U.S. drone strike kills suspected Taliban commanders in Pakistan

[Colin Yai]

The Muslim radicals hate the West already and intend to bring it down. There is no "creating more hatred" and no turning it around. They are the enemy and have to be treated as such.

Ahh yes at long last a touch of realism

[flying]

The Muslim radicals hate the West already and intend to bring it down. There is no "creating more hatred" and no turning it around. They are the enemy and have to be treated as such.

Fear mongering

If in fact the US/West is so worried about this threat from terrorist without navies/air force etc...

Then perhaps go home & protect it rather than constantly make new enemies. Try learn from 9-11

& adjust accordingly.

They are not the enemy as you think....Instead they are a source of income for those who profit

from these policing actions/invasions on foreign soil....All of which is the main reason this so called

war on terror started in the first place.

Go back & read OBL's manifesto & the reasons they felt compelled.

See that the reasons are not the lame excuse of they hate us for our freedoms rhetoric.

Instead it was due to our occupation of their holy lands.

This whole thing can stop if we as the aggressors let it be.

Or continue down this road & bankrupt ourselves as OBL said we would.....along with the thousands

of American lives we have already wasted & more to come on both sides.

It is no more a winnable war than Vietnam was.

[Ulysses G.]

Go back & read OBL's manifesto & the reasons they felt compelled.

Radical Muslims have been dreaming about a new Caliphate that can unite the entire Muslim world and rule with strict Islamic code ever since the death of Muhammed and Al-Qaeda has clearly stated that the re-establishing this Caliphate is one of its primary objectives. The Islamic Caliphate is what terrorism is about and trying to take the Neville Chamberlain appeasement approach is not going to work.

Edited October 30, 2011 by Ulysses G.

[cdnvic]

Ok, you all are off topic. Get back to the drone strike in Pakistan.

[chuckd]

Was there any collateral damage with this specific drone attack?

[flying]

Was there any collateral damage with this specific drone attack?

None of these reports are ever very clear about who they hit & if they were suspects or legitimately identified.

Sometimes they do later furnish names....Sometimes not. Then you have sketchy reports like X# believed to be dead or injured etc.

The US never really comments on it & it has been said many times the Drones in Pakistan are CIA controlled not US military

From the OP...

The double cabin van was reportedly carrying several militants from the village of Tora Gola to the nearby area of Azam Warsak when the U.S. drone launched six missiles. In addition to the killed militants, four were believed to have been injured.

Also from the OP

The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan said in its annual report that the U.S. drone strikes were responsible for 957 extra-legal killings in 2010. Since August 2008, there have been over 250 drone attacks which have reportedly killed more than 1,500 people in North and South Waziristan alone.

There is a group in London that does an accounting of the civilians the drones have killed.

I have not had time to really look at their site so have no opinion on its accuracy

http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/category/projects/drones/

Drone War in Numbers

Total killed: 2,324 - 2,918

Civilians killed: 386 - 775

Total strikes: 301

Obama strikes: 249

It is my opinion the drones drive a whole new generation of people to the side of the militants.

The CIA never ceases to amaze me with their disturbing tactics. It is questionable what their

desired outcome is...peace or business.

Edited October 30, 2011 by flying

[geriatrickid]

Ever notice that when the Pakisatanis kill dozens or hundreds of their own, there is no hand wringing from some quarters. Yet, a targeted drone strike that prevents some terrorists from killing people is condemned. How odd.

[flying]

Ever notice that when the Pakisatanis kill dozens or hundreds of their own, there is no hand wringing from some quarters. Yet, a targeted drone strike that prevents some terrorists from killing people is condemned. How odd.

Why is that odd to you?

Should I as a American be wringing my hands over what other governments do ?

Or am I rightfully concerned what mine does in my name & with my tax dollars in regards to extralegal killings?

Lastly I know of no terrorist making direct impact on the USA's safety living in Pakistan

Perhaps you have some intel that we do not?

Edited October 30, 2011 by flying

[Ulysses G.]

The terrorists who were killed were Taliban and were intent on killing Americans.

Revenge is sweet and not fattening

-Alfred Hitchcock

Edited October 30, 2011 by Ulysses G.

[Steely Dan]

The terrorists who were killed were Taliban and were intent on killing Americans.

Revenge is sweet and not fattening”

-Alfred Hitchcock

See the other thread where 20 Nato troops were killed by the Taliban in neighboring Afghanistan if you want yet more verification of this. The drone operations are against the same group sheltering in Pakistan and using it as a base from which to attack Nato forces.

