UN calls for drone strike investigation

[VolsByNature]

UN report calls for independent investigations of drone attacks | World news | theguardian.com

A report by the United Nations Human Rights Council has called for independent investigations to be carried out into drone attacks after a series of strikes that result in unexpected civilian deaths in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and elsewhere. Most of the attacks involved US drones

It bothers me when the UN will call for investigations of something so barbaric, before the taxpayers would.

 

[hog88]

If I were POTUS my response to the UN would be:

:finger3:

 

[Burhead]

UN report calls for independent investigations of drone attacks | World news | theguardian.com



It bothers me when the UN will call for investigations of something so barbaric, before the taxpayers would.

Wish our politicians would have some backbone and demand investigations as well.

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

The UN should watch their back now for sure or they may be next.

 

[hog88]

Get out of the UN and quit giving them money! Useless organization.

 

[Velo Vol]

It bothers me when the UN will call for investigations of something so barbaric, before the taxpayers would.

Most Americans don't care. Out of sight, out of mind.

 

[lawgator1]

Funny how, when drones trikes were used under Bush administration GOPers said either nothing or that such strikes were a necessary part of the War on Terror, but under Obama they are barbaric and there need to be investigations.

 

[Burhead]

Funny how, when drones trikes were used under Bush administration GOPers said either nothing or that such strikes were a necessary part of the War on Terror, but under Obama they are barbaric and there need to be investigations.

I was opposed to them just as equally but don't let that get in the way of your crusade.

 

[hog88]

Funny how, when drones trikes were used under Bush administration GOPers said either nothing or that such strikes were a necessary part of the War on Terror, but under Obama they are barbaric and there need to be investigations.

I didn't care then and don't care now. So another LG theory down the drain.

 

[AirVol]

Most Americans don't care. Out of sight, out of mind.

Velo, you need one of these.

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

Ya'll know it's much better to use conventional weapons such as tanks, bayonet rifles, dumb bombs, pistols, machetes etc...they are, of course, much more humane?

 

[Burhead]

Ya'll know it's much better to use conventional weapons such as tanks, bayonet rifles, dumb bombs, pistols, machetes etc...they are, of course, much more humane?

Or, you know, actually follow the Constitution...

 

[Velo Vol]

Funny how, when drones trikes were used under Bush administration GOPers said either nothing or that such strikes were a necessary part of the War on Terror, but under Obama they are barbaric and there need to be investigations.

I don't much about them from anyone.

When was the last time you saw a TV news reporter at the scene of a drone strike?

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

Or, you know, actually follow the Constitution...

we have one of those?

 

[FLVOL69]

we have one of those?

$

 

[AirVol]

Or, you know, actually follow the Constitution...

Obozo wiped his a$$ with it back in '08. Hadn't seen it since.

 

[Burhead]

we have one of those?

We used too before both parties butchered it.

 

[lawgator1]

I don't much about them from anyone.

When was the last time you saw a TV news reporter at the scene of a drone strike?

There is almost no discussion in the media of individual strikes. I imagine that is due to a combination of remoteness of where they occur and security classification. We don't know much more than the basic numbers.

But that was the case under Bush, too.

And yet you occasionally have some GOP yahoo rep trying to make a name for himself expressing some vague outrage about it and wanting committee hearings (so he can be on Fox criticizing Obama). Its pretty humorous at this point the extent to which they will go to get their mugs on tv.

 

[hog88]

There is almost no discussion in the media of individual strikes. I imagine that is due to a combination of remoteness of where they occur and security classification. We don't know much more than the basic numbers.

But that was the case under Bush, too.

And yet you occasionally have some GOP yahoo rep trying to make a name for himself expressing some vague outrage about it and wanting committee hearings (so he can be on Fox criticizing Obama). Its pretty humorous at this point the extent to which they will go to get their mugs on tv.

Is that all you got? How long you going to ride that horse? Should the "GOPers" start condemning Dems for Slavery?

 

[FLVOL69]

There is almost no discussion in the media of individual strikes. I imagine that is due to a combination of remoteness of where they occur and security classification. We don't know much more than the basic numbers.

