U.s. Drone Kills 4 Suspected Militants In Pakistan's Tribal Region

[News_Editor]

U.S. drone kills 4 suspected militants in Pakistan's tribal region < br />

2012-12-30 09:37:04 GMT+7 (ICT)

MIRANSHAH, PAKISTAN (BNO NEWS) -- A U.S. drone strike struck a suspected militant compound in Pakistan's volatile tribal region on Friday, killing at least four suspected militants and injuring two others, Pakistani intelligence officials said on Saturday. There were no reports of civilian casualties.

The unmanned U.S. drone fired at least two missiles at a suspected militant hideout in the town of Shiwal in the Shawal Tehsil area, located about 50 kilometers (31 miles) southwest of Miranshah, the main town of Pakistan's volatile North Waziristan tribal area, which is also near the Afghan border.

Pakistani intelligence officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said the compound was being used by militants. "There were several missiles that were fired by the American drone and the house was completely destroyed. Four badly burned bodies were found but we don't know their identities," one official said.

Two suspected militants were also wounded in the drone strike, but their affiliation was not immediately known.

In June, al-Qaeda deputy leader Abu Yahya al-Libi was killed when an unmanned U.S. drone fired at least two missiles at a compound and a nearby pickup truck in the village of Hesokhel, located in the Mir Ali district just east of Miranshah. It was the most serious blow to al-Qaeda since U.S. Navy SEALs killed Osama bin Laden during a secret military operation in the Pakistani city of Abbotabad in May 2011.

Pakistani officials have repeatedly described the U.S. drone attacks as illegal. Pakistani President Asif Zardari has expressed the need to establish alternative security operations to the drone strikes, but U.S. officials have indicated that they will continue to carry out drone strikes to take out militants.

Few details about casualties from the strikes are usually available, but allegations of civilian casualties regularly spark protests in Pakistan. According to the Washington-based think tank New America Foundation, as many as 2,680 individuals were killed as a result of U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan between 2004 and early 2012.

In January, U.S. President Barack Obama, for the first time during his presidency, publicly acknowledged that U.S. drones regularly strike suspected militants along the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. He confirmed that many of these strikes are carried out in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) of Pakistan, targeting al-Qaeda and Taliban suspects in tough terrain.

The U.S. considers the Pakistan-Afghan border to be the most dangerous place on Earth. The area is known to be a stronghold of the Taliban-affiliated Haqqani Network, which is one of the top terrorist organizations and threats to U.S.-led forces in Afghanistan.

But controversy has surrounded the drone strikes as local residents and officials have blamed them for killing innocent civilians and motivating young men to join the Taliban. Details about the alleged militants are usually not provided, and the U.S. government does not comment on the strikes.

-- © BNO News All rights reserved 2012-12-30

[maidu]

Message to friends and family of Taliban/Al Qaeda militants: don't hang around with them. ...could be hazardous to your health.

Message to lieutenants in Taliban and Al Qaeda: think twice before accepting that promotion.

[Potosi]

Suspected militants? So the suspicion is enough for the death penalty, and if the airstrike causes collateral damage, so be it? For those who get goose bumps just reading the words 'Pakistan tribal region', note that this is one of the freest places in the world.

[Lantern]

Suspected militants? So the suspicion is enough for the death penalty, and if the airstrike causes collateral damage, so be it?

Very worrying isn't it. Think someone has been reading to many Judge Dredd comics!

[maidu]

It's like a slow-paced war. In war, you don't knock on your enemies' doors and ask for ID, and then read them Miranda, and then tell them there might be a mlssile with their name on it, streaking silently out of the sky, in the next hour or so.

As I said earlier, if anyone is in a family with, or friends with an terrorist, it's best to stay far away from that person. What can ensue is worse than a bad-hair day.

[maidu]

Suspected militants? So the suspicion is enough for the death penalty, and if the airstrike causes collateral damage, so be it? For those who get goose bumps just reading the words 'Pakistan tribal region', note that this is one of the freest places in the world.

Free in what way? There are several adjectives I could venture for that miserable part of the world. 'Free' is not one of them. Females are treated worse than dirt. Girls are forbidden from going to school, .....the list goes on.....

I just clicked the link you posted. It's a Michael Palin flick about the Khyber Pass. I'm a big fan of Palin and have read/watched much of his stuff. I still don't get the use of the word 'freest' in relation to that part of the world. Maybe you mean it in the sense of 'lawless' of 'never been tamed.' ....that would fit.

