After drone killings, pressure for a new hostage strategy

[Lite Beer]

After drone killings, pressure for a new hostage strategy
By MATTHEW LEE

WASHINGTON (AP) — The accidental killing of two hostages in a U.S. operation against al-Qaida has put a new spotlight on the Obama administration's reliance on drones in the battle against terrorism — and has also raised pressure on the White House to revise the nation's oft-criticized strategy for dealing with abducted Americans and their families.

A day after President Barack Obama apologized and took responsibility for the deaths of American Warren Weinstein and Italian Giovanni Lo Porto in a January strike along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, officials said Friday that a nearly yearlong, interagency review of the hostage policy is to be completed this spring.

White House press secretary Josh Earnest said the Obama administration is considering whether to create a "fusion cell" comprised of the FBI, Pentagon, State Department and intelligence community to ensure they are closely coordinating on rescue efforts and communication with families. The administration is seeking reaction to the idea from relatives of hostages, after several have complained about the government's response in the past.

"These families are in a terrible situation — unthinkable to imagine what it would be like to have a loved one, a family member, being held against their will by a terrorist organization," Earnest said.

The review won't affect the longstanding U.S. refusal to offer ransom or other concessions for the release of hostages. "Paying ransom or offering a concession to a terrorist organization may result in the saving of one innocent life, but could put countless other innocent lives at greater risk," Earnest said.

Obama ordered the review last summer as more Americans were abducted by the Islamic State group in Iraq and Syria and other militant groups, and hostage families and lawmakers criticized the response.

The families' anguish has been made worse by the fact that European governments routinely pay ransoms and their hostages are released unharmed. Meanwhile, kidnappers have killed several Americans, including Luke Somers, who was shot just as a U.S. rescue team was rushing to him.

"We've reached out to all of the hostage families to get their input," State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said of the 82 families and former American hostages taken since 2001. "We want it from them, to see how we can do better, because we understand they're the most important part of this."

On Thursday, Elaine Weinstein thanked her congressional delegation from Maryland and some in the FBI for their "relentless efforts to free my husband." But she also said, in a statement, "Unfortunately, the assistance we received from other elements of the U.S. government was inconsistent and disappointing over the course of three and a half years."

"We hope that my husband's death and the others who have faced similar tragedies in recent months will finally prompt the U.S. government to take its responsibilities seriously and establish a coordinated and consistent approach to supporting hostages and their families."

The administration review has involved consultations with hostage experts from the U.S. and other countries as well as interviews with about two dozen former hostages and family members who have received updates and provided feedback on initial proposals, according to a senior official. That official, who did not have authorization to speak on the record, commented only on condition of anonymity.

The National Counter Terrorism Center is leading the review.

Rep. Duncan Hunter, a California Republican, complained about a lack of government coordination between agencies.

"Warren Weinstein did not have to die," he said in a statement. "His death is further evidence of the failures in communication and coordination between government agencies tasked with recovering Americans in captivity — and the fact that he's dead, as a result, is absolutely tragic."

He said that in the lead-up to the trade of Taliban commanders for Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, a Pentagon official was developing plans to recover not just Bergdahl but all Western hostages believed held in the Afghanistan-Pakistan area, including Weinstein. Bergdahl was eventually traded in May 2014 for five former Taliban figures held at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay.

"Their planning did not include a 5 for 1 trade, as occurred, but rather a 1 for 7 exchange," Hunter said, but the plan never came to fruition.

The complaints echo those of the parents of James Foley, a freelance journalist kidnapped in Syria in November 2012 who last August was the first American to be executed by Islamic State militants. John and Diane Foley have said the government uses its policy of not paying ransom or negotiating with terrorists to avoid answering families' questions about the state of their loved ones. They said officials kept families in the dark.

"For one year, we didn't really know where he was or whether he was alive," John Foley said at a forum at the University of Arizona in February. "We had no one who was accountable for Jim, if you will," his wife, Diane, added.

