Wait a minute; Obama apologized?! Does this mean we have finally reached the point when President Obama can't blame EVERYTHING on Bush -or Congress -or race -or others not comprehending -or climate change -or the Crusades? Well, he almost made it to the end of his term. I'm sure the White House will leak somebody in the Military or Intelligence community to hang this on.
1
No apologies are necessary. War always comes with collateral damage and deaths due to friendly fire. War is always imprecise and messy. Vietnam was much worse and nobody worried too much about how many 2nd Lieutenants were fragged by their own troops. People who choose to serve in war zones always accept the risk of being killed or taken hostage and killed later as these men were. Only the armchair critics back home wring their hands and cry foul.
1
The draft doesn't exist for 42 years.
The first derivative of the draft is the volunteer army.
The second derivative of the draft are drone strikes.
I expect the third derivative will be robot soldiers.
Each derivation removes the body public from horror of war by an order of magnitude.
As a young child, my next door neighbor had an older son in the navy in combat off the coast of Vietnam. You could feel the tension in their house.
With the end of the draft, the potential tension was reduced to only those families that had members who had volunteered.
With the advent of drones, the risk to Americans has dropped by another order of magnitude.
On the one hand side, this is great. I don't want my countrymen dying. On the other hand side, we are all human beings. When death dealing becomes more or less a video game, the humanity of all the people at the other end of the barrel of our drone gun is reduced.
We have reduced the physical risk to our soldiers, but at the cost of reducing all people outside the US (currently) as potential targets of remote control death. This will not lead to a reduction of anti-American sentiments and activities.
If we were to have the attitude that to eliminate these targets we must risk American lives, possibly (hopefully!) we would think, "Let's find a way to eliminate the threats without putting US lives at risk." That won't work all the time, but this article clearly shows why the default drone solution is not viable long term.
The first derivative of the draft is the volunteer army.
The second derivative of the draft are drone strikes.
I expect the third derivative will be robot soldiers.
Each derivation removes the body public from horror of war by an order of magnitude.
As a young child, my next door neighbor had an older son in the navy in combat off the coast of Vietnam. You could feel the tension in their house.
With the end of the draft, the potential tension was reduced to only those families that had members who had volunteered.
With the advent of drones, the risk to Americans has dropped by another order of magnitude.
On the one hand side, this is great. I don't want my countrymen dying. On the other hand side, we are all human beings. When death dealing becomes more or less a video game, the humanity of all the people at the other end of the barrel of our drone gun is reduced.
We have reduced the physical risk to our soldiers, but at the cost of reducing all people outside the US (currently) as potential targets of remote control death. This will not lead to a reduction of anti-American sentiments and activities.
If we were to have the attitude that to eliminate these targets we must risk American lives, possibly (hopefully!) we would think, "Let's find a way to eliminate the threats without putting US lives at risk." That won't work all the time, but this article clearly shows why the default drone solution is not viable long term.
1
This occurrence is truly tragic. It is also a dilemma! What are the alternatives? Do we put "boots on the ground" to fight these terrorists, and thus put even more lives at risk? I can't help but wonder how I would feel if it were my son or daughter that was a hostage. Is there such a thing as an "acceptable risk"? Are the people directing these drone strikes really doing everything they can to minimize collateral damage? Do we just acquiesce and do nothing?
It just seems to me that almost anything we do is apt to have tragic results to some degree. I don't have a clue how you minimize that, but I sure hope somebody does! I also don't get a good feeling that what we are doing has a clear objective to reach a conclusion. It certainly seems reminiscent of Viet Nam!
It just seems to me that almost anything we do is apt to have tragic results to some degree. I don't have a clue how you minimize that, but I sure hope somebody does! I also don't get a good feeling that what we are doing has a clear objective to reach a conclusion. It certainly seems reminiscent of Viet Nam!
A lot of criticism here.
1) No civil society likes war
2) Some groups/countries are not civil, most of those don't mind war as they have nothing else positive to do; too hard to strategically improve their society, easy to blame someone else when you don't do your job.
