Obama has licensed the assassinations of over 50 people

Well, not quite, but i couldn't really explain all this in a topic title. Since Obama took office, unmanned drones have launched missiles and killed over 50 targets; a tactic which began with the Bush administration. These attacks were always kept secret, but the increased frequency of drone attacks has lead to the government justifying their use for the first time.

They say that they do not count as assassinations (which would be illegal) because they are acts of war against the Taliban and al-Queda. The problem is that the vast majority of them do not occur in Afghanisatn, which is the designated 'war zone'. Most have taken place in Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen - none of which America is at war with. In that regard by most definitions they are assassinations. The Obama administration has branded them 'eliminations.'

Further, because the drones launch missiles, civilians are killed a lot of the time. For example, the last target was taken out by a drone but 12 others were killed with him. This is of course showing a terrible disrespect for other countries and their citizens. Worst of all, attacks in Pakistan have been so frequent that a pressue group even took to the streets with a banner proclaiming 'NO MORE DRONE ATTACKS!' None of this was reported in mainstream western news however.

So what do you guys think? Legitimate tool of war or illegal assassinations?

LINK to some commentary on the issue here

only 50?

I would hope the president of a country at war in two countries would have killed more than that. There's a lot of bad folks out there

That's certainly concerning. I would thought US would not cheat their way out with those dirty tricks. But, I guess they did, which is really really concerning. We can't win a war if we can't win their heart. I hope they re-evaluate their tatics.magicalclick

That's certainly concerning. I would thought US would not cheat their way out with those dirty tricks. But, I guess they did, which is really really concerning. We can't win a war if we can't win their heart. I hope they re-evaluate their tatics.magicalclick

A little of Column A, a little of Column B. I can certainly understand the appeal of and rationale for using drones, but at the same time that appeal probably results in some questionable decision-making (that is, it's easy to rationalize collateral damage and civilian loss of life in the name of protecting American military personnel).

Drones are sentient beings that need love just like the rest of us :cry:Engrish_Major

They don't choose to launch a drone attack unless they believe it is worth the risk of civilian casualties. Often there is civilian casualties becuase the people who they target deliberately fill the buildings with women and children as a means of defending themselves. The word "Assassination" tends to paint a picture like you see in spy movies with poison tipped umbrellas, where they want to make someone quietly disappear and have no interest in taking the person alive. Most of the drone targets are enemy combatants that are not easy defenceless targets. Its not any different to sending a jet to drop a bomb an an enemy bunker, its just a little more personal. If they could capture these people alive without putting coalition soldiers in too greater risk then they would.

Is this supposed to somehow slander Obama? I can't help but think so given the topic title's hyperbole...spazzx625

To people saying it's okay. Imagine one of those drones killed 12 citizens of your country, and not Pakistanis that nobody seems to care about.Mochyc

I don't think anyone is saying its ok but alot of people understand that its not easily avoidable.

Often there is civilian casualties becuase the people who they target deliberately fill the buildings with women and children as a means of defending themselves.

mattisgod01

i think its mad you would care about this when there are hundreds of thousands of people dead because of the iraq war. dkdk999

To people saying it's okay. Imagine one of those drones killed 12 citizens of your country, and not Pakistanis that nobody seems to care about.Mochyc

[QUOTE="Mochyc"]To people saying it's okay. Imagine one of those drones killed 12 citizens of your country, and not Pakistanis that nobody seems to care about.chicknfeet

[QUOTE="mattisgod01"]

Often there is civilian casualties becuase the people who they target deliberately fill the buildings with women and children as a means of defending themselves.

Mochyc

Well the idea that every civilian casualty should have been avoided is partly responsible for the deaths of more civilians. its so easy to criticize a civilized 1st world military for civilian deaths especially when they are fighting an uncivilized enemy. The enemies we face in the Middle East have absolutely no concern for the deaths of innocent people and would go as far as to put them in danger as a form of defence. How do you fight such an enemy without civilian casualties?

[QUOTE="Mochyc"][QUOTE="mattisgod01"]

Often there is civilian casualties becuase the people who they target deliberately fill the buildings with women and children as a means of defending themselves.

mattisgod01

Well the idea that every civilian casualty should have been avoided is partly responsible for the deaths of more civilians. its so easy to criticize a civilized 1st world military for civilian deaths especially when they are fighting an uncivilized enemy. The enemies we face in the Middle East have absolutely no concern for the deaths of innocent people and would go as far as to put them in danger as a form of defence. How do you fight such an enemy without civilian casualties?

Well, not quite, but i couldn't really explain all this in a topic title. Since Obama took office, unmanned drones have launched missiles and killed over 50 targets; a tactic which began with the Bush administration. These attacks were always kept secret, but the increased frequency of drone attacks has lead to the government justifying their use for the first time.

