Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

U.S. Government Admits for First Time Drones Killed 4 Americans


  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,477 posts

Posted 22 May 2013 - 10:04 PM

http://www.nytimes.c...ikes.html?_r=1

 

 

In a letter to Congressional leadersobtained by The New York Times, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. disclosed that the administration had deliberately killed Anwar al-Awlaki, a radical Muslim cleric who was killed in a drone strike in September 2011 in Yemen.

The American responsibility for Mr. Awlaki’s death has been widely reported, but the administration had until now refused to confirm or deny it.

The letter also said that the United States had killed three other Americans: Samir Khan, who was killed in the same strike; Mr. Awlaki’s son Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, who was also killed in Yemen; and Jude Mohammed, who was killed in a strike in Pakistan.

“These individuals were not specifically targeted by the United States,” Mr. Holder wrote.

While rumors of Mr. Mohammed’s death had appeared in local news reports in Raleigh, N.C., where he lived, his death had not been confirmed by the United States



#2 china cat

china cat
  • VibeTribe
  • 14,836 posts

Posted 22 May 2013 - 10:31 PM

and 884 confirmed civilians killed (I'm sure there's more). I'd gather that has added a couple thousand family members who we can add to the list of people who now hate the U.S.

 

 

 

http://www.upworthy....tching-2?c=fym1



#3 concert andy

concert andy
  • VibeTribe
  • 10,699 posts
  • LocationPhilly

Posted 23 May 2013 - 02:17 PM

CC, def more.  As TASB elequently stated, better than I will, on numerous occasions.  Identifying a civilian or enemy combatant is a very thin line, and many times labelling a dead person as the enemy will make the Admin look better and more efficient in their strikes.

 

 

The only piece of info I got that stands out the most is the US boy killed was not targeted by the US for death.  I assume they are implying he was a accidental casualty?  Is that safe to assume?



#4 JBetty

JBetty
  • VibeTribe
  • 19,437 posts

Posted 23 May 2013 - 02:37 PM

CC, def more.  As TASB elequently stated, better than I will, on numerous occasions.  Identifying a civilian or enemy combatant is a very thin line, and many times labelling a dead person as the enemy will make the Admin look better and more efficient in their strikes.

 

 

The only piece of info I got that stands out the most is the US boy killed was not targeted by the US for death.  I assume they are implying he was a accidental casualty?  Is that safe to assume?

 

 

It'll make the Admin look better to whom?  Certainly not the families of the deceased.

 

The boy is not an accidental casualty, merely "collateral damage".   ho-hum

 

This whole thing is  just so disgustingly wrong.....   :cry:



#5 concert andy

concert andy
  • VibeTribe
  • 10,699 posts
  • LocationPhilly

Posted 23 May 2013 - 02:44 PM

It'll make the Admin look better to whom?  Certainly not the families of the deceased.

 

The boy is not an accidental casualty, merely "collateral damage".   ho-hum

 

This whole thing is  just so disgustingly wrong.....   :cry:

 

To people who think drones are better way to deal with terrorists instead of military action.

 

 

The reason I brought up that point about the boy, is there was alot of controversy over the boy being targeted, killed, without a trial.  I stated originally I would wait to hear allt he facts.  Only 7 months after that comment do they release the details, according to them.

 

 

 

I am not on board with Drones for taking out people.  There has to be extreme circumstances for them to be used, not because we think they may do something, or know someone.  There should be info released anytime we use one, for whatever purpose.  

 

 

 

I thought of these threads whan watching the new Star Trek as there is a reference to this practice, and one member of the Enterprise resigns over this tactic.

 

 

 

Please note that after Boston, many people were ok with giving up civil liberties to combat terrorism.  Many people were insanely outraged at this idea also.



#6 JBetty

JBetty
  • VibeTribe
  • 19,437 posts

Posted 23 May 2013 - 02:56 PM

Well, if we have to take out 1 or 2 or 10 or 20 innocent people to get the one bad guy with a drone, at least we aren't putting American soldiers in harm's way, because an American life is worth SO much more then any other...    :rolleyes:

 

The whole thing is just so repugnant.   :sad:



#7 concert andy

concert andy
  • VibeTribe
  • 10,699 posts
  • LocationPhilly

Posted 23 May 2013 - 03:02 PM

Well, if we have to take out 1 or 2 or 10 or 20 innocent people to get the one bad guy with a drone, at least we aren't putting American soldiers in harm's way, because an American life is worth SO much more then any other...     :rolleyes:

 

The whole thing is just so repugnant.   :sad:

 

But that is the point.  If an american gets killed as collateral damage, isn't the US guilty of murder?

