Ring of Fire: No Justification for Drone Strikes

[GoLeft TV]

This segment originally aired on the November 10th, 2013 episode of Ring of Fire on Free Speech TV. President Obama is quickly building a foreign policy legacy that will be defined by one word – DRONES. And recent reports from human rights organizations tell us that many of these attacks have been completely unjustified. Ring of Fire guest host Farron Cousins talks about this with Alex Kane, the world editor for Alternet.org.

More at Ring of Fire.

[Ace Acme]

1. Notes

Amnesty Int'l and Human Rights Watch have recently issues reports on Pakistan and Yemen, respectively, saying that many of the drone attacks were unjustified.

The Bureau of Investigative Journalism claims that 400 to 900 civilians have been killed by drones in Pakistan.

Back in May Obama promised more transparency in the drone program. This has not been fulfilled.

Some drone-strike apologists argue that civilians die in war in non-drone operations, so they fact that they die in drone operations is no big deal. Interviewee Alex Kane, the world editor for Alternet.org, argues that even if drone strikes result in fewer civilian deaths than would die in a full-scale boots on the ground op, we should ask why any civilians at all should die. Drone fans advocate an endless global drone war on terror, and drone critics advocate capture and criminal trials for suspected terrorists, and addressing the structural reasons for anti-Americanism.

Host Farron Cousins points out that drone strikes are provoking anti-American attitudes, and asks how long it will be before the "bad guys" get drones.

The lack of controversy about drones among Democrats has long puzzled me. I would think that if Bush were killing civilians willy nilly in six countries that they would have something to say about it.