3) Islam extremists know their naive, desperate followers have nothing to lose and are willing to literally sacrifice their followers, daily.
4) Innocents must not be slaughtered! At least that is the thinking that civil societies live by.
5) One must defend themselves, and waiting until the demons are living next door is no defense.
Given these facts, drones are the very best way to minimize the death of innocents while attacking the enemy. This is especially true when the enemy is elusive - the state of 21st century terrorism. While these deaths are tragic, they are inevitable as those held hostage by Islamic terrorists will be killed. That is the goal of the terrorists, unless they can collect money for their return, which only guarantees more kidnappings, more chaos, and more deaths.
Sorry that these hostages died, but happy that drones are being used to fight there monsters. They will, by the way, continue to use hostages as cover.
1) No civil society likes war
2) Some groups/countries are not civil, most of those don't mind war as they have nothing else positive to do; too hard to strategically improve their society, easy to blame someone else when you don't do your job.
3) Islam extremists know their naive, desperate followers have nothing to lose and are willing to literally sacrifice their followers, daily.
4) Innocents must not be slaughtered! At least that is the thinking that civil societies live by.
5) One must defend themselves, and waiting until the demons are living next door is no defense.
Given these facts, drones are the very best way to minimize the death of innocents while attacking the enemy. This is especially true when the enemy is elusive - the state of 21st century terrorism. While these deaths are tragic, they are inevitable as those held hostage by Islamic terrorists will be killed. That is the goal of the terrorists, unless they can collect money for their return, which only guarantees more kidnappings, more chaos, and more deaths.
Sorry that these hostages died, but happy that drones are being used to fight there monsters. They will, by the way, continue to use hostages as cover.
2
Yes because the drone bombings work so well, they worked so well in Yemen didn't they?
1
I recall the 2008 primaries when McCain, Romney and Clinton were asked whether they would "chase" terrorists into Pakistan without that government's permission - Pakistan was our ally, the Bush Administration had given them $13 Billion to fight the war on terrorism, and there was very strong evidence coming out that their military was doing nothing - and likely feeding the Taliban info in order to "keep the peace". All three candidates said that we HAD to respect the sovereignty of our allies; that making drone strikes inside their country was not appropriate.
A young, first-term Senator from Illinois was asked the same question; he responded that if our allies will not kill the terrorists in their territory, he would. They labeled him naïve, and uninformed. Approximately a year later - within weeks of his inauguration - that naïve, young senator did what the Bush Administration and a Republican Congress could not achieve in seven years, with two wars and $3+ Trillion.
He began a campaign of incessant drone strikes that still goes on to this day. Al Qaeda and the Taliban leadership was dismantled, bin Laden killed, and the terrorists network in Pakistan virtually vanquished.
A Western reporter who gained access to that territory in 2010 interviewed people in those villages were terrorists had been killed. One person said it best: "After dark, you can hear the drones circling above; the terrorists do not sleep well at night."
War is Hell . . .
A young, first-term Senator from Illinois was asked the same question; he responded that if our allies will not kill the terrorists in their territory, he would. They labeled him naïve, and uninformed. Approximately a year later - within weeks of his inauguration - that naïve, young senator did what the Bush Administration and a Republican Congress could not achieve in seven years, with two wars and $3+ Trillion.
He began a campaign of incessant drone strikes that still goes on to this day. Al Qaeda and the Taliban leadership was dismantled, bin Laden killed, and the terrorists network in Pakistan virtually vanquished.
A Western reporter who gained access to that territory in 2010 interviewed people in those villages were terrorists had been killed. One person said it best: "After dark, you can hear the drones circling above; the terrorists do not sleep well at night."
War is Hell . . .
4
Americans who voluntarily travel to countries where terrorism exists cannot expect the USA to ransom them. Sad, but we all know the dangers when we travel. And didn't the American end up working for a private military contractor or something like that? I know people who have been paid huge salaries to do that. And assumed the risk.
Thank you, Mr. President, for having the courage to go after international terrorists. Collateral damage must be minimized and receive an apology, and yes, war is hell irrespective of those who declared it. Unfortunately the hostages' fate was probably sealed when they were captured.
