General Discussion

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)

94. Report of brussels group says more civilians are killed by drones than terrorists.

Thu May 23, 2013, 09:26 PM

May 2013

On Tuesday, the Brussels-based International Crisis Group (ICG) published a report entitled “Drones: Myths and Reality in Pakistan” that says the United States’ refuses to acknowledge that the CIA-led drone campaign “undermines efforts to assess the program’s legality.”

According to the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, the United States’ drone strikes in Pakistan have killed up to 3,587 people since 2004.

In September 2012, a report by the Stanford Law School and the New York University School of Law gave an alarming account of the effect that assassination drone strikes have on ordinary people in Pakistan’s tribal areas. The report noted, “The number of ‘high-level’ targets killed as a percentage of total casualties is extremely low -- estimated at just 2%.”

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/05/22/304751/terror-drones-mostly-kill-civilians/

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

153 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The assassination of 16 y/o American citizen Abdulrahman al-Awlaki. That's part of what she shouted [View all] Poll_Blind May 2013 OP

Text below posted previously on DU... Tx4obama May 2013 #1

The division of pre-crime must pay well nadinbrzezinski May 2013 #2

I hope you will demonstrate your bona fides for this statement by demonstrating how you are not patrice May 2013 #28

Perhaps you should do well to read The actual book nadinbrzezinski May 2013 #153

Thank you for your post, nadin..... truth2power May 2013 #73

I got your back, Nadin. Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #81

None of the details about the son or his upbringing are in any way relevant. Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #4

He was A Combatant, Sir: A Young One, And Not the Target, But A Participant The Magistrate May 2013 #6

So you may claim, but you have no evidence to provide to prove your claim, other than proximity. MNBrewer May 2013 #10

His Up-Bringing And Connection Make It Obvious, Sir The Magistrate May 2013 #12

I believe that's called circumstantial evidence and is not probative. MNBrewer May 2013 #15

Thank You For The Laugh, Sir The Magistrate May 2013 #17

You're welcome MNBrewer May 2013 #20

And a fine standard employed by our government. rug May 2013 #27

You Live In The World You Live In, Sir The Magistrate May 2013 #33

So I do. I'd like to keep more of us here without my government's removing them. rug May 2013 #34

We Are Talking Cases, Sir, Not Totals The Magistrate May 2013 #38

"involved (in) jihadi activity" is not the standard enunciated today. rug May 2013 #44

Since He was Not the Target Of the Attack, Sir, That Has No Relevance The Magistrate May 2013 #48

Ah, no relevance. Perhaps these comments today will supply that. rug May 2013 #49

So You Come Back, Sir, To Whether He Was a Civilian Or Not The Magistrate May 2013 #51

I would be surprised if he was a combatant. rug May 2013 #53

Again, Sir, You Provide No Argument The Magistrate May 2013 #56

You're right. I did not provide an argument, I provided a conclusion: "a mistake, a bad mistake." rug May 2013 #59

Well, Sir, I Have To Go Cook, And Clearly You Are Not Up To the Demands Of Actually Arguing A Point The Magistrate May 2013 #62

I usually don't argue a point. I demonstrate it. rug May 2013 #63

By the same token, it's not remarkable that the government Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #74

This is very dangerous ground and ground based on assumptions ... Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #71

It Will Save Me Time, Sir, Simply To Renew A Previous Post.... The Magistrate May 2013 #85

I'll Save You Nothing Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #133

Always Nice To Start The Day With A Belly Laugh, Sir The Magistrate May 2013 #149

Amazing ... Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #151

So says the authority that has used violence Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #70

That's everyone's wish. The only disagreement is to the degree that it is possible and still stevenleser May 2013 #39

I get where you're coming from, Steve, but often hesitation is a better course than regret. rug May 2013 #46

Therein lies the rub ... Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #75

Correct, but that isn't what we are doing stevenleser May 2013 #79

Two points: Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #80

No, and no stevenleser May 2013 #124

Really? Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #134

Report of brussels group says more civilians are killed by drones than terrorists. HiPointDem May 2013 #94

That is alarming. Thanks for posting. nt Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #106

+1 HiPointDem May 2013 #93

Ways can be changed with knowledge ... Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #69

