Drone Strikes: Why west doesnt care

[Irfan Baloch]

---

---

according to one one the participants. the reason US administration and Specially CIA is able to lie to people about the reality of Drone war is that there are no US casualties so there is no public outcry, no reaction
and the US/ Western public is pretty much sedated with what the already Debriefed Media tells them.
its appalling that everyone within the mile radius of the intended target is considered a "potential hostile" if that person happens to be a male. but there is no rule that if there are women and children around then the strike will be called off

except a handful of few AQ or Taliban names. all the drone strikes have the claims about nameless militants or AQ leaders killed. there is no way to verify the claim and no one finds the need to do so because the US Administrations words are backed up by the US mainstream media whose leadership forms the part of the American national security meetings.

it is this indifference or ignorance of the rest of the world that CIA is able to claim that there are no or negligible civilian casualties, although the facts tell a different story.

there is a need to inform the Western world about the reality of war and see how wrong this drone war is and how they are being lied to by their government. everything they stand for is being nullified and there is a spawn of freelance bloggers and web commentators from neighbouring India who have their own axes to grind when it comes to Pakistan. they make it their national duty to sabotage any report or any story that shows the people of FATA as the victims.

the result is that the western population pretty much buys the idea that drone strikes are a good idea to win this war ignoring the fact that every strike is actually creating more anti American people who might actually hate and suffered at the hands of Al Qaeda and Taliban.


Edit: Don’t Comment if you haven’t seen the video. Discussion is impact of Drone strikes & Western perception about it. And please dont quote the entire post.. just first few lines are enough
====

PS: troll at your own peril. make fun of the human tragedy of this war and you will wear pink sari forever.

[Paan Singh]

Again same question..

1)Why you allow it? and why you dont disclose the secret ties or Mou's with U.S in front of public?.
2)Same military when it comes to public puts the civil leadership in front of ppl to face the wrath and on other hand,they drive the foreign policy from back end.

There are enough examples where pakistan changed their decisions just their military showed finger to civil leadership.

so i find army responsible for every innocent or terrorist killed by drone.

[Irfan Baloch]

my smart Indian friend
you didnt see the video, right? but you chose to comment which is a foul.

your innocence is diverting the discussion to something that has been discussed many times. US -Pak Govt agreement means nothing when one is a sole super power and the other one which relies on its aid and fear of becoming a target itself.

the discussion here is the reality of drone strikes. whether Karzai or zardari allows it or protests about it is not relevant.
I request everyone not to covertly turn it to who allowed it and who didnt.

since the 9/11 to that fateful night of the phone call of being with us or with terrorists. whatever Pakistani state decided or done has no bearing or affect on Done strikes.
if anyone still doesnt get it then there is nothing much to say.

[foxbat]

my smart Indian friend
you didnt see the video, right? but you chose to comment which is a foul.

your innocence is diverting the discussion to something that has been discussed many times. US -Pak Govt agreement means nothing when one is a sole super power and the other one which relies on its aid and fear of becoming a target itself.

the discussion here is the reality of drone strikes. whether Karzai or zardari allows it or protests about it is not relevant.
I request everyone not to covertly turn it to who allowed it and who didnt.

since the 9/11 to that fateful night of the phone call of being with us or with terrorists. whatever Pakistani state decided or done has no bearing or affect on Done strikes.
if anyone still doesnt get it then there is nothing much to say.

is America's use of Drone any different than their action in Afg post 9/11?

[Irfan Baloch]

is America's use of Drone any different than their action in Afg post 9/11?

you tell me but stay on topic
respond on the basis of the video

this is the request to everyone.. otherwise it will be just another thread totally getting off-topic

[swathi]

according to one one the participants. the reason US administration and Specially CIA is able to lie to people about the reality of Drone war is that there are no US casualties so there is no public outcry, no reaction
and the US/ Western public is pretty much sedated with what the already Debriefed Media tells them.
its appalling that everyone within the mile radius of the intended target is considered a "potential hostile" if that person happens to be a male. but there is no rule that if there are women and children around then the strike will be called off

A)Your point is right, American Media echoes the policies of their administration.
Best example for this is Iraq War 2003 (The war which ruined war on terror).

B)Regarding Drone attacks i have a different opinion.

[indianrabbit]

West does not care because of Pakistan's image.

[Irfan Baloch]

West does not care because of Pakistan's image.

you lost the plot

thanks for stating the obvious

if you had bothered to watch the video


the participants are all Western people. Americans and Europeans. and they have also mentioned Africa and Afghanistan in terms of Drone strikes.

the thread is not about Pakistani image. but the whole Drone doctrine and its impact on people.
if decent members like yourself have such a one-liner attitude then I dont expect much from the rest of the chronic trolls.

[indianrabbit]

sorry buddy but I am using Phone and cannot watch the video.

I generally try to be neutral but Pakistan's open support to terrorist in India has pissed me off.

[indushek]

according to one one the participants. the reason US administration and Specially CIA is able to lie to people about the reality of Drone war is that there are no US casualties so there is no public outcry, no reaction
and the US/ Western public is pretty much sedated with what the already Debriefed Media tells them.
its appalling that everyone within the mile radius of the intended target is considered a "potential hostile" if that person happens to be a male. but there is no rule that if there are women and children around then the strike will be called off

except a handful of few AQ or Taliban names. all the drone strikes have the claims about nameless militants or AQ leaders killed. there is no way to verify the claim and no one finds the need to do so because the US Administrations words are backed up by the US mainstream media whose leadership forms the part of the American national security meetings.

it is this indifference or ignorance of the rest of the world that CIA is able to claim that there are no or negligible civilian casualties, although the facts tell a different story.

There are three main points being discussed according to me here:

Legal aspect of drones

Tactical aspect of drones

Information of this to the Americans and Global population at large.

Legal Aspects:

Under UN charter there is no defined law for use of drones. There are however certain aspects which can support it to only some extent like Article 51 about "Resorting to force under Self defense" where America can claim that it carries drone strikes for this, however to carry such attacks on another state's territory that state must be responsible for a significant attack.

Now if the USA's war in Afghanistan is taken, till the fall of Taliban America's position was that since Taliban was responsible for Al qaeda's actions it can attack Afghanistan. It did and the taliban were ousted and from then it is staying there on the invitation of Karzai Govt.

Now the above rule might apply or not since the FATA region where these strikes happen has significant presence of Terrorists according to US Intelligence and other Media houses including Pakistani one's. However are they attacking US Armed Forces personnel or Afghans which warrants use of deadly force?? This question is because the USA is there to protect Afghanistan from Taliban which is in Afghanistan and FATA comes under Pakistan right? So in FATA an armed conflict zone should not exist by which use of deadly force (ala drones) is not legal for US Army as there is no armed conflict zone for them.

However it is widely known that since the border being porous the spill over of Talibs from Afghanistan into Pakistan border areas, again from media outlets international and Pakistani. So the conflict zone does exist based on presence of armed groups and some intensity of fighting. The second one here has to be confirmed again.

From this comes the interesting part, has the Pakistani government invited the Americans to help them in eliminating these "guys"?? As then it is legally valid for USA to carry drone strikes. Article 51 allows this, however this has to be an "internal armed conflict" which Pakistan is unable to curb.

So when Pakistan denounces these strikes then it is illegal for USA, however then Pakistan has to pull USA to ICJ. Also there were instances where publicly these strikes are hailed, like in 2009 when the Foreign Minister and Prime Minister spoke in favour of attack against TTP leader Mehsud. Legally this could be fatal for Pakistan's case. This shows that the onus is on Pakistan to make a good case against these attacks and present it to UN and ICJ.

There is also another point on which both USA could be accountable here, the same article which gives right to self defense also states that the force used under self defense should not be disproportionate. This is a point to be established properly as it is subjective in nature.

There is one more article which can make a case for drone strikes, however it would be very much debatable "hot pursuit" based on maritime law.

These are some of the legal aspects that crop up to my average mind and i believe that the intelligent ones could think of even more. As rightfully suggested in the video the USA could have made it legal through bring some rule in UNO however it chose otherwise and this makes it weak for the USA in presenting their case in ICJ if they are pulled up ever.

Tactical Aspects:

The tactical aspects of these drone strikes are that, the collateral damage is disproportionate to the intended purpose. However there is no authoritative data on this and both sides present different stories. If such study has to be carried out by an Independent body then may be we can arrive at a proper conclusion.

Information on Drones:

Very less information is released to the public even in Pakistan where it happens as the Pakistani Government rightfully will have to face backlash. So it is not much of a mystery that even less is available on the globe.

There is one last argument on psychological aspects of drone strikes made in the video, which is true as a tactic not yielding 100% results is bound to cause harm. The hate towards USA could turn into love for extremism at some point and the USA would be responsible for it. They have to do something about it.

My argument here is that finally the burden is lying on the Pakistani Government and other independent bodies to make a case of these illegalities and put a stop to drone strikes. This is not happening and the Pakistani Govt doesn't do much than protest, so Irfan how do you think the world is going to care when its own Government doesn't do much??

The inconsistencies of USA wrt drones are monumental and they can be pulled apart in ICJ, still why doesn't the Pakistani Govt do something on it. Your statement that Indian bloggers and Web Commentators could sabotage the Global Community's thought process on Pakistan is laughable. Just because we are more in number so carry more voices will not guarantee our prorogation unless there is some weight behind it. Please let me know if any other points are left out.

[Irfan Baloch]

thanks for your post appreciate it.
I stand by what I said (my reference was about social media, and thats my target. what Governments and main stream media is not topic of discussion because what they do or say has vested interests & mostly the view & approval is coerced by the stronger party)
some Indians DO make a point of silencing the criticism over the drone strikes becaue the victims belong to their arch enemy)

but will like to keep the discussion strictly on drones.

you have given a suggestion about "how can" the western population care .. i will expand on it later

thanks

[OrionHunter]

Drone strikes have become the order of the day and there is much debate about whether or not this technological advancement has unwanted consequences. There is a fear that the impersonal nature of drone warfare makes it harder for soldiers to empathize with their victims and that it makes it too easy for large scale killings to be ordered and executed.

The Pakistani government may well have unofficially given Obama the green light for some of those strikes it remains true that they represent a violation of Pakistani sovereignty. With no official permission from the Pakistani government, there is no legal justification for American military action in the mountains of northern Pakistan.

To see the negative strategic result of the ‘drone doctrine’ it is important to look at the case of Yemen. Although it is undoubtedly true that factions of Al Qaeda operated in Yemen before the campaign of drone attacks they were relatively small, had next to no political sway and did not control territory. Now they have increased in number, they seriously threaten the stability of Yemen and they control large areas of land. So much for the WOT!

How many innocent civilians have been killed in Afghanistan by drone strikes? We’ll never know for sure as there is no independent media presence there except for American ‘embedded journalists’ accompanying American troops.

The lack of transparency in the U.S. Administration’s drone policy have made it impossible to know how the U.S. government chooses its targets in any given incident, and thus difficult to get any real traction on important questions of civilian harm. The U.S. Administration's response to such concerns has ranged from outright denial to mere assertions that its “strikes comply with international law!”

Really?

[regular]

The West won't care about the eastern pplz and their races period. They just using drones to make/create reasons to kill everybody in the east I guess.......and to control their resources easily. They don't want anybody to stand against their world dominations.......

[Irfan Baloch]

the reason to create this thread is about brining up the moral aspect and the human cost of Drone war.
the American warlords have addressed the American psyche very well be removing the potential risk to American life and then sterilized the whole concept as an other version of Xbox, PS2, PC game shoot em ups.

the only body bags in this "game" are that of nameless people living thousands of miles away and disappearing into nothingness. any potential outcry or concern is drummed down by upbeat nationalism and patriotic reporting by the already briefed Main stream media that goes into a lot of pain into advocating the CIA drone strikes and how there is no other way to deal with the nameless enemy.

if the story does reach out to a sizeable popular social media like twitter, blogs and facebook etc.. the counter offensive is launched showing how bad/ corrupt and untrustworthy Pakistani state is. hence removing the focus from the argument over the loss of innocent life to jt the justification of the strikes.


Just for a moment: Ask yourself

Is the murder of thousands of people Justifiable who had no role, no say, no control and no knowledge of alleged terrorists who may or may not have been in the vicinity of the drone strikes ....... on the basis that.. Pakistani state has had an alleged double role? .. had agreed to these strikes?


if the answer is yes then next time dont criticize Fascist dictators of the past and present who murdered not only their political opponents but also murdered their next of kin including women & children.

[Juice]

---

---

You are right that most westerners could care less about third-world lives. But the opposite is true...those who allow terrorist to be their guest because they have the same religion must not care about western lives.