Are you really okay with a government that continuously engages in deadly conflict in another country without their permission? Would you be okay if another country did so here? Would you be okay if you or your family died at their hands? If you're okay with all of that--how much further is not okay? Is killing only those slightly suspect okay? Judging by the majority of these comments, all of this is okay according to most of your moral compasses...to the point where it's just a given in your minds. Think about that.
1
mr3, you ask if I would be okay if another country would continuously engage in deadly conflict without their permission, and whether I would be okay if it happened here. I'd say it depends on the conditions. If I were a persecuted minority in a country with zero tolerance for minorities including death by decapitation, the answer is an absolute and resounding "YES". I wish the Allies had invaded Germany in 1933. I would certainly have many more family members than I do today, and most likely would be living in Germany.
I truly do not hate or even dislike President Obama.
I would prefer someone else as President, but I'm not one of those trying to tear down his administration.
Drones are just the latest way humanity has developed for distancing ourselves from the horrors of and responsibilities for our inhumanity.
As a Vietnam combat veteran, I do wish this President were capable of communication from the heart, without enveloping his sincere thoughts and feelings in rationalist political qualifications.
I would prefer someone else as President, but I'm not one of those trying to tear down his administration.
Drones are just the latest way humanity has developed for distancing ourselves from the horrors of and responsibilities for our inhumanity.
As a Vietnam combat veteran, I do wish this President were capable of communication from the heart, without enveloping his sincere thoughts and feelings in rationalist political qualifications.
2
I am appalled that our President would go on television and apologize to the world for the deaths of 2 hostages who made personnel choices to be in that part of the world--when he does nothing of the kind for the deaths of every serviceman/woman who has died as a result of his decisions sending them into the same parts of the world. Until he stands there and apologizes to each and every one of these families on national television I have lost all respect for him. We think nothing of sending our best and brightest off to fight and then attempt to bury the cost of fighting when it comes home to roost.
1
As we again see innocent victims killed in the "fog of war," I find it encouraging and poignant that, once the deaths of these hostages were confirmed, President Obama was able to come forward and do the right thing by his announcement and personal contact with the families.
Having worked with Soldiers involved in aerial surveillance and piloting drones, I am again concerned by the naivete about the use of drones as weapons against enemy combatants. Soldiers who gather intel and guide drones with joysticks and live video feeds, regardless of where they are stationed, are fully aware their actions can result in the deaths of others, especially innocents like children. They are often troubled, many to the point of having PTSD symptoms, by what they do. There is little difference between targeted attacks on an enemy by drones, guided munitions delivered by stealth bombers, snipers hundreds of yards away, or by special forces teams entering buildings of hostiles. Studies suggest the risk for PTSD increases with how close the individual is to the traumatic event. That is, high altitude bomber crews are less likely to experience PTSD than someone in a knife fight. But when you can see children being killed on your monitor by a missile you directed to that target or by the intel you provided, it gets quite personal.
I fully support efforts for peace and diplomacy over war, but let's not split hairs over use of conventional weapons by our Soldiers when war is fought.
Having worked with Soldiers involved in aerial surveillance and piloting drones, I am again concerned by the naivete about the use of drones as weapons against enemy combatants. Soldiers who gather intel and guide drones with joysticks and live video feeds, regardless of where they are stationed, are fully aware their actions can result in the deaths of others, especially innocents like children. They are often troubled, many to the point of having PTSD symptoms, by what they do. There is little difference between targeted attacks on an enemy by drones, guided munitions delivered by stealth bombers, snipers hundreds of yards away, or by special forces teams entering buildings of hostiles. Studies suggest the risk for PTSD increases with how close the individual is to the traumatic event. That is, high altitude bomber crews are less likely to experience PTSD than someone in a knife fight. But when you can see children being killed on your monitor by a missile you directed to that target or by the intel you provided, it gets quite personal.
I fully support efforts for peace and diplomacy over war, but let's not split hairs over use of conventional weapons by our Soldiers when war is fought.