What's With The "Sir" Business? otohara May 2013 #84

It is? davidthegnome May 2013 #105

Even to their children? N.T. Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #19

Since It Is Obvious You Understand The Ludicrous Stretching You Are Engaged In, Sir The Magistrate May 2013 #21

As is the charge of the government ... Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #65

'Evidence' means nothing in an accident. randome May 2013 #13

Funny but that "leader" has never been named. Luminous Animal May 2013 #72

I dont disagree with much about what you say but I would argue that with regards to collateral stevenleser May 2013 #8

But "not firing anything at all" was also an option. Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #22

That's always an option for all involved. I encourage you to pursue it equally with all parties. stevenleser May 2013 #25

So you're happy with moral equivalence with Al Quaeda? Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #26

There is something wrong with the idea that no one should try to hurt each other? stevenleser May 2013 #29

It's wrong because there are situations in which not trying to hurt someone is morally wrong. Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #35

There are other options you and others seem to keep overlooking though to. cstanleytech May 2013 #128

I'm not interested in al-Awlaki's options. Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #132

Wow. Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #137

As I said in the third paragraph of the post you're replying to, no. N.T. Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #152

Can you say "bad person" again, pretty please? Bonobo May 2013 #148

But the kid was just there for the bar-b-que! baldguy May 2013 #32

I think it was his 'family' in the USA that first said he was at a BBQ, the reports I read said... Tx4obama May 2013 #37

Well, that makes it alright then. Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #64

My USC spouse spent ten years of childhood in Germany. Does that make it more ok to kill my spouse? leveymg May 2013 #78

He Should Have Been Someplace Else, Sir The Magistrate May 2013 #3

Exactly. I'm hoping we find what I call a post-drone solution to the Al-Qaeda and affiliate problem stevenleser May 2013 #5

Or ever. As long as it's a Dem in, right? morningfog May 2013 #108

Actually ignored, no, I had no problem with Bush going after actual terrorists either. nt stevenleser May 2013 #127

And you're "The Magistrate" MNBrewer May 2013 #11

It Certainly Does For Me, Sir The Magistrate May 2013 #14

Yes sir MNBrewer May 2013 #16

So You Have No Objection To My Stating My View Of The Matter, Sir? The Magistrate May 2013 #18

I object not to the existence, but rather to the content of the opinions you express MNBrewer May 2013 #23

Then Let Us Review, Sir, So The Matter Is Clear The Magistrate May 2013 #31

Consider the paternalistic assumptions about the rest of us that you make in such statements. wow.nt patrice May 2013 #42

Of what relevance is the fact that he was American? randome May 2013 #7

The argument is that an American is entitled to the bill of rights and a non-American is not stevenleser May 2013 #9

+1 treestar May 2013 #58

i agree, i never understand why they keep bringing that up JI7 May 2013 #101

Your picture fails because ... JoePhilly May 2013 #24

yeah? Still puzzled about what happened to the chechen friend of Tamerlan Tsarnaev librechik May 2013 #30

Definitely part of the cover-up. JoePhilly May 2013 #36

This message was self-deleted by its author patrice May 2013 #41

Those Unnamed Sources Are No Longer So Sure Tamerlan's Friend Pulled a Knife MNBrewer May 2013 #45

Awe come on ... JoePhilly May 2013 #47

He's probably not MNBrewer May 2013 #50

Please, for the sake of your own case against this, could everyone opposed to these kinds of actions patrice May 2013 #40

This is just joelz May 2013 #43

This is murder too. patrice May 2013 #57

and here I thought the "terrorist sympathizer" trope was RWNJ fiction sagat May 2013 #52

taking your son to high level al-quaeda meetings should raise some ethical questions too arely staircase May 2013 #54

The father was already dead at the time the son went to the meeting Tx4obama May 2013 #67

apparantly he learned nothing from that eom arely staircase May 2013 #68

Here is the ProSense May 2013 #55

k, so if I can't get an answer to #40, I am forced to conclude that the killing IS OKAY as long as patrice May 2013 #60

Shit happens. nt Pragdem May 2013 #61

I don't believe his killing was a coincidence or an accident. GoneFishin May 2013 #66