Edited December 30, 2012 by maidu

[FDog]

It's like a slow-paced war. In war, you don't knock on your enemies' doors and ask for ID, and then read them Miranda, and then tell them there might be a mlssile with their name on it, streaking silently out of the sky, in the next hour or so.

As I said earlier, if anyone is in a family with, or friends with an terrorist, it's best to stay far away from that person. What can ensue is worse than a bad-hair day.

Suspected terrorist.

I believe that term is used for any adult they kill over there.

[Beechboy]

Well let's pull out then and let the Taliban take over and stifle Afghan society as they did before. Women confined to their homes and regularly raped and beaten or when taken out having to sit in the boot (trunk?) of the car. People parading football grounds with sticks beating anybody who cheered and public executions of adulterers at half time (they buried them upto their heads and stoned them to death by the way.) Woe betide anybody who played music that could mean a summary execution..

Then eventually they will take over Pakistan and have the nuclear capability to threaten us all. That is their aim.

Drone the b's to the last man standing. They are medieval-minded barbarians and hypocrites to boot.

The loss of young men's lives fighting out there is awful, the alternative is a hundred times worse. The loss of innocent civilians is also awful but I seem to remember us Brits losing thousands when Adolf deliberately aimed his bombers at our cities. Then we did the same to them. Evil causes evil.

If you don't believe me about the Taliban read "The Kite Runner."

Edited December 30, 2012 by Beechboy

[FDog]

Who said they were Taliban?

They are suspected terrorists.

[Potosi]

Well let's pull out then and let the Taliban take over and stifle Afghan society as they did before. Women confined to their homes and regularly raped and beaten or when taken out having to sit in the boot (trunk?) of the car. People parading football grounds with sticks beating anybody who cheered and public executions of adulterers at half time (they buried them upto their heads and stoned them to death by the way.) Woe betide anybody who played music that could mean a summary execution..

Then eventually they will take over Pakistan and have the nuclear capability to threaten us all. That is their aim.

Drone the b's to the last man standing. They are medieval-minded barbarians and hypocrites to boot.

The loss of young men's lives fighting out there is awful, the alternative is a hundred times worse. The loss of innocent civilians is also awful but I seem to remember us Brits losing thousands when Adolf deliberately aimed his bombers at our cities. Then we did the same to them. Evil causes evil.

If you don't believe me about the Taliban read "The Kite Runner."

Did you want to post in this thread because you hurl unrelated terms like Afghanistan, and Taliban, and Adolf? Good you mention him, he let 200,000 Britons escape at Dunkirk, and proposed peace to UK immediately afterwards. All in all over 20 peace proposals, all of them turned down by Churchill. Please work on your education, we are not Taliban who believe in dogma, but Europeans eager for facts. Pakistan already is a 'Islamic Republic', the fundamentalists are in power and have nucular weapons.

Funny to name the people killed 'terrorists', while their killers used the ultimate weapon of terror, drones.

[Bwanatickey]

The first casualty of war is the truth. A saying that goes back a long time ago. Very appropriate for today.

[Beechboy]

Well let's pull out then and let the Taliban take over and stifle Afghan society as they did before. Women confined to their homes and regularly raped and beaten or when taken out having to sit in the boot (trunk?) of the car. People parading football grounds with sticks beating anybody who cheered and public executions of adulterers at half time (they buried them upto their heads and stoned them to death by the way.) Woe betide anybody who played music that could mean a summary execution..

Then eventually they will take over Pakistan and have the nuclear capability to threaten us all. That is their aim.

Drone the b's to the last man standing. They are medieval-minded barbarians and hypocrites to boot.

The loss of young men's lives fighting out there is awful, the alternative is a hundred times worse. The loss of innocent civilians is also awful but I seem to remember us Brits losing thousands when Adolf deliberately aimed his bombers at our cities. Then we did the same to them. Evil causes evil.

If you don't believe me about the Taliban read "The Kite Runner."

Did you want to post in this thread because you hurl unrelated terms like Afghanistan, and Taliban, and Adolf? Good you mention him, he let 200,000 Britons escape at Dunkirk, and proposed peace to UK immediately afterwards. All in all over 20 peace proposals, all of them turned down by Churchill. Please work on your education, we are not Taliban who believe in dogma, but Europeans eager for facts. Pakistan already is a 'Islamic Republic', the fundamentalists are in power and have nucular weapons.