Likewise, the family of kidnapped aid worker Kayla Mueller, who was killed in what Islamic State militants said was a Jordanian airstrike in February, has said government policies were contradictory and prevented her from being rescued.

Rep. John Delaney, a Democrat who represents the suburban Maryland area that includes the Weinsteins' home, has called for the creation of a "hostage czar" who would unify government efforts to free hostages and work with their families. "I feel like his country failed him in his greatest time of need," he said of his constituent.

He said he planned to introduce legislation in a month or so that would create a panel led by the czar — someone empowered to reach across agencies and coordinate efforts to find and retrieve U.S. citizens held hostage and be the primary liaison with families.

___

Associated Press writers Nedra Pickler, Brett Zongker and Deb Riechmann contributed to this report.

-- (c) Associated Press 2015-04-25

[Dannyboy666]

Do not feed this Filth, No Ransom, Keep the Drone Program, if you 're over there, it's your problem, Not Obamas...

[Credo]

I don't think there is a plan to drop the drone program, but there is a need for better identification of targets. Collateral damage has been a big problem. It will always be a problem with military action, but it needs to be minimized.

[Ulysses G.]

Some collateral damage is unavoidable in war and IMO, that is the case here. Rather than drop drones, we need to keep using them, but also grab some live terrorists for Intelligence from time to time.

[geriatrickid]

It is regrettable that hostages died, however, these hostages made the decision to go to a place where they faced certain danger .They were to a large extent the author of their own fates when they willingly chose to work in Pakistan. Both had a professed love of Pakistan. There intentions were good and they meant well. Unfortunately, common sense keeps outsiders away from the conflict zones where they were kidnapped. The Pakistanis receive enough aid money to pay their own nationals to work as aid workers. They don't need foreigners getting involved.

[boomerangutang]

Where's Chuck Norris or Sylvester Stallone when you need 'em? Oh, sorry, almost forgot, they lives in Fictionland.

How about this: apply a debilitating chemical (horse tranquilizer mist?) on the compound, go in there, rescue the good guys, shoot the bad guys.

[MaeJoMTB]

Why are Americans killing people on foreign soil?

No excuse at all.

First it was communists.

Now it's Muslims.

Totally unacceptable.

Edited April 25, 2015 by MaeJoMTB

[Dannyboy666]

Why are Americans killing people on foreign soil?

No excuse at all.

First it was communists.

Now it's Muslims.

Totally unacceptable.

so they don't soil our soil...

[Expat1]

No problem. The USG has it all worked. We won't deal with you terrorists, understand? However, we will come over and kill the hostages for you. Can you say cluster<deleted>? What bunch of RE<deleted>s.

[Lopchan]

Why are Americans killing people on foreign soil?

No excuse at all.

First it was communists.

Now it's Muslims.

Totally unacceptable.

^{so they don't soil our soil...}

Native American's would have the right to say "our soil". I bet that's what they were thinking when the US was colonized..."Here they come to soil our soil"

America aka the world police are the leaders when it comes to calling Invasion "preemptive strike" or Protecting OUR soil. Here's an idea..protect YOUR soil instead of fighting on the soil of someone else's country. FYSMTT!

[Credo]

Some of these fine terrorists are probably headed to a country near you. Of course, then you'll be upset that the US didn't take them out.

[boomerangutang]

Why are Americans killing people on foreign soil?

No excuse at all.

First it was communists. Now it's Muslims. Totally unacceptable.

So, after 9-11, Americans should have just made a complaint to the UN, or sat on their hands immersed in self-doubt.

Or after Iraq's take-over of Kuwait, Americans should have left it to the Arabs to sort it out?

Actually, the US is standing back on the impending imbroglio in the S.China Sea. I take a more aggressive stance on that: send in Filipino commandos. Have Uncle Sam standing nearby (if needed). Fils take back their off-shore territory. If the Chinese respond with military force, then ask the Americans to assist, which they will.