They say that they do not count as assassinations (which would be illegal) because they are acts of war against the Taliban and al-Queda. The problem is that the vast majority of them do not occur in Afghanisatn, which is the designated 'war zone'. Most have taken place in Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen - none of which America is at war with. In that regard by most definitions they are assassinations. The Obama administration has branded them 'eliminations.'

Further, because the drones launch missiles, civilians are killed a lot of the time. For example, the last target was taken out by a drone but 12 others were killed with him. This is of course showing a terrible disrespect for other countries and their citizens. Worst of all, attacks in Pakistan have been so frequent that a pressue group even took to the streets with a banner proclaiming 'NO MORE DRONE ATTACKS!' None of this was reported in mainstream western news however.

So what do you guys think? Legitimate tool of war or illegal assassinations?

LINK to some commentary on the issue here

Ninja-Bear

[QUOTE="mattisgod01"]

[QUOTE="Mochyc"] Really? I keep on hearing this argument over and over, especially from Israel, but I never see any proof. It's obviously not working, so I wonder why they would continue anyway. Mochyc

Well the idea that every civilian casualty should have been avoided is partly responsible for the deaths of more civilians. its so easy to criticize a civilized 1st world military for civilian deaths especially when they are fighting an uncivilized enemy. The enemies we face in the Middle East have absolutely no concern for the deaths of innocent people and would go as far as to put them in danger as a form of defence. How do you fight such an enemy without civilian casualties?

The way they prioritize people now (1st Your soldiers, 2nd Allied soldiers, 3rd civilians) is in my opinion the only way to fight a war. You can not realistically expect to win a war leading an army that isn't your first and foremost concern. As for them filling building with civilians i'm too tired to find links to support this but i know for a fact it happens. They may not go as far as forcing people into buildings but they do go out of there way to conduct meetings in crowded areas knowing that Coalition soldeirs will be extremely hesitant when it comes to launching attacks.

Drones are such a huge morale boost to US troops and a big negative towards Al'Queda. Since there are no US lives being risked this makes the cost of fighting the U.S. less appealing as a terrorist because your guerrilla tactics don't have the same demoralizing effect as they did against US casualties. We need to let every kid who knows how to use an xbox controller to drop by the local military recruiting station and do some recon for your country for a few hours. I'm half joking, but more drones can only help.

pretty sure if this was Bush people would go crazy on this board, but double standards be damned im not surprised.

They know what they're doing. The United States would not just launch a drone attack in a foreign nation with little purpose.

I agree with the assassinations, it's necessary to protect the U.S's interests.

Where are the war protestors? where's the dialy body count? And Barrack Hussein Obama gets a nobel peace prize while GBush is still crucified over the same war, even after extending it into new countries (which Obama still swears he would never do wth?)? There's something very, very seriously wrong about these things.

Where are the war protestors? where's the dialy body count? And Barrack Hussein Obama gets a nobel peace prize while GBush is still crucified over the same war, even extending it into new countries? There's something very, very seriously wrong about these things.

narlymech

Where are the war protestors? where's the dialy body count? And Barrack Hussein Obama gets a nobel peace prize while GBush is still crucified over the same war, even extending it into new countries? There's something very, very seriously wrong about these things.

[QUOTE="Mochyc"]To people saying it's okay. Imagine one of those drones killed 12 citizens of your country, and not Pakistanis that nobody seems to care about.chicknfeet

Is this supposed to somehow slander Obama? I can't help but think so given the topic title's hyperbole...spazzx625

I don't know about that, but he does have the name of a murderous dictator and another like a terrorist.narlymech

i don't see nothing wrong with that, i wish i had the power to say blow that up and it was done

I'd say drone strikes are okay provided they are done to have zero civilian casualties, and are permitted by the government of the country where the strikes are taking place. If both of those criteria aren't followed, then I'd have to be against the strike(s) in question.

Cheese FTW.

[QUOTE="narlymech"]I don't know about that, but he does have the name of a murderous dictator and another like a terrorist.Hewkii

I wont pick a side, but hey on one side we have people plotting to do harm to this country and its people, On the other we have a country invading another, both are acts of agression, and are engaged in war. The people targeted in these drone attacks are classified as terrorist and im pretty sure thats the case 99.9 % of the time. So given that both sides are at war with each other what differece does it make how they take each other out??

You know what Ill pick a side.....Screw them they'd car bomb the hell out of us if they could so what the hell at least we just put a drone on it and spare the lives of some marine .....

Is this supposed to somehow slander Obama? I can't help but think so given the topic title's hyperbole...spazzx625

Oh jeeze doesn't sound to good

i think this is funny considering ur name has 'ninja' in it lol

Nah, just ones who want to "fundamentally transform" my country in all the wrong ways and who happened to be named like a dictator and a terrorist.narlymech