Funny to name the people killed 'terrorists', while their killers used the ultimate weapon of terror, drones.

The mention of Afghanistan was totally relevant. This whole business in the tribal borders is spreading from there.

Read my post again. Was anything inaccurate? Did Adolf not order the bombing of British civilians?

You don't agree with me, I don't agree with you. Terrorists? My bum, they are Taliban. Who else would they be? Please fill me in with your superior knowledge.

Whatever. If we pulled our boys out the Taliban would take control again and my scenario would be for real.

By the way drones are not the ultimate weapon of terror, the nuclear bomb is.

You have also made the mistake of confusing a conventional "Muslimist Republic" with the excessively extreme Taliban. Miles and miles apart.

Read the Kite Runner.

Edited December 30, 2012 by Beechboy

[Scott]

Please stay on topic (which isn't about WWII) and please be civil.

[maidu]

Who said they were Taliban? They are suspected terrorists.

I say they're Taliban. US intelligence gathering is among the best in the world, particularly with 'eye in the sky' tech. They can see weapons being taken out of the trunk of a car, and other things we won't know about. US methods of ID'ing targets is very different than the Taliban's. If they're not Taliban, they're likely Al Qaeda, or very possibly active sympathisers or wannabe-terrortist punks. Look at young men in the Middle East, and you'll see hordes of frustrated, testosterone riven, unemployed men with nearly no chance of sex (with a female) or marriage. For many, being a terrorist is cool and might get them some pocket money and notoreity. They've got their religion, but look at the underpinnings of it (if in doubt, read up on Ayotallah Komeini's pearls of wisdom).

Killing terrorists is not like arresting someone in the US and escorting them through 'due process' of law. It's about killing enemies before they kill you (and scores of innocents in markets, weddings, etc) - by whatever means. Pakistan is also suffering gravely from terrorism, particularly with their soldiers killed on a weekly basis. Their top authorities know that, and want to snuff out the Taliban and Al Qaeda, but the authorities know they have to put on a different face for 'hate Americans' public. So, the Pakis leave it mostly up to the US to kill the bad guys, because the US does it more effectively.

[simple1]

In Pakistan the greatest threat is the Pakistani Taliban (Sunni) who are attacking Shiites to provoke a civil war to destabilize the government. Very similar tactics to Al Qaeda in Iraq. If their ever was a serious credible prospect of the Pakistani nuclear weapons and material getting in the hands of the extremists you can guarantee that India will take action.

[FDog]

Who said they were Taliban? They are suspected terrorists.

I say they're Taliban. US intelligence gathering is among the best in the world, particularly with 'eye in the sky' tech. They can see weapons being taken out of the trunk of a car, and other things we won't know about. US methods of ID'ing targets is very different than the Taliban's. If they're not Taliban, they're likely Al Qaeda, or very possibly active sympathisers or wannabe-terrortist punks. Look at young men in the Middle East, and you'll see hordes of frustrated, testosterone riven, unemployed men with nearly no chance of sex (with a female) or marriage. For many, being a terrorist is cool and might get them some pocket money and notoreity. They've got their religion, but look at the underpinnings of it (if in doubt, read up on Ayotallah Komeini's pearls of wisdom).

Killing terrorists is not like arresting someone in the US and escorting them through 'due process' of law. It's about killing enemies before they kill you (and scores of innocents in markets, weddings, etc) - by whatever means. Pakistan is also suffering gravely from terrorism, particularly with their soldiers killed on a weekly basis. Their top authorities know that, and want to snuff out the Taliban and Al Qaeda, but the authorities know they have to put on a different face for 'hate Americans' public. So, the Pakis leave it mostly up to the US to kill the bad guys, because the US does it more effectively.

YOU say they are Taliban, well it must be true then.

Even though the US, whose intelliigence gathering is the best in the world, as you say, doesn't say that. They say they are suspected terrorists.

[maidu]

Who said they were Taliban? They are suspected terrorists.

I say they're Taliban. US intelligence gathering is among the best in the world, particularly with 'eye in the sky' tech. They can see weapons being taken out of the trunk of a car, and other things we won't know about. US methods of ID'ing targets is very different than the Taliban's. If they're not Taliban, they're likely Al Qaeda, or very possibly active sympathisers or wannabe-terrortist punks. Look at young men in the Middle East, and you'll see hordes of frustrated, testosterone riven, unemployed men with nearly no chance of sex (with a female) or marriage. For many, being a terrorist is cool and might get them some pocket money and notoreity. They've got their religion, but look at the underpinnings of it (if in doubt, read up on Ayotallah Komeini's pearls of wisdom).

Killing terrorists is not like arresting someone in the US and escorting them through 'due process' of law. It's about killing enemies before they kill you (and scores of innocents in markets, weddings, etc) - by whatever means. Pakistan is also suffering gravely from terrorism, particularly with their soldiers killed on a weekly basis. Their top authorities know that, and want to snuff out the Taliban and Al Qaeda, but the authorities know they have to put on a different face for 'hate Americans' public. So, the Pakis leave it mostly up to the US to kill the bad guys, because the US does it more effectively.

YOU say they are Taliban, well it must be true then.

Even though the US, whose intelliigence gathering is the best in the world, as you say, doesn't say that. They say they are suspected terrorists.

Bad territory to be a 'suspected terrorist.' The US has all sorts of odd terms they use (collateral damage, assets, disappeared, et. al.) and a hundred acronyms. A terrorist by any other name would be as much in danger of a silent heartless missile shooting down from the sky.

[Hedghog]

If they find out it was a mistaken identity.

Then it will be called.

A regrettable friendly fire incident.

[mccw]

Well let's pull out then and let the Taliban take over and stifle Afghan society as they did before. Women confined to their homes and regularly raped and beaten or when taken out having to sit in the boot (trunk?) of the car. People parading football grounds with sticks beating anybody who cheered and public executions of adulterers at half time (they buried them upto their heads and stoned them to death by the way.) Woe betide anybody who played music that could mean a summary execution..

Then eventually they will take over Pakistan and have the nuclear capability to threaten us all. That is their aim.

Drone the b's to the last man standing. They are medieval-minded barbarians and hypocrites to boot.

The loss of young men's lives fighting out there is awful, the alternative is a hundred times worse. The loss of innocent civilians is also awful but I seem to remember us Brits losing thousands when Adolf deliberately aimed his bombers at our cities. Then we did the same to them. Evil causes evil.

If you don't believe me about the Taliban read "The Kite Runner."

Your right. But they will take over. The West has done a deal with the devil, the Wahhabi Sunni extreemists are bank roled by the Saudis across the Muslim world. All the Arab uprisings wich have been supported are Sunnis coming to power and imposing Islamic laws. The protest/ attempted revolutions by shia against sunni have been largely unreported by western media and allowed to be squashed with no comment. They will take Siria , then Iran and try for Pakistan maybe even also. The west is happy with this so long as they get the resources + its a good excuse to squash civil liberties and freedoms at home + the string pulling power behind the democratic front of western government get to enrich themselves from all the war spending, through all the taxes and borrowing coming through the arms industry and banks. The whole show from the beginning has been a well staged theatre to advance the interests of a small group of elite.

Edited December 31, 2012 by mccw

[Scott]

Off-topic posts deleted. Please stay on the topic of this thread.

[simple1]

Well let's pull out then and let the Taliban take over and stifle Afghan society as they did before. Women confined to their homes and regularly raped and beaten or when taken out having to sit in the boot (trunk?) of the car. People parading football grounds with sticks beating anybody who cheered and public executions of adulterers at half time (they buried them upto their heads and stoned them to death by the way.) Woe betide anybody who played music that could mean a summary execution..

Then eventually they will take over Pakistan and have the nuclear capability to threaten us all. That is their aim.

Drone the b's to the last man standing. They are medieval-minded barbarians and hypocrites to boot.

The loss of young men's lives fighting out there is awful, the alternative is a hundred times worse. The loss of innocent civilians is also awful but I seem to remember us Brits losing thousands when Adolf deliberately aimed his bombers at our cities. Then we did the same to them. Evil causes evil.

If you don't believe me about the Taliban read "The Kite Runner."

Your right. But they will take over. The West has done a deal with the devil, the Wahhabi Sunni extreemists are bank roled by the Saudis across the Muslim world. All the Arab uprisings wich have been supported are Sunnis coming to power and imposing Islamic laws. The protest/ attempted revolutions by shia against sunni have been largely unreported by western media and allowed to be squashed with no comment. They will take Siria , then Iran and try for Pakistan maybe even also. The west is happy with this so long as they get the resources + its a good excuse to squash civil liberties and freedoms at home + the string pulling power behind the democratic front of western government get to enrich themselves from all the war spending, through all the taxes and borrowing coming through the arms industry and banks. The whole show from the beginning has been a well staged theatre to advance the interests of a small group of elite.