1
As tragic as these deaths are, they are not as tragic as the loss of thousands of Americans and exponentially more civilians in the Iraq and Afghanistan boots-on-the-ground activity, not to mention deaths from friendly fire in the two wars. Yes, Americans prefer drone activity to combat. Why wouldn't they?
Of course, nobody could even imagine that Al Qaeda could hold prisoners in its quarters. Who is dumb here?
It's a war what else could possibly be expected? Mr, Obama's apology is misplaced. Our enimies reign terror on us and our allies, we make them wonder every day if one of our drones will reign terror on them.
Our enimies brought this on themselves and they are responsible to all of the collateral deaths. It is they who should be apologozing to the famies of their innocent kidnapped captives.
Our enimies brought this on themselves and they are responsible to all of the collateral deaths. It is they who should be apologozing to the famies of their innocent kidnapped captives.
1
It's nice to pontificate sitting in one's basement about legality of drone-strikes and death of TWO Americans..
This is the Pakistan-Afghanistan border we are talking about, the original motherlode of AQ/Taliban - this According to Wiki:
Terrorism in Pakistan ... The annual death toll from terrorist attacks has risen from 164 in 2003 to 3318 in 2009, with a total of 35,000 Pakistanis killed between September 11, 2001 and May 2011. According to the government of Pakistan, the direct and indirect economic costs of terrorism from 2000–2010 total $68 billion. President Asif Ali Zardari, along with former President ex-Pakistan Army head Pervez Musharraf, have admitted that terrorist outfits were "deliberately created and nurtured" by past governments "as a policy to achieve some short-term tactical objectives" The trend began with Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq's controversial "Islamization" policies of the 1980s, under which conflicts were started against Soviet involvement in Afghanistan. Zia's tenure as president saw Pakistan's involvement in the Soviet-Afghan War, which led to a greater influx of ideologically driven Muslims (mujahideen) to the tribal areas and increased availability of guns such as the AK-47 and drugs from the Golden Crescent.
This is the Pakistan-Afghanistan border we are talking about, the original motherlode of AQ/Taliban - this According to Wiki:
Terrorism in Pakistan ... The annual death toll from terrorist attacks has risen from 164 in 2003 to 3318 in 2009, with a total of 35,000 Pakistanis killed between September 11, 2001 and May 2011. According to the government of Pakistan, the direct and indirect economic costs of terrorism from 2000–2010 total $68 billion. President Asif Ali Zardari, along with former President ex-Pakistan Army head Pervez Musharraf, have admitted that terrorist outfits were "deliberately created and nurtured" by past governments "as a policy to achieve some short-term tactical objectives" The trend began with Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq's controversial "Islamization" policies of the 1980s, under which conflicts were started against Soviet involvement in Afghanistan. Zia's tenure as president saw Pakistan's involvement in the Soviet-Afghan War, which led to a greater influx of ideologically driven Muslims (mujahideen) to the tribal areas and increased availability of guns such as the AK-47 and drugs from the Golden Crescent.
We fight an out-of-sight / out-of-mind drone war because this POTUS does not have the integrity and moral courage to make a decision about what is right and pursue it.
If POTUS believes we are the problem, then POTUS should get us the hell out of there and stop squandering our military. If POTUS believes Muslim extremism is the problem, then POTUS should do what is necessary to win the war. By taking a middle ground strategy, he is squandering lives with no strategic effect, and why? To manage his PR. Disgraceful. You'd think 6.5 years into it, he would have developed a doctrine, a set of principles, for the use of force. But clearly, his only operational doctrine is "don't do stupid stuff".
If POTUS believes we are the problem, then POTUS should get us the hell out of there and stop squandering our military. If POTUS believes Muslim extremism is the problem, then POTUS should do what is necessary to win the war. By taking a middle ground strategy, he is squandering lives with no strategic effect, and why? To manage his PR. Disgraceful. You'd think 6.5 years into it, he would have developed a doctrine, a set of principles, for the use of force. But clearly, his only operational doctrine is "don't do stupid stuff".
