Over 50 killed in latest U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan

[News_Editor]

Over 50 killed in latest U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan

2010-12-19 11:35:42 GMT+7 (ICT)

ISLAMABAD, PAKISTAN (BNO NEWS) -- At least 54 suspected militants were killed on Friday in the latest series of U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan, officials said on Saturday.

The attacks were carried out in the Sipah area of the Khyber tribal region of Pakistan which borders Afghanistan. Officials said the first strike hit two vehicles in Tirah Valley, killing seven and wounding nine.

Moments later, a second strike hit a compound in Speen Darang village, killing 32 suspected militants, including high-ranking individuals as several were gathered for a meeting. The area has a strong presence of Lashkar-e-Islam, a Taliban affiliate.

An additional 15 suspected insurgents were killed during a third U.S. drone attack in Narai Baba village.

The attack was the latest as part of the U.S. drone campaign in Afghanistan which is aimed at disrupting Al-Qaeda and the Taliban in the Afghan border area with Pakistan. The U.S. considers the region as the most dangerous place on Earth.

U.S. drone strikes have usually been conducted in Pakistan's North Waziristan, where the Haqqani group is known to be close to the Taliban and Al-Qaeda. Haqqani, while less known internationally, has been accused of planning some of the deadliest attacks on U.S. and coalition forces in Afghanistan.

Controversy has surrounded the drone strikes all year long as local residents and officials have blamed them for killing civilians and motivating young men to join the Taliban.

-- © BNO News All rights reserved 2010-12-19

[flying]

At least 54 suspected militants were killed.....killing 32 suspected militants....An additional 15 suspected insurgents were killed

Amazing how these drones only kill Suspected militants & insurgents....never any mention of innocents.

Amazing precision for a drone

Then again...suspected is neither innocent nor convicted in these killings...But it is enough to justify the deaths?...They seem to think so

The U.S. considers the region as the most dangerous place on Earth.

I am guessing the inhabitants trying to go about their lives there would agree as drones fall from the sky with pin point accuracy

Edited December 19, 2010 by flying

[siampolee]

Certainly a novel way of , winning hearts and minds.

[Ulysses G.]

Has there ever been a war anywhere with no civilian casualties? It is regrettable, but war is sometimes a necessary evil.

[funfunfunfun]

Has there ever been a war anywhere with no civilian casualties? It is regrettable, but war is sometimes a necessary evil.

This is not an excuse. It is murder committed by USAmerican military.

Why is there a war anyway?

[beechguy]

Has there ever been a war anywhere with no civilian casualties? It is regrettable, but war is sometimes a necessary evil.

This is not an excuse. It is murder committed by USAmerican military.

Why is there a war anyway?

It's not murder, and I guess you don't watch the news much do you.

[beechguy]

At least 54 suspected militants were killed.....killing 32 suspected militants....An additional 15 suspected insurgents were killed

Amazing how these drones only kill Suspected militants & insurgents....never any mention of innocents.

Amazing precision for a drone

Then again...suspected is neither innocent nor convicted in these killings...But it is enough to justify the deaths?...They seem to think so

The U.S. considers the region as the most dangerous place on Earth.

I am guessing the inhabitants trying to go about their lives there would agree as drones fall from the sky with pin point accuracy

The drone attacks are specifically directed at suspected militant/insurgents, and I don't think it's very easy to get the authorization approved for such a strike. Unfortunately some civilians get caught in the middle, one example may be young boys kidnapped to be suicide bombers.

Do you ever wonder how many suspected enemy combatants are in a market when the Taliban intentionally sets of a bomb in a market filled with civilians?

Edited December 20, 2010 by beechguy

[philw]

Has there ever been a war anywhere with no civilian casualties? It is regrettable, but war is sometimes a necessary evil.

This is not an excuse. It is murder committed by USAmerican military.

Why is there a war anyway?

It's not murder, and I guess you don't watch the news much do you.

Which news ?

If it's not murder, suppose neither was the accidental drone attack on a wedding party..........

