6 killed in rare U.S. drone strike outside Pakistan tribal areas


The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2013 AFP

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

Login to comment

How should we view these drone strikes? Since this no official war between Pakistan and the US, we cannot call them "war" crimes. Then are they state terrorism? If so, what does it make those who are authorizing the strikes and how should they be dealt with by standards of international law?

2 ( +3 / -1 )

However you wish to judge these drone strikes against militant fighters, you must also judge equally or more severely the actions of the fighters every time they set off an IED or attack mosques, hotels, Red Cross stations, TB clinics, buses, marketplaces, girls' schools etc. in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Washington has long demanded that Pakistan take action against the Haqqanis, who are blamed for numerous bloody attacks in Afghanistan including one on the U.S. embassy in Kabul in 2011.

U.S. officials have in the past accused Pakistani intelligence agencies of links to the Haqqani network, which has bases in the tribal districts.

And here rests the problem. Washington has asked over and over and over again that something should be done to curtail the Taliban and the Haqqanis, but that plea seems to fall on deaf ears. We can't trust the Pakistani FIA or ISI, which leaves the US little discourse, since they don't want to deal with the problem or take it seriously, which was the case when the US found that for years, the Pakistanis were aiding OBL. And this is our ally. A lot of the drone strikes could've been avoided, if the Pakistanis would do their part, but since they don't, we have to step up.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

This is a bit like the RAF bombing parts of New York because the some of the Irish people there helped to fund the IRA during the Troubles. You can't just go into another country and kill people, terrorists or not. Countries have a right to secure borders. Personally I would rather the Pakistani security forces dealt with their Taliban menace themselves. Moreover Pakistan is not a rogue state.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

"The USA has always been a bull in a china shop, but now it has really lost its mind."

Yes, the U.S. should quit killing terrorists outside its borders and just play defense for as long as they can hold out, right?

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

I find it so very ironic that the very same people justifying the seemingly random airstrikes that kill civilians, are the very same ones that condemn suicide bombers and the like as being "cowards."

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

A bull? Hardly, hawkish, perhaps and in the aftermath of the Kenyan embassy bombings, the USS Cole, 9/11, I would certainly think so and might I add to that, you Europeans weren't attacked, so for anyone to judge us! is completely irrelevant. I will, however submit to you that I would love for the Pakistani governments to take over in getting these terrorists, but at this point and time, it's difficult to put ANY trust in them, it'll take some time for them to build it up and to prove that they are serious when it comes to stopping radical Islam.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

As the Pakistani Government is not just ok but counting on the US to hit these targets I see no problem with the use of drones. It would be another thing if the USA did not have the full blessing of Pakistani Government, who doesn't like to advertise that it has given that blessing but when pushed will admit that it has. The use of drones is no more inherently bad than the use of a manned aircraft. Drones don't think on their own and have a human flying, calling out the targets and communicating with group intel. Another point that needs to be made is that these strikes work. They have largely made running Al Queda a death sentence and have cut the head off of the insurgent snake. Drone on!

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

it's difficult to put ANY trust in them

I agree, you shouldn't have trusted Pakistan from the start. But killing innocent Pakistanis makes things a lot worse.

Yes, the U.S. should quit killing terrorists outside its borders and just play defense for as long as they can hold out, right?

American boneheaded aggression is all the jihadis need to keep recruiting more martyrs. Don't get me wrong, there is a worldwide jihad that needs to be countered in an intelligent way. But with the warlike passages of the Quran on one hand and ridiculous, illegal US aggression on the other, it's just going to get stronger.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

These drone attacks are pure terrorism against all war treaties! Outrageous!

And worst, the UNO is totally mute about that.

I am really, really angry against this imperialistic behaviour from the US!

0 ( +2 / -2 )

If they are against all treaties, just cite one to prove your point. Never mind that the Pakistani government has give the OK for the attack. So these comments who make it seem as if the US was doing this against the will of Pakistan are just plain wrong. If the UK took out a target with the approval of the US while the target was on US soil, that would not violate American sovereignty nor be against any known treaties. Drones work....that's why the anti-American folk don't like them. And for those who think that drones cause more terrorism, there was terrorism in that area before the use of drones, most terrorist captured are not in it for revenge but rather state either ideological or monetary reasons for fighting. Most are just young men without any means to establish themselves and like a lot of young men feel compelled to do macho things like fight. The grand conspiracy theorist make everything out to be some sort of diabolical plan but in reality life is mainly just straightforward justifications and happenstance.

And if the critics of drones could see how many times the strike has been called off due to a desire to not hit "innocent" targets those critics would see how silly their argument that equates drones to random terrorist bombings is.

Another point that must be faced by the critics of drones is how the Geneva Convention regulates airstrikes targets. It clearly states that if the combatants hide behind the guise of a school, home, or even religious buildings, i.e. a place that would not be normally seen to be a legit strike target, it is those combatants who make those targets hot. So when these terrorist choose to go to their homes, after waging war on the Afghan people and coalition troops, it is they who are endangering their family not the drone operators nor the spec ops guys on the ground calling the targets.

In short done on about droning but we are going to keep the heat on the terrorist and we will win.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Simple and on point. I am going to say, Bad People Deserve To Be Put Down An Destroyed Of Their Wrong Doings.

2 ( +3 / -1 )


0 ( +3 / -3 )

Sorry but evil, evil heartless cold blooded murdering terrorists need to be eliminated, now by drones etc...should we feel sorry????? HELL NO!! They want to convert the entire world to their twisted ideology?? So they will reap what they so and burn in HELL!!!

-1 ( +0 / -1 )


Yep. Six dead Militant Islamist is a good thing.

What's more, Pakistan sucks. It time we forget Pakistan, and make nicey-nice with India. India is a liberal democracy, speaks English, is growing rapidly and, of course, is HUGE.

An US-Indian alliance would end China's attempt to take over East Asia.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

An US-Indian alliance would end China's attempt to take over East Asia.

then what alliance would end the US's attempt to take over the world?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites