| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
tfan
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 9634
Back to top |
 Posted: 02/01/17 10:26 pm ::: Drone Strikes |
Reply  |
|
| I am surprised that there isn't at least some outrage, either here or around the world about US drone strikes. Obama had over 26,000 drone strikes in 2016 alone. . We are assassinating people thousands of miles away who present no threat to us - unless we allow them to immigrate or visit. And through it all we steadfastly maintain our position that we are the good guys in the world.
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/01/17 10:43 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Why are you only worried about Obama's drone strikes and not Trump's first military action that resulted in the deaths of a number of non-combatants, including women and children, speaking of people who "present no threat to us." At least one dead 8 year old girl was a US born US citizen.
And the raid - evidently poorly planned and even more poorly executed - also exhibits how at least the drone strikes don't kill American troops, while actual raids certainly can. But either way, innocents also die.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/seal-american-girl-die-first-trump-era-u-s-military-n714346
|
|
NYL_WNBA_FAN
Joined: 28 May 2007
Posts: 14097
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/01/17 11:32 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| I'm liberal and not at all a Trump supporter. But I hate the loss of innocent life either way. Drone strikes in Yemen have continued under Trump as well, if what I heard is accurate. But I acknowledge and disagree with the practice under Obama as well. I will say a ban on refugees is very hypocritical in light of our role in some of those war-torn countries.
_________________
The poster formerly known as LibWNBAFan.
|
|
Howee
Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15744
Location: OREGON (in my heart)
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/02/17 12:21 am ::: Re: Drone Strikes |
Reply |
|
| tfan wrote: |
| I am surprised that there isn't at least some outrage, either here or around the world about US drone strikes. Obama had over 26,000 drone strikes in 2016 alone. . We are assassinating people thousands of miles away who present no threat to us - unless we allow them to immigrate or visit. And through it all we steadfastly maintain our position that we are the good guys in the world. |
I'd be interested to know more; for example, is a 'strike' one hit, with some/zero/many casualties? The Full Story is paramount.
Re: Obama? I'd have voted for him for a third term, if possible, BUT.....I can share lots of his actions that I abhorred. Like his 'gifts' to the (late) Uzbeki president. The politics of war is never palatable, and he was not exempt.
_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
|
|
cthskzfn
Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 12851
Location: In a world where a PSYCHOpath like Trump isn't potus.
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/02/17 11:41 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
Why are you only worried about Obama's drone strikes and not Trump's first military action that resulted in the deaths of a number of non-combatants, including women and children, speaking of people who "present no threat to us." At least one dead 8 year old girl was a US born US citizen.
And the raid - evidently poorly planned and even more poorly executed - also exhibits how at least the drone strikes don't kill American troops, while actual raids certainly can. But either way, innocents also die.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/seal-american-girl-die-first-trump-era-u-s-military-n714346 |
My guess is this was a preempted strike by tfan, who anticipated criticism of the Trump-endorsed strike you mentioned.
_________________
Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.
|
|
tfan
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 9634
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/02/17 4:49 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
Why are you only worried about Obama's drone strikes and not Trump's first military action that resulted in the deaths of a number of non-combatants, including women and children, speaking of people who "present no threat to us." At least one dead 8 year old girl was a US born US citizen.
And the raid - evidently poorly planned and even more poorly executed - also exhibits how at least the drone strikes don't kill American troops, while actual raids certainly can. But either way, innocents also die. |
It was this raid that got me to post about drone strikes as I initially thought it was a drone strike. An eight year old girl dying is a familiar refrain from drone strikes. That is normally followed by the US military claiming they only killed "bad guys" or "enemy combatants". If third parties are able to verify that indeed multiple women and children were killed, even that it was a wedding party that was hit, then the US military will say "well, we thought it was only bad guys".
I wasn't only worried about Obama's - he is the only one I readily had numbers for from a recent article. But it is nice to attach his name to it as he is considered a Saint, while Bush and Trump are readily acknowledged as non-Saints.
|
|
tfan
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 9634
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/02/17 4:57 pm ::: Re: Drone Strikes |
Reply |
|
| Howee wrote: |
I'd be interested to know more; for example, is a 'strike' one hit, with some/zero/many casualties? The Full Story is paramount. |
This Guardian article gives a number for "bomb droppings" in 2016 that is what I saw elsewhere for "drone strikes", so I think every bomb/missile fired from a drone is considered a "strike". Most don't result in fatalities. At least the 26,000+ is claimed to have killed hundreds, not thousands, of people. But this article says that the USA under-reports fatalities versus what is recorded by the Bureau of Investigative Journalists. I would bet that the USA does not try real hard to find out who they killed beyond any "bad guys" they targeted.
The article above puts that number of bombs into perspective - it is 3 per hour for the entire year. All being fired by some guy sitting in a Nevada military facility
Last edited by tfan on 02/02/17 7:25 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
norwester
Joined: 14 Jun 2006
Posts: 6368
Location: Seattle
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/02/17 7:18 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
This is something it's hard for me to think about, but I may have to analyze my thoughts more and do some research. Like I have a physically negative reaction to the thought of the bombs dropping on Hiroshima and Nagasaki (particularly the Nagasaki one, as it was largely dropped as a science experiment, versus the reasons the bomb was dropped on Hiroshima), but the War in the Pacific was excruciating. Nothing like the European theater (where at least there was infrastructure, etc.), which was terrible enough. Having the bomb drop I know saved countless American soldier lives, at a terrible expense, but if I went back and were president, I'd likely make the same decision. Not blithely, but sometimes there are no good solutions.
Right now, drone strikes are much the same in my head. I don't like them, or rather the necessity of them, but I also acknowledge them as a useful and flawed tool for executing (often) necessary offensive actions without putting American soldiers in physical danger, and I actually feel that they're a great use of technology. I hope that we can tighten up policy and execution so that we greatly minimize civilian deaths, but if there were 26,000 strikes, and we only have a handful of horror stories about dead wedding parties, then the military is probably already doing its job. Which is often a nasty job. But which the majority execute conscientiously.
_________________
Don't you know the plural of "anecdote" is "data"?
|
|
norwester
Joined: 14 Jun 2006
Posts: 6368
Location: Seattle
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/02/17 7:21 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Also, I don't necessarily condemn Trump for this Yemen attack. There are some reports of there not having been enough intelligence, etc., and that had delayed attacking the target under the Obama administration. Perhaps given more time they realized that they'd gathered all they could, and the potential benefits outweighed the costs, particularly with boots on the ground. Maybe that's what made them send in a strike team versus make it a drone strike.
I guess I'll have to read up on it more.
As far as the dead soldier, that is tragic. That's also what they train practically every day of their lives for. Trump should get criticism if he ordered the attack against recommendations from the military (Joint Chiefs on down), but sometimes these things just go wrong.
_________________
Don't you know the plural of "anecdote" is "data"?
|
|
mercfan3
Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 19765
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/02/17 9:31 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
President Obama has always been criticized for his use of drones.
Has nothing to do with Trump's failed raid, however.
_________________
“Anyone point out that a Donald Trump anagram is ‘Lord Dampnut’”- Colin Mochrie
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/02/17 9:45 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| norwester wrote: |
| Trump should get criticism if he ordered the attack against recommendations from the military (Joint Chiefs on down), but sometimes these things just go wrong. |
He diminished the role of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs on his National Security Council.
But he put his white supremacist political hack on the NSC.
Prepare yourself for more fiascos.
|
|
tfan
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 9634
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/02/17 10:38 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| norwester wrote: |
| Trump should get criticism if he ordered the attack against recommendations from the military (Joint Chiefs on down), but sometimes these things just go wrong. |
He diminished the role of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs on his National Security Council.
But he put his white supremacist political hack on the NSC.
Prepare yourself for more fiascos. |
This raid came out of the bowels of the US Terror/War Machine - the combination of the military and the spy agencies. Trump or Bannon didn't decide to do this raid on their own. It was recommended they do it by the people who's full time job it is to spy on and kill people in other countries. A job that you won't find in the job listing of many countries and possibly only one.
|
|
Howee
Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15744
Location: OREGON (in my heart)
Back to top |
|
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8231
Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/03/17 3:09 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
He diminished the role of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs on his National Security Council.
|
That's a common misinterpretation of National Security Presidential Memorandum 2 (NSPM2).
The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) and Director of National Intelligence (DNI) are the only two statutory advisors to the National Security Council (NSC). Under Trump's NSPM2 both of them "shall . . . attend NSC meetings." Hence, there is absolutely no change regarding the CJCS and DNI attendance at NSC meetings.
There are other national security committees. One is called the Principals Committee (PC). The agenda of the PC is determined by its chair and the invitees are determined by the National Security and Homeland Security advisors. Some of the NSC members are required at all PC meetings. The DNI and CJCS "shall attend where issues pertaining to their responsibilities and expertise are to be discussed."
This clarification was made so the DNI and CJCS didn't feel they were statutorily required to run over to PC meetings even when the meeting agenda had nothing to do with their organizations. Sean Spicer has made clear in press conferences that the DNI and CJCS can attend these meetings if they want to.
Obviously, any PC meeting that discussed drone strikes would involve the mission of the CJCS and probably the DNI. |
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/03/17 4:18 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Yes, as I said, he diminished their roles.
He couldn't knock them off the NSC completely because their membership is dictated by statute,
And of course adding a political hack with no formal national security role or any qualifications is unprecedented, but manifests a dangerous politicization of foreign policy. It's like Canadian Bacon. Maybe we'll invade Canada to try to boost Trump's poll numbers.
And Sean Spicer says a lot of shit, much if which has little to do with what actually happened. Oh he of alternative facts.
I chose my words carefully and accurately.
|
|
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8231
Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/03/17 11:58 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Art, you said that Trump had diminished the role of the CJCS "on his National Security Council." That's simply incorrect.
The change relates only to the Principals Committee. There, Trump has clarified the attendance of the CJSC and DNI using exactly the same words (except for "also") as in Bush's National Security Presidential Directive. I doubt that many busy executives would consider their roles to have been "diminished" simply because they have been freed up from attending irrelevant committee meetings. |
|
|
|