[Wallaby]

The terrorists who were killed were Taliban and were intent on killing Americans.

Revenge is sweet and not fattening"

-Alfred Hitchcock

See the other thread where 20 Nato troops were killed by the Taliban in neighboring Afghanistan if you want yet more verification of this. The drone operations are against the same group sheltering in Pakistan and using it as a base from which to attack Nato forces.

You are proving Flying's point. The drone strikes aren't working.

There are some posts on here that are racist simply because the people killed are muslim. If similar racist remarks were made against other another race the posts would have been removed.

Muslims have every right to exist as any other people and just because some countries are run anything other than democratic govts does not mean they are the enemy.

[Steely Dan]

The terrorists who were killed were Taliban and were intent on killing Americans.

Revenge is sweet and not fattening"

-Alfred Hitchcock

See the other thread where 20 Nato troops were killed by the Taliban in neighboring Afghanistan if you want yet more verification of this. The drone operations are against the same group sheltering in Pakistan and using it as a base from which to attack Nato forces.

You are proving Flying's point. The drone strikes aren't working.

There are some posts on here that are racist simply because the people killed are muslim. If similar racist remarks were made against other another race the posts would have been removed.

Muslims have every right to exist as any other people and just because some countries are run anything other than democratic govts does not mean they are the enemy.

Your accusation is totally baseless - Comments clearly refer to radical elements not a religion as a whole, besides which religion and race are not the same thing. As for your assertion that the drone strikes are not working, again this is just your opinion and according to the BBC their effectiveness has increased since the U.S has stopped sharing operational information with the Pakistani authorities.

[Scott]

One off-topic post removed. Literary license denied.

[Pakboong]

Tribal elders Thursday told a news conference in Islamabad that nearly 2,000 innocent people have so far been killed in 300 drone strikes in the tribal regions.

http://uruknet.com/?p=m82667&hd=&size=1&l=e

[flying]

Tribal elders Thursday told a news conference in Islamabad that nearly 2,000 innocent people have so far been killed in 300 drone strikes in the tribal regions.

http://uruknet.com/?p=m82667&hd=&size=1&l=e

Some may remember the drone strike On March 17... that attack struck a tribal meeting in North Waziristan.

Between 32 and 53 people were killed, most of them civilians

Here are 25 more strikes & their results

http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2011/07/18/get-the-data-twenty-five-deadly-strikes/

[Jingthing]

Obama should send back his peace prize.

[chuckd]

Tribal elders Thursday told a news conference in Islamabad that nearly 2,000 innocent people have so far been killed in 300 drone strikes in the tribal regions.

http://uruknet.com/?p=m82667&hd=&size=1&l=e

Some may remember the drone strike On March 17... that attack struck a tribal meeting in North Waziristan.

Between 32 and 53 people were killed, most of them civilians

Here are 25 more strikes & their results

http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2011/07/18/get-the-data-twenty-five-deadly-strikes/

Mr. Flying:

Let me pose a question about your source.

They claim there have been between 386 and 775 civilians killed by drone strikes.

The difference between 775 and 386 is 389 so is it possible their low count is off by the same number?

If 386 could be 775, it could also be zero.

[flying]

If 386 could be 775, it could also be zero.

Well that would be pressing it since even the CIA claims they can

identify 19 of the civilians killed on the March 25th attack of tribal elders.

But hey for the sake of argument say it was 1...Say in 300 drone strikes 1 civilian was killed

Would the US be ok with it if a drone came to the US & killed 1 American Civilian?

I have to say I find it a bit odd that so many would try to justify or brush off

things like this.

It is one thing to be blindly patriotic & assume your government CIA can do no wrong. It is another to stand behind such activities as this & try to hope them away.

Edited October 30, 2011 by flying

[Ulysses G.]

It is unfortunate that civilians are killed in warfare. In fact it is unfortunate that anyone is killed, but war is not going away any time soon and letting these terrorists keep up their criminal activities would kill far more people in the long-run than using drones.

[Pakboong]

I would guess that in all of these kinds of killings, the affected side having a political motive, grossly exaggerates the damage.

[chuckd]

I would guess that in all of these kinds of killings, the affected side having a political motive, grossly exaggerates the damage.

...and therein lies the problem with the link provided earlier.

