Survey reports widespread opposition to US drone policy

[Zakii]

---

---

Survey reports widespread opposition to US drone policy



WASHINGTON: The Obama Administration's unilateral actions on foreign soils as part of its counterterrorism policy, particularly the use of drone attacks, are widely opposed by people around the world, the Pew Research Center said.

The Center, in the latest survey of international opinion about the United States' image and its policies, found that more than 50 percent of population in 17 out of the 21 countries surveyed, opposed attacks.

Washington uses unmanned drones to target suspected militants in Pakistani tribal areas and other countries, including Yemen and Somalia.

"There remains a widespread perception that the US acts unilaterally and does not consider the interests of other countries," Pew's Global Attitudes Project found.

Citing public opinion, the Pew Center said in predominantly Muslim nations, American anti-terrorism efforts are still widely unpopular.

"And in nearly all countries, there is considerable opposition to a major component of the Obama administration's anti-terrorism policy: drone strikes. In 17 of 20 countries, more than half disapprove of US drone attacks targeting extremist leaders and groups in nations such as Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia."

According to the survey, Americans are the clear outliers on this issue - 62% approve of the drone campaign, including most Republicans (74%), independents (60%) and Democrats (58%).

The US administration has not reacted immediately to findings of the survey.

The Pew findings come as President Obama gears up for his re-election campaign, four years after his rise to the top in American politics.

Obama's security advisors have been publicly defending drone strikes lately, saying they are an important part of the overall strategy to get rid of al-Qaeda linked terrorists.

However, several American and European experts have started questioning the values of frequent strikes, with many of them saying these strikes, which also kill civilians, do more harm than good.

Islamabad has been strongly voicing its opposition to drone strikes on its tribal areas, calling them a violation of international laws and the country's sovereignty.

The US reliance on force and unilateral actions, including drone strikes, has also angered the Pakistani public.

"Roughly a year after he ordered the Abbottabad raid that killed Osama bin Laden, just 7% of Pakistanis have a positive view of Obama, the same percentage that voiced confidence in President George W. Bush during the final year of his administration," the survey found.

Outside of Pakistan, however, Obama consistently receives higher ratings than Bush did in 2008. This is particularly true in Western Europe and Japan, but it is also true in several predominantly Muslim nations where Obama's ratings, while not especially high, are nonetheless more positive than his predecessor's.

The 21-nation survey was conducted by the Pew Research Center's Global Attitudes Project from March 17-April 20.

The poll also finds that, despite disappointment with Obama's policies, there is still considerable support for his re-election in many countries, especially in Europe. (APP)

Source: Survey reports widespread opposition to US drone policy - geo.tv

[SMC]

Whatever happened to the typical bharati mantra of 'whole world agrees with us on Pakistan'? I keep telling these guys that 'the whole world' does not consist of bharat, US, a select few other western countries;that there are other countries in the world as well.

[regular]

Survey reports widespread opposition to US drone policy

Source: Survey reports widespread opposition to US drone policy - geo.tv

Excellent report.The USA need to learn some mannerz otherwie gonna get some real bashing........

[VCheng]

...............

According to the survey, Americans are the clear outliers on this issue - 62% approve of the drone campaign, including most Republicans (74%), independents (60%) and Democrats (58%). ......................

USA seems pretty united as a nation to me in terms of its drone policy, all things considered, given those numbers.

[Safriz]

USA seems pretty united as a nation to me in terms of its drone policy, all things considered, given those numbers.

Americans are good at celebrating and cheering other nations loss of life.

[VCheng]

Americans are good at celebrating and cheering other nations loss of life.

Not at all. Americans see their government trying to protect them after being attacked on 9/11.

[notorious_eagle]

Not at all. Americans see their government trying to protect them after being attacked on 9/11.

The Germans believed that Wehrmacht was protecting German lives after Hitler unleashed World War 2. I can see the correlation here.

Drones are winning the battle for the US tactically, but not strategically. The negative fall out from these drone strikes far outweigh the positives. Every civilian killed creates 10 militants whom want to cause destruction to US.

[Caine]

The Germans believed that Wehrmacht was protecting German lives after Hitler unleashed World War 2. I can see the correlation here.

Drones are winning the battle for the US tactically, but not strategically. The negative fall out from these drone strikes far outweigh the positives. Every civilian killed creates 10 militants whom want to cause destruction to US.