 

What about all the new terrorists drones are creating?

 

There are so many unseen consequences of this issue, that it gets convoluted and most importantly repugnant on all sides.



#8 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,550 posts

Posted 23 May 2013 - 03:14 PM

I guess I was mistaken and they didn't target the kid...my bad



#9 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,477 posts

Posted 23 May 2013 - 03:16 PM

Or so they now claim. But it takes a lot of overlooking reality to believe anything that the govt. says at this point.



#10 concert andy

concert andy
  • VibeTribe
  • 10,699 posts
  • LocationPhilly

Posted 23 May 2013 - 03:21 PM

I guess I was mistaken and they didn't target the kid...my bad

 

No, I do not think you were not mistaken.  I think you were/have been upset that no information was being released even though the public demanded it.

 

That he could have been targeted and no one would answer questions.  That recent history of hiding behind whatever, is standard practice of the administration.

 

 

PS.  Who even knows if this is the truth.  This could be another spin of the truth, and collateral damage could be key words for cover up.  



#11 JBetty

JBetty
  • VibeTribe
  • 19,437 posts

Posted 23 May 2013 - 03:25 PM

Or so they now claim. But it takes a lot of overlooking reality to believe anything that the govt. says at this point.

 

 

 

I gave that up years ago during the Reagan administration, and was never given any reason to change my mind.



#12 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,550 posts

Posted 23 May 2013 - 05:37 PM

Obama news conference discussing drones in about 30 minutes



#13 concert andy

concert andy
  • VibeTribe
  • 10,699 posts
  • LocationPhilly

Posted 23 May 2013 - 05:48 PM

Time for spin class...



#14 JBetty

JBetty
  • VibeTribe
  • 19,437 posts

Posted 23 May 2013 - 06:13 PM



#15 concert andy

concert andy
  • VibeTribe
  • 10,699 posts
  • LocationPhilly

Posted 23 May 2013 - 07:51 PM

Obama news conference discussing drones in about 30 minutes

 

Was going to ask if anything of note was mentioned, but decided to read the article on CNN...

 

 

 

Obama:

 

"When a U.S. citizen goes abroad to wage war against America -- and is actively plotting to kill U.S. citizens; and when neither the United States, nor our partners are in a position to capture him before he carries out a plot -- his citizenship should no more serve as a shield than a sniper shooting down on an innocent crowd should be protected from a SWAT team," Obama said.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2....html?hpt=hp_t3



#16 JBetty

JBetty
  • VibeTribe
  • 19,437 posts

Posted 23 May 2013 - 07:55 PM

Has a US citizen ever gone abroad to wage war against America and was unable to be captured before he carried out his plot?   :dunno:

This is bullshit.



#17 concert andy

concert andy
  • VibeTribe
  • 10,699 posts
  • LocationPhilly

Posted 23 May 2013 - 08:01 PM

Guess they are saying this guy did and that is why they took him out.

 

 

http://www.nytimes.c...ikes.html?_r=1

 

 

In a letter to Congressional leadersobtained by The New York Times, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. disclosed that the administration had deliberately killed Anwar al-Awlaki, a radical Muslim cleric who was killed in a drone strike in September 2011 in Yemen.

The American responsibility for Mr. Awlaki’s death has been widely reported, but the administration had until now refused to confirm or deny it.

The letter also said that the United States had killed three other Americans: Samir Khan, who was killed in the same strike; Mr. Awlaki’s son Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, who was also killed in Yemen; and Jude Mohammed, who was killed in a strike in Pakistan.

“These individuals were not specifically targeted by the United States,” Mr. Holder wrote.

While rumors of Mr. Mohammed’s death had appeared in local news reports in Raleigh, N.C., where he lived, his death had not been confirmed by the United States



#18 JBetty

JBetty
  • VibeTribe
  • 19,437 posts

Posted 23 May 2013 - 08:12 PM

OK, so assuming that it's true (and that's a broad assumption to make) that's 1 total.

Billions of dollars spent developing, deploying and maintaining the drone program, countless innocent lives lost and pissing off people all over the world all to nab one guy.   



#19 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,477 posts

Posted 23 May 2013 - 10:00 PM

We already knew he was a target, his son from CO is a different story though.