Algeria, Iraq, Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, all with Sunni majority populations, were ruled by Sunni dictators. Previously Iraq with a Sunni dictator with a Shiite majority, now primarily governed by Shiites.. Syria is currently ruled by a Shiite minority dictatorship. Iran 80%+ Shiite & supporting the Syrian Shiite dictatorship, rumours that Iraq is also supporting the Syrian Shiite dictatorship. There is plenty of reporting on both Sunni & Shiite extremist sectarian killings in their mutual desire to obtain power. Saudi Arabia and Qatar are the main providers supporting the "rebels" in the Syrian civil war, encouraged by the USA. Turkey is a majority Sunni state, a member of NATO and currently a "moderate" government.

Pakistan is majority Sunni, but the Pakistani Taliban (Sunni) are trying to generate a civil war to destablise the government and gain access to power sharing by sectarian killings of the minority Shiites and Pakistani military & police.

I disagree that the West is "happy" with this current state of affairs as it creates strategic threats to energy supplies and international trade. Regional security threats with the potential flow on effect of yet more billions of dollars supporting intervention would be the last thing Western government would be wanting.

Edited December 31, 2012 by simple1

[OzMick]

Who said they were Taliban?

They are suspected terrorists.

No, they WERE suspected terrorists.

[Exsexyman]

Who said they were Taliban? They are suspected terrorists.

I say they're Taliban. US intelligence gathering is among the best in the world, particularly with 'eye in the sky' tech. They can see weapons being taken out of the trunk of a car, and other things we won't know about. US methods of ID'ing targets is very different than the Taliban's. If they're not Taliban, they're likely Al Qaeda, or very possibly active sympathisers or wannabe-terrortist punks. Look at young men in the Middle East, and you'll see hordes of frustrated, testosterone riven, unemployed men with nearly no chance of sex (with a female) or marriage. For many, being a terrorist is cool and might get them some pocket money and notoreity. They've got their religion, but look at the underpinnings of it (if in doubt, read up on Ayotallah Komeini's pearls of wisdom).

Killing terrorists is not like arresting someone in the US and escorting them through 'due process' of law. It's about killing enemies before they kill you (and scores of innocents in markets, weddings, etc) - by whatever means. Pakistan is also suffering gravely from terrorism, particularly with their soldiers killed on a weekly basis. Their top authorities know that, and want to snuff out the Taliban and Al Qaeda, but the authorities know they have to put on a different face for 'hate Americans' public. So, the Pakis leave it mostly up to the US to kill the bad guys, because the US does it more effectively.

When you talk of "Terrorists" killing people on a regular basis at wedding parties etc you conveniently ignore the fact that US drones do a very good job themselves killing "scores of innocents" at these wedding parties, young children collecting firewood etc on a regular basis. I have lost count of the number of times we see apologies offered by the US authorities for these killings, promises of an inquiry, then nothing until the next "unfortunate accident". As for the rest of your post with references to "Pakis, wannabe terrorist punks, hordes of frustrated, testosterone riven men with no chance of sex ,(with a woman), it is mostly a load of racist, paranoid drivel.

[maidu]

As for the rest of your post with references to "Pakis, wannabe terrorist punks, hordes of frustrated, testosterone riven men with no chance of sex ,(with a woman), it is mostly a load of racist, paranoid drivel.

Call it what you want, but it's the nicest way I could put it. As soon as they stand up and act like decent people - I'll be the first to welcome them. I've got Islamist friends here in Chiang Rai., Two Islamists work with me directly. They're fine, except when they digress to mentioning Zionists ('"grumble, grumble"). We quickly switch to a sunnier subject. It's the extremists bent on harming innocents that I have a problem with. I've read Ayatollah Komeini's dictates, which are very influential to tens of millions of Muslims. Here's an excerpt: :""A man can have sexual pleasure from a child as young as a baby. However, he should not penetrate. If he penetrates and the child is harmed then he should be responsible for her subsistence all her life. This girl, however would not count as one of his four permanent wives. The man will not be eligible to marry the girl's sister."

With spiritual leaders like that, no wonder so many people are messed up (confused, insecure, angry, vengeful) in that part of the world.

[uptheos]

To those who object to the drone strike, exactly how would you deal with 'suspected terrorists', assuming of course you'd rather they be dealt with than lose them?