[philw]

At least 54 suspected militants were killed.....killing 32 suspected militants....An additional 15 suspected insurgents were killed

Amazing how these drones only kill Suspected militants & insurgents....never any mention of innocents.

Amazing precision for a drone

Then again...suspected is neither innocent nor convicted in these killings...But it is enough to justify the deaths?...They seem to think so

The U.S. considers the region as the most dangerous place on Earth.

I am guessing the inhabitants trying to go about their lives there would agree as drones fall from the sky with pin point accuracy

The drone attacks are specifically directed at suspected militant/insurgents, and I don't think it's very easy to get the authorization approved for such a strike. Unfortunately some civilians get caught in the middle, one example may be young boys kidnapped to be suicide bombers.

Do you ever wonder how many suspected enemy combatants are in a market when the Taliban intentionally sets of a bomb in a market filled with civilians?

BG, your 8th word is key.

[neverdie]

Has there ever been a war anywhere with no civilian casualties? It is regrettable, but war is sometimes a necessary evil.

[funfunfunfun]

Has there ever been a war anywhere with no civilian casualties? It is regrettable, but war is sometimes a necessary evil.

This is not an excuse. It is murder committed by USAmerican military.

Why is there a war anyway?

It's not murder, and I guess you don't watch the news much do you.

It is murder and i guess you are watching only USAmerican news and there a very biased and selective channel.

[Carib]

Has there ever been a war anywhere with no civilian casualties? It is regrettable, but war is sometimes a necessary evil.

So the u.s. is at war with Pakistan too ??

[beechguy]

Has there ever been a war anywhere with no civilian casualties? It is regrettable, but war is sometimes a necessary evil.

This is not an excuse. It is murder committed by USAmerican military.

Why is there a war anyway?

It's not murder, and I guess you don't watch the news much do you.

It is murder and i guess you are watching only USAmerican news and there a very biased and selective channel.

Look up the definition of murder, it is not murder. And I don't have to watch the news, I'm there for some of it first hand, not sitting on my ass behind a computer monitor talking or running my fingers on a keyboard as it were, about stuff I know nothing about.

[brahmburgers]

Has there ever been a war anywhere with no civilian casualties? It is regrettable, but war is sometimes a necessary evil.

This is not an excuse. It is murder committed by USAmerican military.

Why is there a war anyway?

War is never nice and clean. The Taliban have been making many people miserable for decades, not to mention getting young men and retarded women to blow themselves up in crowded places (and killing a lot of innocent Moslems, btw). If the US drops a drone, you can bet it had strong evidence there were baddies there. The Taliban hate drones, but do they hate drones more than their compatriots hate having their loved ones blown up in a market? If the Taliban had the slightest chance to use drones against their enemies, do you think they'd hesitate to use them?

History is rife with examples of superior weaponry being deployed with devastating effects. Indeed, it could be argued that the reason Thailand lost two major wars to Burma was the superior weapons and tactics the Burmese invaders used (superior weaponry tends to travel from west to east on the Eurasian continent, gunpowder and the Tartars excepted).

[beechguy]

Has there ever been a war anywhere with no civilian casualties? It is regrettable, but war is sometimes a necessary evil.

This is not an excuse. It is murder committed by USAmerican military.

Why is there a war anyway?

It's not murder, and I guess you don't watch the news much do you.

Which news ?

If it's not murder, suppose neither was the accidental drone attack on a wedding party..........

Accidental would keep it from being murder wouldn't it.

[funfunfunfun]

Look up the definition of murder, it is not murder. And I don't have to watch the news, I'm there for some of it first hand, not sitting on my ass behind a computer monitor talking or running my fingers on a keyboard as it were, about stuff I know nothing about.

First hand?  You are killing people with drone attacks?  It is murder and it is coward.  Nothing to be proud of.

[Carib]

This is not an excuse. It is murder committed by USAmerican military.

Why is there a war anyway?

It's not murder, and I guess you don't watch the news much do you.

It is murder and i guess you are watching only USAmerican news and there a very biased and selective channel.

Look up the definition of murder, it is not murder. And I don't have to watch the news, I'm there for some of it first hand, not sitting on my ass behind a computer monitor talking or running my fingers on a keyboard as it were, about stuff I know nothing about.

