world

U.S. missiles kill 10 in Pakistan

14 Comments

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

© Copyright 2010 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

14 Comments
Login to comment

This is from your 'friendly' American government...

Officials revealed this week that the US intelligence agency is operating under rules that allow it to target suspected "militants" in Pakistan based upon "pattern of life" analyses, without even ascertaining their identity. For the most part, they acknowledge, the names of those assassinated with Hellfire missiles fired from Predator and the larger Reaper drones are never known.

Let's just call it what it is, extrajudicial assassinations, and of people they don't even know.

And you say they hate you because of your freedom. I believe the people affected by those strikes don't really care about your freedom. Revenge would be a better reason to hate you...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Those Predators and Reapers are deadly.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I am embarrassed for my country if this story is true as reported.

OTOH, reporting on stories like this often leave out or are unaware of critical details.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It was not immediately clear whether Gul had any ties to militant groups.

Combine that with the information from PeaceWarrior. A link to his info here: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2010/may2010/dron-m07_article.html

Yes, I have to agree with PeaceWarrior that revenge is plenty of reason for us to get hated. I swear, the U.S. government just won't be happy until terrorism is an everyday thing.

Aside, and interestingly, the Hague Convention of 1899 banned aerial bombardment (the mode of the time would have been by balloon). I suspect the reason is because its a chicken-hearted thing to do. Unfortunately that convention was only in effect for 5 years. Its a pity they did not renew that clause.

Predator drones are twice chicken-hearted though being as they are unmanned.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It must suck to be a militant in Pakistan.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Let's just call it what it is, extrajudicial assassinations, and of people they don't even know.

Alright they are assassinations, we have bounties on some of these people anyway. It's actually a darn shame that there aren't more dynamic PMC's out there doing the work for us. Maybe if we make a more comprehensive list and offer a couple million per head we can get some grassroot operations going.

And you say they hate you because of your freedom. I believe the people affected by those strikes don't really care about your freedom. Revenge would be a better reason to hate you...

I've never particularly cared for their reasons, motivations, rational or otherwise. If somebody wants me dead there's no place I'd rather see them than plastering the inside of a crater.

I suspect the reason is because its a chicken-hearted thing to do. Unfortunately that convention was only in effect for 5 years. Its a pity they did not renew that clause.

Those drones are a fantastic new innovation. They can fly longer, they don't risk pilots, and if you think efficiency is chicken-hearted you're probably living under the delusion that all fights should be fair. Every advance in military technology is to present less risk to the user and more risk to the target, to that end drones, robots, and satellite technology are of the upmost priority. You can only redesign and upgrade guns and body armor so many times, these drones are new and have yet to reach their true potential.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

you should expect more attacks like this in Pakistan with the 1000's of drones now in Afghanistan to protect those opium fields.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Do you really not see why they hate you?

Are you starting to understand why they don't like you and they want you "dead" (your quote)?

I can't make this any more clear. I don't care why people hate me, despise me, or want me to encounter heavy traffic on a regular basis. But if they want me dead I want them dead.

So what's really the difference between the US using "pattern of life" to kill people indiscriminately using high-tech equipment and a remote control, and someone who straps a C4 vest to their chest and goes into someone's home and detonates it?

There were militants in the house, they would like nothing more than to put a round through the head of a soldier, U.S civilian, or myself. So they were killed, that's the military providing security. I'd be more concerned if they didn't act on the intelligence they were provided.

When a man crashes a plane into a building, blows himself up, or detonates a car bomb in a crowded plaza he, more often than not, does so because of ideology. Because he see's the lifestyle of those he kills as a taint, an abomination. There is no reasoning with that level of hatred, you can run from it, you can attempt to isolate it, or you can face it. I don't care how a person lives their life so long as it doesn't interfere with mine, that is the difference.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

TheQuestion,

Here is a video you can watch on youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CuehYGXM_Og&feature=related

It explains how your news is sanitized so that people in the US continue to support the wars. I don't think you'll change your mind about not caring when your armies kill indiscriminately but I'm hoping!