[Scott]

Off-topic, inflammatory and troll posts removed.

[arjunadawn]

Some collateral damage is unavoidable in war and IMO, that is the case here. Rather than drop drones, we need to keep using them, but also grab some live terrorists for Intelligence from time to time.

Regrettably, I actually wonder what calculus, if any, was applied with foreknowledge that the hostages were co-located/present? Outrageous? Preposterous? Maybe, but this president already kills American citizens, why is the question itself beyond the pale?

[Credo]

Some collateral damage is unavoidable in war and IMO, that is the case here. Rather than drop drones, we need to keep using them, but also grab some live terrorists for Intelligence from time to time.

Regrettably, I actually wonder what calculus, if any, was applied with foreknowledge that the hostages were co-located/present? Outrageous? Preposterous? Maybe, but this president already kills American citizens, why is the question itself beyond the pale?

Something the former resident of the WH didn't do, right?

[wabothai]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Some of these fine terrorists are probably headed to a country near you. Of course, then you'll be upset that the US didn't take them out.

no, I won't be upset, because I know better.

[Scott]

Off-topic post removed.

Please stay on topic.

[mania]

There is much more wrong with the whole Drone program than can justifiably be called right.

Starting at the very beginning with who decides what to strike & who they answer to or ever even inform of what they

plan to do or have done in the name of the USA

It is a large subject with much research already done.

If you like to read here are a few

Predator Empire: The Geopolitics of US Drone Warfare Ian G. R. Shaw a a School of Geographical and Earth Sciences , The University of Glasgow , Scotland Published online: 14 Jun 2013.

Drone Warfare: effective or counter-productive? Stefan Wolff, University of Birmingham

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF DRONE STRIKES IN COUNTERINSURGENCY AND COUNTERTERRORISM CAMPAIGNS James Igoe Walsh September 2013

Also the website Drone Wars UK has much information of not just the US drones but as the title suggests UK/British also

Bureau of Investigative Research's Covert Drone War web page also has many statistics etc.

Edited April 25, 2015 by mania

[boomerangutang]

I saw some drone footage on Youtube. It was an attack drone circling a town square in Afghanistan, middle afternoon. About 20 Taliban fighters were on the ground, with weapons, but didn't suspect there was a drone, because they weren't looking up. All looked casual on the ground, while the drone operator was asking permission to strike. It was only found out later, that two of the casualties were M.East press corps. What bothered me most was the drone attacked a 2nd time at the same site (a few minutes after the first strike), while a truck was loading wounded. The US military should not have attacked that p.u. truck, as it was plainly doing a red-crescent type of service, tho it wasn't marked as Red Crescent. It was found out later 2 little kids were in the back of the truck (hidden by hanging tarps) and, along with many others, were killed that day.

[ravip]

I saw some drone footage on Youtube. It was an attack drone circling a town square in Afghanistan, middle afternoon. About 20 Taliban fighters were on the ground, with weapons, but didn't suspect there was a drone, because they weren't looking up. All looked casual on the ground, while the drone operator was asking permission to strike. It was only found out later, that two of the casualties were M.East press corps. What bothered me most was the drone attacked a 2nd time at the same site (a few minutes after the first strike), while a truck was loading wounded. The US military should not have attacked that p.u. truck, as it was plainly doing a red-crescent type of service, tho it wasn't marked as Red Crescent. It was found out later 2 little kids were in the back of the truck (hidden by hanging tarps) and, along with many others, were killed that day.

Collateral damage.

Next

[tifino]

drones don't ask questions first...

[F430murci]

Why are Americans killing people on foreign soil?

No excuse at all.

First it was communists.

Now it's Muslims.

Totally unacceptable.

^{so they don't soil our soil...}

Native American's would have the right to say "our soil". I bet that's what they were thinking when the US was colonized..."Here they come to soil our soil"

America aka the world police are the leaders when it comes to calling Invasion "preemptive strike" or Protecting OUR soil. Here's an idea..protect YOUR soil instead of fighting on the soil of someone else's country. FYSMTT!

