Stanford-NYU Report: Drone Attacks Illegal, Counterproductive 362
trbdavies writes "In 'Living Under Drones,' investigators from Stanford and NYU Law Schools report on interviews with 130 people in Pakistan about U.S.-led drone attacks there, including 69 survivors and family members of victims. The report affirms Bureau of Investigative Journalism numbers that count '474 to 884 civilian deaths since 2004, including 176 children' while 'only about 2% of drone casualties are top militant leaders.' It also argues that the attacks violate international law and are counterproductive, stating: 'Evidence suggests that US strikes have facilitated recruitment to violent non-state armed groups, and motivated further violent attacks One major study shows that 74% of Pakistanis now consider the U.S. an enemy.'"
So let's see... (Score:3, Interesting)
Of the 176,745,364 people in Pakistan (according to World Bank), they chose 130 and managed to get more than half who were related to the "474 to 884" people who've died. You know, I could continue to point out the problems here, but it doesn't seem necessary. This entire "investigation" is complete and utter bullshit.
Re:Drones are cheaper. (Score:4, Interesting)
Total number of foreign US military bases: on the order of 650.
Number of foreign countries who have military bases in the US: None, although command of NORAD changes between an American general and a Canadian general every 2 years. And we train a lot of foreign military at our bases here in the States.
And people wonder why the US spends more on 'defense' than the next 26 countries combined when 25 of them are nominally allies.
Re:74% of Pakistanis now consider the U.S. an enem (Score:4, Interesting)
I love my country and consider myself quite patriotic, but these drone attacks are shameful. They should be stopped. Aside from the obvious moral imperative, there is the practicality of it: every time we kill another "al-Qaeda #2" with these cowardly half-blind strikes from the sky we create many more enemies.
Why do I hear so little protest here in the US? What can the average Joe do to raise hell about it?
And where is the press on all this? I'm tired of hearing about Mitt Romney's taxes and President Obama's birth certificate. Let's get real.
We've met the enemy...
Re:What % always considered us the enemy? (Score:1, Interesting)
Seems to be that you're flat out wrong, so you must be one of the uneducated rabble being manipulated by your leaders.
The US in general gets along very well with the countries that don't burn its flag constantly or kill its diplomats or go into a homicidal rage at every little insult to their religion. The Bush family (including the President most hated by Muslims, George W.) was reportedly good family friends of the king of Saudia Arabia, Egypt was a US ally until the people revolted, and 2.5 million Muslims live and practice Islam in the US without the extreme levels of hatred that those in most Middle Eastern countries have (to be sure, there is hate, but it isn't enough for them to go out rioting every couple of months).
Re:Persecution of Christians (Score:4, Interesting)
Well if that's correct his points are nonsense. Religious persecution is religious persecution, prejudice is prejudice, in any country. There is nothing ridiculous about it. Civilians murdered are civilians murdered, regardless of their religion. And if I bomb civilians in an area I know is 98% Muslim, the implication that I am deliberately murdering Muslims would seem a fairly strong one, whether or not I manage to kill a Christian or two in the process.
As a side note, apparently there was a memo I missed, and Eastern rite christians dont really count as Christians. At least Western rite Christians dont seem to care at all when they are murdered or dispossessed. In the last dozen years we (as in the USA) has essentially eliminated Christianity from Iraq, something many centuries of Muslim and even Mongol rulers have never been able to do. Al Queda thanks you, US Government!
Re:US military doctrine is simple to understand... (Score:3, Interesting)
Obama defines militant as "a man or boy killed by drone". You can either modify your thinking, or accept the fact that you are an evil fuckwad who supports random murder. Those are your two choices.
http://www.salon.com/2012/05/29/militants_media_propaganda/ [salon.com]
Re:Even without the drones. Pakistanis don't like (Score:5, Interesting)
I think you're confusing "idiots" with "tyrants". Stripping us of our civil liberties without without triggering a revolt or even widespread protests is hardly the accomplishment of an idiot.
Re:Persecution of Christians (Score:2, Interesting)
If I was 19 years old and a predominantly christian nation sent a drone that killed my cousin, I would probably hate christians too.
Is this the same group who (Score:2, Interesting)
Is this the same 74% who wanted to lynch a 14 year old mentally handicapped christian girl for burning pieces of paper she had found as litter? Who was framed as proven by Pakistans own police force by a Muslim cleric? The girl that even after the police said there was no case at all, still has to be in hiding from these 74% of Pakistanies AND defend herself in court for something that didn't happen and the police says so?
Well. fuck them then. Pakistan was a hell hole long before drone strikes, read up on the dark ages and then condense the centuries into a couple of decades. That is Pakistan. I am wrong? Then show me the immigration vs emmigration numbers. Any place that has more people leaving then coming in, can't be a nice place.
Que down mod by a bleeding heart who loves Muslims but not so much as to live the same neighborhood and is against the war for oil but drives a SUV.
Re:Persecution of Christians (Score:4, Interesting)
All the above links are all based on what actually had happened. They are not propaganda.
All newspapers have spin and are mechanisms of propaganda. You can't know what actually happened for sure unless you were there.
I am not saying that Pakistani christians aren't being persecuted. There is persecution of minorities in every country in the world to one degree or another often resulting in degraded living conditions and death for those of the minority. Muslims persecute Christians, Christians persecute Muslims, blacks persecute whites and whites persecute blacks, Chinese / Japanese, Jews / Palestinians...the list goes on without end and that's just today, never mind what happened in the middle ages. Not much of it makes it into the news because it happens all the time which means it isn't sensational and as such doesn't 'sell papers'. Only when there are genocides (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosnian_Genocide ; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwandan_Genocide [wikipedia.org] ) do such items make it into the news.
But you do not get to read any of that in the main stream media, do you?
That is because the Western main stream media, - from New York Times to Le Monde of France, - are being controlled by the liberals who hate Christianity more than anything else.
They will not report any news on the persecution of the Christian minority in Indonesia or in Pakistan.
Putting your obvious right wing religious basis aside for a moment, I'll just say that you don't get stories on such topics in the US mainstream media because you get almost nothing in the US mainstream media of any substance unless it directly affects the US or US interests. This is not specific to any particular set of minority bashing (or any other number of subjects that get ignored in the US), but is a general reality for the media.
But if ever there is a single case of Muslim being hurt or killed, you bet on the next day those liberal controlled main-stream-media will have their BIG HEADLINE blaring "Evil Christian killing peace loving Muslims !!!"
This is just wrong. The American media, for instance, plays down what Israel does in Palestine all the time to the point where Americans generally haven't got the slightest clue of what actually goes on there.