND rape their female compatriots.

AS IF using drones is worse. IT DEFINITELY IS NOT, and this is a tactic seen so typically in the whole Bush/Iraq war on journalists (as an example of tactics) fear mongering style.

I don't blame HIM...I blame the Peace Prize Committee for JUMPING the GUN on giving that to him..which gave him ROOM coming off the Bush Years!