Lol at the historical obsession of our soil, their soil, his soil, her soil . . . Like it or not, we own the land we live on NOW. Obsess or complain all you want about what happened 100s of years ago, but it won't change anything.

Like it or not, we will protect our families, our possessions and our interests here in the US. You can bellyache and get all worked up all you want, but that will not change anything except your blood pressure or serenity. Drones are here to stay and will become a larger and larger part of our defense as time goes by. Drones are economical, save lives and keep good men and women out of harms way on a large scale.

Preemptive strikes on others' soil are here to stay because of the miserable nut cases in the world that fail in life and want only to cause harm to those that have not failed in life. Misery loves company and too many miserable fools in this world want to create misery in the lives of those that work hard and live right. Ain't gonna happen anymore.

You wanna run around in bed sheets, wielding swords, chopping off heads, raping women, stoning women, creating terror, plotting terrorists acts against innocent people in other countries and acting like fools . . . cool. That's your choice, but you better keep and eye to the sky.

[OMGImInPattaya]

What...killing American held hostages isn't a winning national security or political strategy?

[NeverSure]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Some of these fine terrorists are probably headed to a country near you. Of course, then you'll be upset that the US didn't take them out.

no, I won't be upset, because I know better.

You're sure about that. Would you be from one of those countries which is being overrun by Muslims who are out breeding the traditional citizens while demanding financial support, "political correctness" and international unity?

Some countries just have to be politically correct and almost worse, cave in to unelected bodies which tell them what they must do.

Some don't do that.

[NeverSure]

What...killing American held hostages isn't a winning national security or political strategy?

You'll have to ask Obama and the Obama lovers. He's the Commander In Chief of the entire US Military. (How did some guy with no military experience whatsoever get that job?)

[NeverSure]

Here's a poorly kept secret.

[simple1]

Here's a poorly kept secret.

No attempt at secrecy, has previously been reported in the media, including the source beloved by some, Fox News.

Edited April 25, 2015 by simple1

[Loptr]

Some collateral damage is unavoidable in war and IMO, that is the case here. Rather than drop drones, we need to keep using them, but also grab some live terrorists for Intelligence from time to time.

But therein lies the rub UG, the US has not declared war on anyone since the end of WWII... What some view as collateral damage due to military operations in the best interest of the US are viewed as terrorist attacks by those on the receiving end of a hellfire missile... Much like his predecessor, Obama is being called a war criminal for his unilateral, covert assassinations in foreign countries...

[NeverSure]

Much like his predecessor, Obama is being called a war criminal for his unilateral, covert assassinations in foreign countries...

Who's going to prosecute him, LOL. Are they calling for the prosecution of people in the UK who did the same thing? Are they calling for the prosecution of France which led the attack on Libya? Are they calling for the prosecution of all 22 countries including Canada, Australia and the UK which attacked Iraq when Saddam was taken out?

"Some people" can get pretty damned hypocritical, don't you know?

[Dannyboy666]

I saw some drone footage on Youtube. It was an attack drone circling a town square in Afghanistan, middle afternoon. About 20 Taliban fighters were on the ground, with weapons, but didn't suspect there was a drone, because they weren't looking up. All looked casual on the ground, while the drone operator was asking permission to strike. It was only found out later, that two of the casualties were M.East press corps. What bothered me most was the drone attacked a 2nd time at the same site (a few minutes after the first strike), while a truck was loading wounded. The US military should not have attacked that p.u. truck, as it was plainly doing a red-crescent type of service, tho it wasn't marked as Red Crescent. It was found out later 2 little kids were in the back of the truck (hidden by hanging tarps) and, along with many others, were killed that day.[/quo. They use Civilians as Sheilds, No Cross , No Cresent Fair Game, Fire with Fire