Its a bogey! Every war has regrettable collateral damage. Drone attacks are much better in that aspect than the F 16 bombing runs used by PAF when they go after their choice of terrorists.

Whatever happened to the typical bharati mantra of 'whole world agrees with us on Pakistan'? I keep telling these guys that 'the whole world' does not consist of bharat, US, a select few other western countries;that there are other countries in the world as well.

What is ****** Mantra ?

[nuclearpak]

Its a bogey! Every war has regrettable collateral damage. Drone attacks are much better in that aspect than the F 16 bombing runs used by PAF when they go after their choice of terrorists.

Those bombing runs are done in designated zones, areas which have been cleared prior to the operation.

Not just any random place that they damn please.

[ziaulislam]

co lateral damage means unintended civilian loss
here most of the time the loss is intended..like attacking funerals,homes,markets etc

[ashokdeiva]

Whatever happened to the typical bharati mantra of 'whole world agrees with us on Pakistan'? I keep telling these guys that 'the whole world' does not consist of bharat, US, a select few other western countries;that there are other countries in the world as well.

being a elite member, you are supposed to responsible when you post some thing.
what has India to do with this topic. Pulling us in here is not needed for the topic at hand.

[Caine]

Those bombing runs are done in designated zones, areas which have been cleared prior to the operation.

Not just any random place that they damn please.

You are either naive or totally removed from ground realities if you think the drone attacks are done randomly. The reason drones are effective is that they can hover for hours above a designated target and execute the mission once the controllers are absolutely sure (as much as one can be in the fog of war) of the hit. Apples to Apples, Pakistani COIN ops have killed much more civilians than drones ever will. Its just that the optics are worse for Drones since they belong to an outside party.

[RaptorRX707]

Drone programme will not change Afghan outcome: Expert
June 16, 2012

WASHINGTON: The US drone programme, which conducts aerial strikes against suspected militant targets in tribal areas, will not only ultimately fail to influence the outcome of an Afghan settlement, but also severely tarnish America’s image in Pakistan, an American expert stressed in a newspaper opinion piece.

Michael Krepon, who is the Director and co-founder of the South Asian Program at the Stimson Center, noted in The Washington Post that Afghanistan’s future matters more critically to Pakistan than to the United States.

“Afghanistan’s future matters much more to Pakistan than to the United States. This elemental truth is forgotten in US deliberations about how best to leverage Pakistan to achieve a political settlement in Afghanistan,” he noted.

About the unmanned predator drone strikes, which the US regularly carries out against militant targets, the expert noted they have only succeeded in casting the US in a more negative light than even longtime arch rival India. “These strikes will ultimately fail to influence the outcome of an Afghan settlement, but they have already succeeded in making the United States more hated in Pakistan than India.”

Islamabad has repeatedly denounced drone attacks on its tribal areas as counterproductive to the overall fight against terror, and that such unilateral actions violate the country’s sovereignty and provoke militancy.

Human rights activists have also condemned drone strikes for the high number of civilian casualties.The Obama administration claims drones are important in taking out al Qaeda linked militants.

In the Post, Krepon wrote that Pakistan wants a government in Kabul that, after most of US troops withdraw in 2014, will be friendlier to it than India. He said Pakistani resolve is rooted in the assumption that, if India gains a strong foothold in Afghanistan, then Pakistan’s largest and most resource-rich province, Balochistan, would be ripe for an India-supported insurgency.

Drone programme will not change Afghan outcome: Expert – The Express Tribune

[SMC]

What is ****** Mantra ?

The thoughts you'd hear a typical Indian mention over and over again.

[notorious_eagle]

---

---

Its a bogey! Every war has regrettable collateral damage. Drone attacks are much better in that aspect than the F 16 bombing runs used by PAF when they go after their choice of terrorists.

Collateral Damage?

This is a new word that is being used far too loosely. I wonder if your sentiments would be the same if Americans were being killed in cross fire and written off as collateral damages. I sincerely doubt it!!

F16's have been used to attack militant positions, bunkers, ammunition dumps and their grouping compounds. At no point have the F16's have been called in to attack compounds where there are civilians, only once this happened and the COAS/CAS personally apologized to the victims when civilians were killed. My claim is by no means a bogey. Have you ever stopped to wonder how come the Taliban never run out of fresh recruits? Its because of this collateral damage that provides them with infinite number of foot soldiers, because this collateral damage is creating massive hatred among the hearts of the common people.