Subpoena them to appear at court?

[koheesti]

I have zero problem with drone strikes killing suspected terrorists. I wouldn't mind a little more info in the reporting as to what makes them suspected in the first place though.

[simple1]

As for the rest of your post with references to "Pakis, wannabe terrorist punks, hordes of frustrated, testosterone riven men with no chance of sex ,(with a woman), it is mostly a load of racist, paranoid drivel.

Call it what you want, but it's the nicest way I could put it. As soon as they stand up and act like decent people - I'll be the first to welcome them. I've got Islamist friends here in Chiang Rai., Two Islamists work with me directly. They're fine, except when they digress to mentioning Zionists ('"grumble, grumble"). We quickly switch to a sunnier subject. It's the extremists bent on harming innocents that I have a problem with. I've read Ayatollah Komeini's dictates, which are very influential to tens of millions of Muslims. Here's an excerpt: :""A man can have sexual pleasure from a child as young as a baby. However, he should not penetrate. If he penetrates and the child is harmed then he should be responsible for her subsistence all her life. This girl, however would not count as one of his four permanent wives. The man will not be eligible to marry the girl's sister."

With spiritual leaders like that, no wonder so many people are messed up (confused, insecure, angry, vengeful) in that part of the world.

It's fair to say that Khomeini was a sociopath. I would not call him a religious leader, but a barbarous dictator full of hate and revenge. He had tortured and killed thousands who had even the slightest opposition to him or his regeime. He was totally focused on power, religion was just a screen. Remember during the Iran/Iraq war he had school kids running across the mine fields to clear them for the combat infantry.

Edited December 31, 2012 by simple1

[maidu]

It's fair to say that Khomeini was a sociopath. I would not call him a religious leader, but a barbarous dictator full of hate and revenge. He had tortured and killed thousands who had even the slightest opposition to him or his regeime. He was totally focused on power, religion was just a screen. Remember during the Iran/Iraq war he had school kids running across the mine fields to clear them for the combat infantry.

You and I and other reasonable people can see him for the screwball he was. Still, the fact remains he's effectively worshiped by large numbers of Shi'ites in Iran. It helps explain why Iran remains run their scary crew. Iranian head honchos wouldn't even allow females to celebrate their country's entry in to the World Cup competition. Its leaders are treading closer to nuclear war with each passing day.

[mccw]

As for the rest of your post with references to "Pakis, wannabe terrorist punks, hordes of frustrated, testosterone riven men with no chance of sex ,(with a woman), it is mostly a load of racist, paranoid drivel.

Call it what you want, but it's the nicest way I could put it. As soon as they stand up and act like decent people - I'll be the first to welcome them. I've got Islamist friends here in Chiang Rai., Two Islamists work with me directly. They're fine, except when they digress to mentioning Zionists ('"grumble, grumble"). We quickly switch to a sunnier subject. It's the extremists bent on harming innocents that I have a problem with. I've read Ayatollah Komeini's dictates, which are very influential to tens of millions of Muslims. Here's an excerpt: :""A man can have sexual pleasure from a child as young as a baby. However, he should not penetrate. If he penetrates and the child is harmed then he should be responsible for her subsistence all her life. This girl, however would not count as one of his four permanent wives. The man will not be eligible to marry the girl's sister."

With spiritual leaders like that, no wonder so many people are messed up (confused, insecure, angry, vengeful) in that part of the world.

Sick; but then Muhammad was a pedo too so no surprise really.

On the subject of uprisings. They have replaced largely secular regiemes with Islamic ones. Weakened states more easily manipulated and controlled. Divide and conquer etc. West has history of supporting what ever evil scum is happy to play thier economic game. Today it is the Islamic extreemists.

Sure they still need to kill the terrorists to keep them in thier box and yes they are dangerous lunatics but clearly west is playing both sides of the game, using the extreemist to destabilise countries to meet geo political goals.

[maidu]

Terrorists, whether suspected or verified, should add an added minute to their prayers each day, to thank the American military for only using a tiny modicum of their military might to target them. I wouldn't doubt there are more than a few Americans who wouldn't mind seeing convoys of military doing blanket sweeps through Wawiristan (or what whatever ...Stan), with trained dogs and flame throwers, similar to how they mopped up Japanese resistance at Iwo Jima in WWII. I bet Paki leaders wouldn't mind seeing that either, but of course they can't admit to it.