One cannot claim the CIA lies about everything yet believe an unknown web site also will not lie. What is the agenda and who are they trying to bring down?

As the old saying goes...64.36% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

[Pakboong]

I would guess that in all of these kinds of killings, the affected side having a political motive, grossly exaggerates the damage.

...and therein lies the problem with the link provided earlier.

One cannot claim the CIA lies about everything yet believe an unknown web site also will not lie. What is the agenda and who are they trying to bring down?

As the old saying goes...64.36% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

In some circles, arguing the body count from several thousand miles away, with a guy on the ground at the actual site, is considered defamation of the dead.

today's body count below.

Associated Press= PESHAWAR, Pakistan (AP) — Suspected U.S. unmanned aircraft fired six missiles at a vehicle in Pakistan's tribal region near the Afghan border Sunday, killing six alleged militants, Pakistani intelligence officials said.

Edited October 31, 2011 by Pakboong

[beechguy]

The Muslim radicals hate the West already and intend to bring it down. There is no "creating more hatred" and no turning it around. They are the enemy and have to be treated as such.

Fear mongering

If in fact the US/West is so worried about this threat from terrorist without navies/air force etc...

Then perhaps go home & protect it rather than constantly make new enemies. Try learn from 9-11

& adjust accordingly.

They are not the enemy as you think....Instead they are a source of income for those who profit

from these policing actions/invasions on foreign soil....All of which is the main reason this so called

war on terror started in the first place.

Go back & read OBL's manifesto & the reasons they felt compelled.

See that the reasons are not the lame excuse of they hate us for our freedoms rhetoric.

Instead it was due to our occupation of their holy lands.

This whole thing can stop if we as the aggressors let it be.

Or continue down this road & bankrupt ourselves as OBL said we would.....along with the thousands

of American lives we have already wasted & more to come on both sides.

It is no more a winnable war than Vietnam was.

What holy lands was the U.S. occupying when Al Qaeda was formed?

[flying]

What holy lands was the U.S. occupying when Al Qaeda was formed?

That info is pretty easy to find

Look at 1988 when they formed.

Look at how & why they formed.

Look at where they came from & whose lap dogs they use to be.

[flying]

...and therein lies the problem with the link provided earlier.

One cannot claim the CIA lies about everything yet believe an unknown web site also will not lie. What is the agenda and who are they trying to bring down?

As the old saying goes...64.36% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

Not really sure where you expect to go with this...

Zero count then?

Of the statistics that are made up on the spot....

Are you claiming certain sides make them all up or both sides?

Or do you mean things like when the CIA contractor Raymond Davis statistics changed from being a diplomat to a CIA contractor?

As for the link provided earlier....As I said in my post that provided the link I am not a regular reader of that site but it does seem to be used by many sectors for info.

But we are not to assume it is the only source of such info are we? We have seen footage & injured children/civilians on TV haven't we?

Sites such as the New York Times are they also suspect?

If so then again I ask.....Just those that claim injustices by the hands of the CIA are all in your opinion just telling stories then?

What would be your guess? A drone can fire 6 or more hellfire missiles at a house & do spot killing? Neighbors watching TV just say....hmmm what was that honey?

You once said you have kids....If it were they that died would you be as flippant?

Edited October 31, 2011 by flying

[Scott]

If you want to start a circular argument, the topic will be closed.

[johna]

These drone strikes are a disaster, the argument in their favor is they avoid US casualties.

Saeed Shah in Islamabad and Peter Beaumont guardian.co.uk,

"For every 10 to 15 people killed, maybe they get one militant," he said. "I don't go to count how many Taliban are killed. I go to count how many children, women, innocent people, are killed."

My link

[Scott]

Off-topic post deleted.

[Steely Dan]

I do find it interesting that many posters here seem more than willing to believe any source that gives a contrary view to the U.S government line, even when the sources they cite are more often than not merely internet opinion or conspiracy sites. This is especially ironic when Pakistan has a long history of journalists being murdered for not towing the party line.

Also in light of the self evident contempt for human life shown by the Pakistani regime, and sadly many of it's people I have to view the shrill complaints as to the humanitarian issue of drone attacks being a likely sign that they are actually having an effect on the people who they are intended to, this includes official Pakistani government protests in light of the obvious double game they are playing.

[Pakboong]

http://www.popsci.com/military-aviation-amp-space/article/2009-08/video-annotated-predator-drone-attack

I video feed for a standard predator drone attack in Afganistan.