Officials: Suspected US drone kills 4 in Pakistan

Source: Associated Press

PESHAWAR, Pakistan – A suspected U.S. drone attacked a compound in Pakistan's volatile tribal area Tuesday, killing four people as part of an unprecedented wave of strikes since a deadly attack against the CIA across the border in Afghanistan, said intelligence officials.

Two missiles slammed into a building in the Deegan area of North Waziristan, a zone dominated by the Haqqani network, an al-Qaida-linked Afghan Taliban faction that many suspect helped orchestrate the Dec. 30 suicide bombing that killed seven CIA employees at a remote base in Khost province.

Tuesday's strike was the 12th since the CIA attack. The unmanned aircraft have also targeted the leader of the Pakistani Taliban, Hakimullah Mehsud, who appeared in a video alongside the Jordanian man who carried out the suicide bombing. But a series of strikes against his stronghold in South Waziristan apparently failed to take out the militant leader.

The identities of those killed in Tuesday's attack were unknown, said the intelligence officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk to the media. The area hit in the attack is located 18 miles (30 kilometers) west of the town of Miran Shah and 12 miles (20 kilometers) south of the Afghan border.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100119/ap_on_re_as/as_pakistan

No chocolate rations for you.

I'll gladly sacrifice my chocolate for the greater good.
But I'm keeping my new netbook.

And WE dare to wonder why they HATE the USA? :eyes:

One dead grandmother at a time.

Is there an international convention against uavs? Of course they could be used to commit war crimes, but they are not of themselves war crimes unless there's something I'm not aware of.

So I'm curious what you base that on.

Assassination=murder.

Murder is prohibited under the Geneva Convention (Article 3).

Violating the Geneva Convention=war crimes.

And in a war zone murder refers to intentional targeting and killing of civilians or surrendered combatants.So however morally repugnant and counter-productive the "collateral damage" is, it is not legally war crimes.

Regardless, drone strikes can be and are used for more than targeting leadership, so unless there's an international convention against their use drone strikes are not war crimes.

Who needs trials when you can launch a Hellfire missile from a remotely-controlled Predator drone?



Why was Blackwater putting the bombs on these drones? Their contract is for security, not equipping Predator drones with bombs to launch attacks against naturalized US citizens in a country we are not at war with. Why do you think that happened?

Edit:typo

But that doesn't make drone strikes war crimes, as the other poster stated they were. As i stated upthread, they could be used to commit war crimes the same as any weapons platform. Not to mention the article states that the naturalized US citizen was an active enemy combatant, so while we may agree about CIA and Blackwater/Xe being involved, he was still fair game under international law.

why do you think the US used them? Why do you think the US used a private mercenary army, whose contract is to provide security for people, places, and equipment, to perform an inherently governmental action, which is to equip unmanned drones with missiles to attack people in a country we are not at war with, where civilians and a naturalized US citizen were killed, under an authority the government gave to itself? Why do you think they did that? Maybe because it's a war crime, and maybe because Blackwater is operating under no restrictions whatsoever, including the UCMJ, US law, and the laws of the country where the attack originated. Think about that for a bit and get back to me.

That explains both why the CIA was used rather than the military, and considering who was in charge of our government why Blackwater was involved.

It doesn't add any substance to the contention that drone strikes are war crimes.

And when did we declare war on Yemen?

And the article mentions two strikes, including one in Pakistan in 2005:



Edit: Added date

and on steroids. It's fucking VILE and should stop NOW! :grr:

I'm sorry to take my anger out on you. It's just that using these Killer Drones is so vile.

I love my country but I want us to STOP THIS NOW!

Here I thought that torturing prisoners was the LOWEST our government would go.

I was wrong. :(

leaves me feeling a little dead inside.

Who knew staring into the Abyss would have side effects?

I only hope that we can stop all this killing and dying because it will mark the end of our species.

Too funny! I used to laugh at the old people predicting the end of the world, but if we don't stop the warmongering ... well, I wish we could stop the stranglehold that the MIC has over our Executive Branch. :(

:blush: :hi:

:hi:

it only has 2 active members, so I can take an educated guess which one it is.

As I keep saying, drones can be used to commit war crimes, and i'm sure they have been.
However, drone strikes are not war crimes just because they are drone strikes. Not unless there is an international convention against their use, as there is with poison gas for example.

No charges and No trial = International CRIME.

Or are we AT WAR with 1) Pakistan; 2) Afghanistan; 3) Yemen; and 4) Somalia?

ONLY CONGRESS can declare "WAR."

Therefore, it would be akin to labeling one of our local GANGS "the enemy" and the police sending a KILLER DRONE out to kill them ... and their families caught the crossfire.

what? you want a citation?
hey, without looking at any law at all it should be admitted
that what we are doing is

stealthily and without prior warning, directing a highly destructive bomb, a WMD,
into a civilian target and killing people, including admittedly innocent civilians.

right so far?

so what remains is to ask what justification is present for this
monstrously depraved act of aggression and terror.

burden of proof on the aggressor. that IS the way of civilized societies, isn't it?

You're emotions and "gut feelings" are enough? I'm sorry, but how is that mentality any different than a teabaggers?

our PUPPET, Hamid Karzai. They are fighting THE OCCUPATION in Afghanistan. If we pull out, elements of the Taliban will move back into areas of Afghanistan and put less pressure on "our buddies" in Pakistan.

But no, the MIC has to have it's NATIONS to use as their personal "Battlefield Disneyland" in order for them to test out all their PRETTY WEAPONS and various kick-ass munitions.

Obama has been deliberately going around Karzai. Karzai's influence is slipping, and he's responding by ratcheting up his anti-Western rhetoric. To Taliban approval, actually.

...If you're looking for an ally in the "all America does is kill innocent civilians" propaganda campaign, Karzai is it.

acts of aggression must be justified.
that is the law of civilized society.
that is the law of nations.

in other words, we return to my eloquent repost,

(which apparently went over your head the first time,
but you can answer now without penalty...)

"how are they not a war crime?"

I think these reporters are ordered to write 'suspected' before U.S. drone in these 'suspected' U.S. drone stories.

There sure are a lot of suspicions and unknowns in this article.