Pakistan: US Drones have killed 687 Innocents
Pakistani authorities investigating the aftermath of US bombing raids in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas of Pakistan have come to the conclusion that they cause more harm than good:
' Of the 60 cross-border predator strikes carried out by the Afghanistan-based American drones in Pakistan between January 14, 2006 and April 8, 2009, only 10 were able to hit their actual targets, killing 14 wanted al-Qaeda leaders, besides [killing] 687 innocent Pakistani civilians. The success percentage of the US predator strikes thus comes to not more than six per cent.'
Also, Aljazeera English has video on the Taliban challenge to Kabul and Islamabad.
End/ (Not Continued)
posted by Juan Cole @ 4/12/2009 01:30:00 AM
|
Facebook
11 Comments:
I still think a lot of those drone attacks are guided from way up in the sky. I'm sure those wedding parties that were hit were simply seen from miles up in the air as clusters of "hotspots," i.e., people milling about in a large-ish group. It's only long after the drones do their thing that we hear "Oh, crap! That was a wedding party?"
Yet another fine mess made by the US. Obama = Bush
I love to travel to South Asia, but the US has been recruiting soooooo many new militants it is becoming less safe for westerners day by day. The US believes it is killing militants, but in fact, it is recruiting thousands of new ones.
What kind of flawed and stupid logic guides US foreign policy ???
This is all quite awful, but from where is the 6% figure derived?
10/60 missions = 17%
14/701 deaths = 2%
So in other words the combined might, the intellectual power, the intelligence accuracy, the pinpoint accuracy, and the technological capability of the US military boils down to a 6% "success" rate? That is, for every "success" racked up by some political or military functinary, we generate 16 enemies, probably for life? Ths is not progress. This is not success. This is utter stupidiy.
One more time: if it comes down to "success" being defined as a dollar-stuffed Predator taking out a donkey carrying a load of RPG's, or a "high value" "resistance/Taliban/AlQaeda/warlord/druglord/emerging leader/Communist" person who also happens to be a respected leader in his locale, who fought the Russians when THEY were the occupiers, and who also has a beautiful wife who is a community model, and 9 beautiful children, who also are all blown to smithereens when the Predator vaporizes their mud hut---well, no matter who you consult as your personal strategic guru, the people shooting the Predators have already lost, and no cubic amount of money thrown in the same direction will change things. I am simply appalled that my country, the US, is acting ths way. Incomprehensibly idiotic.
so true. I think US should adopt a different method to this issue. The military action is not working. In fact it is bringing Pakistan into the chaos. Pakistani Government should focus on the decaying educational system, so that young masses would be well aware of Islam and would meet the job demands of the 21st Century.
I believe 16 hits out of (687+16) should be about a 2.3 % "success rate"?
Regarding previous comment, poor memory between reading and comenting. 14 hits would be 2%.
ref : “Pakistan: US Drones have killed 687 Innocents”
Tomgram : “[the warrior...] what was once an elite activity performed in person has been transformed into a 24/7 industrial activity fit for human drones. . . Those involved claim that the fear and thrill of battle do not completely escape them, but the descriptions we now have of their world sound discomfortingly like a cross between the far frontiers of sci-fi and a call center in India.”
but imho, As we rush headlong into this new kind of war ~ most of us in the West fail to see that: we are accomplishing nothing more than the education of our enemies on how to create and deploy weapons -in- kind for which we, ourselves have no defense.
What is it like for the soldier commandeering a drone from his San Diego office. What is it like when he sees his drone has accidentally killed children- like his own children that he will be tucking into bed that night.
it is mind boggling. War is completely inefficient and an obsolete form of conflict resolution. So, there must be some other stupid reason we continue with it. Is it simply something to make? Something to export? Is it economics? How tragically unimaginative we are.
There must be some way to raise a big enough stink in the media about the drone attacks. The story is not getting any attention. I think about how that Afghan law about marriage became so high profile that it may have to be dropped. Surely the media is able to raise just as much a stir about the civilian deaths due to drones, and confront Obama face to face with him, obliging him to rethink the strategy.
- Inkan1969
"They cause more harm than good..."--the obscene absurdity of military speak. You can actually put a quotient on this? When does it get "good?" 15 innocents for every one? 10? 5? From who's perspective is this judgment being made? What makes them the judge over the value of "innocent" life? All this "collateral damage"--oops, sorry, didn't mean it, don't mind us, we're just passing through--time to time. Are we at war with the Pakistanis, or not. If so, declare it. If you can't get a confident, accurate, pre-confirmed terrorist or Taliban target, then don't fire the damn missile. Stop guessing at it. 687 is just plain and simple American terrorism, and dare I say, blind murder. Didn't we learn anything from Cambodia?
Post a Comment
<< Home