This next youtube video shows some "action" in Iraq. Please have a look at it and tell me you agree with what you see. All I see are civilian drivers getting killed for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, much like the people attending wedding being targeted by your countries' remote-controlled bombs, especially women and children. They don't do it for ideology, just because it's fun, yahooo! There's no reasoning with that level of stupidity...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stq1Gd3OnGk

Blackwater mercs shooting innocent civilians (they are on the US payroll so they count). Talking about stupidity!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_JGfhnsxjkU

I know, I know. I shouldn't use videos in the defense of my point-of-view, I should use arguments and try to convince you that I am right and you are wrong... but TheQuestion, I can't. Not when you say that you don't care why people hate you and you simply want them dead, even women and children who, just like you, don't care how you live your life as long as your army doesn't assault and kill them. That statement simply means that nothing I can say will ever change your mind and that's a sad thing.

I would think that you'd be first in line to make sure your country is safe, from the way you write. The best way to make it safe would be to stop the bombings, the wars of aggression and the extrajudicial assassinations your country seems so bent on using, and try diplomacy instead.

These women and children killed by your bombs don't care about your lifestyle and they don't see it as a taint or an abomination, they really don't. What they care about is finding a good source of water today, a little food today, and maybe learn something new at school, today.

You have a right to defend yourselves, but not to kill innocents by using 'patterns of life'. Shame on your government for doing that.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If the news is so sanitized, how is it still so unsanitary?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"It explains how your news is sanitized so that people in the US continue to support the wars."

You wqant un-sanitized? LiveLeak has hundreds of clips of jihadis getting blown to bits in Iraq, vaporized by Hellfire rockets in Pakistan and Afghanistan. The big 3 have lost the monopoly they had back in the Vietnam War.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Thank you for the link info Egalityranny, I'll definitely make use of it. Much appreciated.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It explains how your news is sanitized so that people in the US continue to support the wars. I don't think you'll change your mind about not caring when your armies kill indiscriminately but I'm hoping!

I watch a couple of business channels for stock reports but I get most of my news from third party or foreign sites. I just can't stand the partisanship in the major media companies.

Please have a look at it and tell me you agree with what you see. All I see are civilian drivers getting killed for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, much like the people attending wedding being targeted by your countries' remote-controlled bombs, especially women and children. They don't do it for ideology, just because it's fun, yahooo! There's no reasoning with that level of stupidity...

I saw a group of soldiers shouting and firing out of context and I clearly heard "that f** sniper round hit right where you were at" at 2:13. You have to take the uploader’s word that they are firing at civilians.

I know, I know. I shouldn't use videos in the defense of my point-of-view, I should use arguments and try to convince you that I am right and you are wrong... but TheQuestion, I can't.

Videos are fine, videos with proper context are better. Those particular two weren't impressive.

Not when you say that you don't care why people hate you and you simply want them dead, even women and children who, just like you, don't care how you live your life as long as your army doesn't assault and kill them. That statement simply means that nothing I can say will ever change your mind and that's a sad thing.

If people are giving aid, shelter, and comfort to enemy combatants they obviously care and, in some cases, support their cause. You keep using women and children to garner some kind of emotional response or backtracking, it doesn't work. If the drone's work, use them.

I would think that you'd be first in line to make sure your country is safe, from the way you write. The best way to make it safe would be to stop the bombings, the wars of aggression and the extrajudicial assassinations your country seems so bent on using, and try diplomacy instead.

Diplomacy has its limits. Knowing when and where to draw the line between a salvageable diplomatic relationship and open hostility is of the upmost importance.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You keep using women and children to garner some kind of emotional response or backtracking

I don't use them, they are the main reason why bombing people without knowing who they are is a bad idea. And the reason why you and I are having this debate. The American bombers do not know for a fact that there are any enemy combatants in the area, they just assume. That's what really irks me the most. I don't dispute your right to fight in response to aggression, never. But who is the aggressor?

Unfortunately, some of my posts were considered off-topic, mostly the ones about why the US is in this mess. Too bad.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I can't think of a valid reason for anyone to blow up a house if the occupants identifications are not fully known.

Cheers, TheQuestion, time for a cold beer.

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