Great, we have an expert on the matter at hand. I am sure now all of it will be explained since it it " first hand" info.

[funfunfunfun]

Has there ever been a war anywhere with no civilian casualties? It is regrettable, but war is sometimes a necessary evil.

This is not an excuse. It is murder committed by USAmerican military.

Why is there a war anyway?

War is never nice and clean.  The Taliban have been making many people miserable for decades, not to mention getting young men and retarded women to blow themselves up in crowded places (and killing a lot of innocent Moslems, btw).  If the US drops a drone, you can bet it had strong evidence there were baddies there.  The Taliban hate drones, but do they hate drones more than their compatriots hate having their loved ones blown up in a market?  If the Taliban had the slightest chance to use drones against their enemies, do you think they'd hesitate to use them?

History is rife with examples of superior weaponry being deployed with devastating effects.  Indeed, it could be argued that the reason Thailand lost two major wars to Burma was the superior weapons and tactics the Burmese invaders used (superior weaponry tends to travel from west to east on the Eurasian continent, gunpowder and the Tartars excepted).

Why not use drones to hunt criminal suspects in the USA? Go home and blow up your own country.

In Pakistan and in the rest of the world nobody think it is the right  tactic.

http://en.wikipedia....cks_in_Pakistan

[SweeneyAgonistes]

The Taliban have been making many people miserable for decades,

The taliban haven't been around for decades. But there predecessors have, though only thanks to the generosity of the Americans and the Saudis. There was, though, a government in Afghanistan which promoted women's rights. It was the communist government.

Accidental would keep it from being murder wouldn't it.

I'm no expert but I guess it would depend on the extent to which the person pulling the trigger could be expected to anticipate civilian deaths. As drones have killed thousands of Pakistanis and Afghans, I don't think there's much general excuse for ignorance but in any individual case it's hard to say. What it's not hard to say is that the Afghan war is murderous barbarism which is also utterly counter-productive.

[tim armstrong]

Watch wikileaks for the truth about this one.

[funfunfunfun]

Accidental would keep it from being murder wouldn't it.                                                 

I'm no expert but I guess it would depend on the extent to which the person pulling the trigger could be expected to anticipate civilian deaths. As drones have killed thousands of Pakistanis and Afghans, I don't think there's much general excuse for ignorance but in any individual case it's hard to say. What it's not hard to say is that the Afghan war is murderous barbarism which is also utterly counter-productive.

There isn't much 'accidental' - that is calculated, included and accepted. Everyone knows that the drone attacks kill mostly innocents and civilian victims and only very few of the the taliban.

http://www.allvoices...n-687-civilians

[beechguy]

The Taliban have been making many people miserable for decades,

The taliban haven't been around for decades. But there predecessors have, though only thanks to the generosity of the Americans and the Saudis. There was, though, a government in Afghanistan which promoted women's rights. It was the communist government.

Accidental would keep it from being murder wouldn't it.

I'm no expert but I guess it would depend on the extent to which the person pulling the trigger could be expected to anticipate civilian deaths. As drones have killed thousands of Pakistanis and Afghans, I don't think there's much general excuse for ignorance but in any individual case it's hard to say. What it's not hard to say is that the Afghan war is murderous barbarism which is also utterly counter-productive.

Murder would be killing with malice or with malice aforethought, it is not their intention to kill or maim innocent civilians. Unfortunately mistakes and accidents happen, and if they can prove negligence, personnel can be prosecuted for that. I think that was the case in one of the wedding parties being attacked, they said the personnel didn't asses the intelligence properly before authorizing the attack, I don't recall what the punishment was.

[SweeneyAgonistes]

You don't have to intend death to commit murder; there being a significant risk of death is sufficient (as far as I know) so if you do something which will almost certainly result in someone's death, you can still be done for murder even though you might not have directly intended that person's death. In the case of the drone attacks, there is clearly significant risk of civilian death. But even from the standpoint of the American army, it's a spectacularly stupid policy which only serves the interests of their enemies.

[philw]

It's not murder, and I guess you don't watch the news much do you.

Which news ?

If it's not murder, suppose neither was the accidental drone attack on a wedding party..........

Accidental would keep it from being murder wouldn't it.

ok, Islamic person slaughter ( similar to manslaughter )........is that a better terminology??

And to follow another poster, is America now at war with Pakistan ?

Edited December 20, 2010 by philw

[beechguy]

You don't have to intend death to commit murder; there being a significant risk of death is sufficient (as far as I know) so if you do something which will almost certainly result in someone's death, you can still be done for murder even though you might not have directly intended that person's death. In the case of the drone attacks, there is clearly significant risk of civilian death. But even from the standpoint of the American army, it's a spectacularly stupid policy which only serves the interests of their enemies.

I suppose it depends on who the personnel are working for as to which legal definiton applies. My point was that just because someone gets killed doesn't mean it's murder, there can be negligence and other factors involved that put it in a different classification.

Anyway, contrary to popular but erroneous opinion, they aren't targeting every van, pickup or donkey cart going up and down the highway.

Edited December 20, 2010 by beechguy

[beechguy]

Look up the definition of murder, it is not murder. And I don't have to watch the news, I'm there for some of it first hand, not sitting on my ass behind a computer monitor talking or running my fingers on a keyboard as it were, about stuff I know nothing about.

First hand? You are killing people with drone attacks? It is murder and it is coward. Nothing to be proud of.

"First hand?" Not as first hand as I would have liked, actually my friends do the drones, I work with equipment to get other weapons on station when and where it's needed. Do I like it if truly innocent people get killed? Of course not, but I have no regrets at all about the rest of the people that got killed, we prevented a lot of attacks.

[Norcan]

Look up the definition of murder, it is not murder. And I don't have to watch the news, I'm there for some of it first hand, not sitting on my ass behind a computer monitor talking or running my fingers on a keyboard as it were, about stuff I know nothing about.

How did you manage to type that then?

Go get 'em Rambo!

[geriatrickid]

Why not use drones to hunt criminal suspects in the USA? Go home and blow up your own country.

In Pakistan and in the rest of the world nobody think it is the right tactic.

Guess you missed the news, but a Mexican drone operated in conjunction with the US government crashed in Texas on the weekend. As you may or may not know there is a war going on between the dug cartels and the Mexican government. In Mexico, public officials are being murdered daily in a situation which parallels Afghanistan. A legitimate government is in place and a group of narco terrorists wants to remove the government from the region.

In the Afghanistan border area where the drones are operatingthe Taliban have been operating with relative impunity. The other side of the Afghanistan border is only Pakistan on the map. In rea;ity it is an autonomous area where the Pakistani government is absent. Pakistan does not control the border region, the Taliban does. the Taliban uses the area as its base of operations to resupply, to plan and to undertake attacks into Afghanistan. The Taliban also operates its heroin shipping activities from this area. If Pakistan wants the drone activity to stop it should extend its control over the region, you know, take some of the billions in US$ it has received for security and actually spend some of it in the region.

[SweeneyAgonistes]

In rea;ity it is an autonomous area where the Pakistani government is absent. Pakistan does not control the border region, the Taliban does

It's a tribal zone where the government does not have legal authority; it's not that the Pakistani army can't be bothered to go there - they can't. And heroin has been there for years. I went there in the early 90s, long before the Taliban appeared, and back then it was all guns and smack, though the Americans were not especially worried about it then.

[beechguy]

Look up the definition of murder, it is not murder. And I don't have to watch the news, I'm there for some of it first hand, not sitting on my ass behind a computer monitor talking or running my fingers on a keyboard as it were, about stuff I know nothing about.

How did you manage to type that then?

Go get 'em Rambo!

Actually, I'm taking a break for a while, but will try to go back after the first of the year. What about you, want to come use your computer in Iraq or Afghanistan?

Anyway, these guys can try to impress each other all they want, it's just clearly evident that certain individuals don't know what they are writing about, too much Wikileaks I suppose.

Edited December 20, 2010 by beechguy