But that was the case under Bush, too.

And yet you occasionally have some GOP yahoo rep trying to make a name for himself expressing some vague outrage about it and wanting committee hearings (so he can be on Fox criticizing Obama). Its pretty humorous at this point the extent to which they will go to get their mugs on tv.

I don't recall bush killing American citizens with drone strikes either.

 

[AirVol]

There is almost no discussion in the media of individual strikes. I imagine that is due to a combination of remoteness of where they occur and security classification. We don't know much more than the basic numbers.

But that was the case under Bush, too.

And yet you occasionally have some GOP yahoo rep trying to make a name for himself expressing some vague outrage about it and wanting committee hearings (so he can be on Fox criticizing Obama). Its pretty humorous at this point the extent to which they will go to get their mugs on tv.

That's because the media knows it's wrong and they sure as hell won't tell everybody that "his Holiness" is approving the killing of innocent civilians.

 

[Velo Vol]

We used too before both parties butchered it.

Been engaged in shadow wars for a long time.

And yet you occasionally have some GOP yahoo rep trying to make a name for himself expressing some vague outrage about it and wanting committee hearings (so he can be on Fox criticizing Obama).

Maybe (I don't watch Fox) but they never get enough traction to rise to any national discourse on whether or not we should be doing such strikes.

 

[volinbham]

I have zero respect for the UN but I do agree with most in here that the issue of drones should be debated.

 

[utvolpj]

Amazing that the same people claiming Bush was the worst ever sure do seem to like claiming Obama is just like him.

Killing innocent civilians should always be investigated by the US. Sad we have to wait for cries from the UN

 

[volinbham]

There is almost no discussion in the media of individual strikes. I imagine that is due to a combination of remoteness of where they occur and security classification. We don't know much more than the basic numbers.

But that was the case under Bush, too.

And yet you occasionally have some GOP yahoo rep trying to make a name for himself expressing some vague outrage about it and wanting committee hearings (so he can be on Fox criticizing Obama). Its pretty humorous at this point the extent to which they will go to get their mugs on tv.

Sorry to interrupt your rant.

Under Obama, an emerging global apparatus for drone killing - The Washington Post

In the space of three years, the administration has built an extensive apparatus for using drones to carry out targeted killings of suspected terrorists and stealth surveillance of other adversaries. The apparatus involves dozens of secret facilities, including two operational hubs on the East Coast, virtual Air Force* *cockpits in the Southwest and clandestine bases in at least six countries on two continents.

Other commanders in chief have presided over wars with far higher casualty counts. But no president has ever relied so extensively on the secret killing of individuals to advance the nation’s security goals.

When Obama was sworn into office in 2009, the nation’s clandestine drone war was confined to a single country, Pakistan, where 44 strikes over five years had left about 400 people dead, according to the New America Foundation. The number of strikes has since soared to nearly 240, and the number of those killed, according to conservative estimates, has more than quadrupled.

The escalation of the lethal drone campaign under Obama was driven to an extent by early counterterrorism decisions. Shuttering the CIA’s detention program and halting transfers to Guantanamo Bay left few options beyond drone strikes or detention by often unreliable allies.
Key members of Obama’s national security team came into office more inclined to endorse drone strikes than were their counterparts under Bush, current and former officials said.

The only member of Obama’s team known to have formally raised objections to the expanding drone campaign is Dennis Blair, who served as director of national intelligence.
During a National Security Council meeting in November 2009, Blair sought to override the agenda and force a debate on the use of drones, according to two participants.
Blair has since articulated his concerns publicly, calling for a suspension of unilateral drone strikes in Pakistan, which he argues damage relations with that country and kill mainly mid-level militants. But he now speaks as a private citizen. His opinion contributed to his isolation from Obama’s inner circle, and he was fired last year.

The administration official who discussed the drone program declined to address the discrepancies in the kill lists, except to say: “We are aiming and striving for alignment. That is an ideal to be achieved.”

Divided oversight
Such disparities often elude Congress, where the structure of oversight committees has failed to keep pace with the way military and intelligence operations have converged.

Just a few reasons why this might be a bit more on Obama's plate but continue to rant away.