She's barking at the wrong car marshall May 2013 #76

Saved the picture. I will never forgive that heinous act. n/t truth2power May 2013 #77

Forget it, Poll Blind -- Hell Hath No Fury May 2013 #82

I thought it was interesting what a frenzy could be caused simply by relaying what... Poll_Blind May 2013 #83

Kool-aid -- Hell Hath No Fury May 2013 #86

Well said. woo me with science May 2013 #89

I have never understood . . . markpkessinger May 2013 #92

I agree .. Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #147

people who dissed Bush all those years are all of a sudden concerned about "respecting the boilerbabe May 2013 #88

"..the only reason these folks didn't like bush is because he wasn't a democrat." Scurrilous May 2013 #150

Wow, all the way fucked up "Kid had it coming cuz he was likely to become a terrorist" apologias whatchamacallit May 2013 #87

The arguments I have seen defending this seem to amount to: Bonobo May 2013 #90

1 and 2 are not contradictory. jeff47 May 2013 #100

But the defenses for the action are themselves in contradiction. Bonobo May 2013 #115

No, they're not. jeff47 May 2013 #122

Yes they are. Bonobo May 2013 #123

Why do you bother replying if you don't bother to read the posts? jeff47 May 2013 #125

I read your post. Bonobo May 2013 #126

. Bonobo May 2013 #130

Holy fuck balls ... look upthread Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #142

Can you give me a clue? Bonobo May 2013 #144

LOL ... Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #146

I have a laser pointed on me. Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #143

No, it's not. Plenty of combatants have been killed without being targeted Recursion May 2013 #141

1 and 2 don't contradict each other. There are plenty of combatants we don't target (nt) Recursion May 2013 #136

I think I covered that above. Bonobo May 2013 #139

Nope, you didn't Recursion May 2013 #140

Posts saying he was accidentally hit belong in the Creative Speculation forum. nt Bonobo May 2013 #91

Any standard that would require that would put posts saying he was targeted there, too. n/t Bolo Boffin May 2013 #96

Hmmm, let me think about that.... Bonobo May 2013 #98

It's amazing how "does not pass the smell test" always manages to confirm one's own bias. n/t Bolo Boffin May 2013 #99

It is equally amazing how people will accept anything Bonobo May 2013 #114

Until I have a reason to discount what the Obama administration has said... Bolo Boffin May 2013 #120

I would expect no less. Bonobo May 2013 #121

Holder said, yesterday, that he was not the target Recursion May 2013 #135

Yeah, that settles it! nt Bonobo May 2013 #138

The rationalizations on this thread for execution without trial, execution of bystanders, execution HiPointDem May 2013 #95

Sometimes I have to check I didn't accidentally wander into Free Republic n/t whatchamacallit May 2013 #97

on certain issues there's no difference. HiPointDem May 2013 #103

So we should invade Yemen? jeff47 May 2013 #102

i don't see how your comments follow from anything i said. i nevertheless doubt your conclusion. HiPointDem May 2013 #104

It appears you are saying we should not do drone strikes. jeff47 May 2013 #111

A hypothetical. If we could have killed OBL to prevent 9/11, but in doing so perhaps kill still_one May 2013 #107

If capture and prosecution is not an option, then bombing is the least-bad alternative. jeff47 May 2013 #112

I think most would say Yes because of the lives it would save, and this is really what still_one May 2013 #116

Yes same thing with Hitler the week before he gave the orders to load up the trains graham4anything May 2013 #131

Sorry you are disgusted, but ... kwassa May 2013 #113

where are these 'terrorist' attacks on 'us' taking place? because the only war *i'm* seeing HiPointDem May 2013 #117

There are no drone strikes in the class war ... kwassa May 2013 #118

i repeat, where are these terrorist attacks in this 'war' against 'us' taking place? because the HiPointDem May 2013 #119

Disgusting, insane, reactionary, fascist ... Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #145

her behavior today resulted in her having zero credibility in my opinion ZRT2209 May 2013 #109

she looked like a crazed maniac, she has NO IDEA how to effectively advocate for anything. ZRT2209 May 2013 #110

I know she means well but she came off like a fool today. MrSlayer May 2013 #129