1
I think some people need to read a little more carefully. The President apologized to the families of those killed. He did no apologize to anyone else: not for the drone program, not to terrorists, not the countries whose airspace was invaded. He acknowledged there may have been deficiencies in intelligence that lead to the strikes, that otherwise might not have taken place when they did. He promised to review the incident thoroughly to insure that, to the extent possible, this kind of tragedy is possible. For those with outrage over the semantic difference between an apology and expression of condolence to the families, I suggest you unknot your knickers.
The right wing has long ascribed to the view that "collateral damage" is "acceptable" in warfare and not used as a liberal excuse to hamstring the U.S. efforts to combat terrorism. It has condemned the practice of using human shields. If this practice were allowed to impede the war on terrorism, it would certainly lead to terrorists everywhere having at least one human shield//hostage chained to them at all times as "drone prevention". There have been many instances of "collateral" civilian deaths since we got immersed in hostilities there, and it has not stopped and will not stop our efforts. So it looks like some people are looking for something, anything to quibble with, and the only thing they can complain about is his apology to families of these innocent victims, in this instance.
The right wing has long ascribed to the view that "collateral damage" is "acceptable" in warfare and not used as a liberal excuse to hamstring the U.S. efforts to combat terrorism. It has condemned the practice of using human shields. If this practice were allowed to impede the war on terrorism, it would certainly lead to terrorists everywhere having at least one human shield//hostage chained to them at all times as "drone prevention". There have been many instances of "collateral" civilian deaths since we got immersed in hostilities there, and it has not stopped and will not stop our efforts. So it looks like some people are looking for something, anything to quibble with, and the only thing they can complain about is his apology to families of these innocent victims, in this instance.
1
Wait let me get this straight. It is not okay to interrogate terrorists aggressively leaving them alive and giving us useful information to stop future terrorists but it is okay to kill them with drones? I just want to be sure I can keep up with liberal ideology.
2
Coincidence that this news was released in the middle of a very busy news cycle (Loretta Lynch, etc.) so that it goes unnoticed? Hey Obama haters - you're always calling for him to resign when he does something you don't like (healthcare, abortion, women's rights, equality issues, gay marriage - all of those really "important" things)...what about these drone strikes and hiding this information from Americans for so long? No comment? Crickets?
"President Obama said Thursday that his administration was investigating the botched drone strike, carried out in the thickly forested valley that straddles North and South Waziristan in the lawless region of western Pakistan. But serious questions have already emerged — about the intelligence leading up to the strike, about when American officials knew that the hostages had been killed, and about why it took the White House so long to go public with the information."
"President Obama said Thursday that his administration was investigating the botched drone strike, carried out in the thickly forested valley that straddles North and South Waziristan in the lawless region of western Pakistan. But serious questions have already emerged — about the intelligence leading up to the strike, about when American officials knew that the hostages had been killed, and about why it took the White House so long to go public with the information."
“You can go down to a gun show at the local convention center and come away with a fully automatic assault rifle, without a background check, and most likely without having to show an identification card,” he said in the video. “So what are you waiting for?”
This serves as a reminder that our country's lax approach to monitoring the purchase of lethal firearms, including assault weapons designed for military purposes, creates a huge risk to our children and families on our own soil.
This serves as a reminder that our country's lax approach to monitoring the purchase of lethal firearms, including assault weapons designed for military purposes, creates a huge risk to our children and families on our own soil.
While President Obama claimed "tremendous sorrow" over the two Western hostages, American Dr. Warren Weinstein, a USAID worker held by al-Qaeda since 2011, and Italian Giovanni LoPorto, held since 2012,that were in a drone strike.He did not mention, however, that two additional Americans had also been killed in these raids. That was left to a statement released by the White House Wednesday morning, which described Americans Ahmed Farouq and Adam Gadahn as "fighters" for al-Qaeda, The president expressed no regret, nor gave any excuse for the killing of Americans on his own volition without following explicit Constitutional due process requirements. Obama has long insisted that he has the right to determine who is a terrorist and who is not, and to kill whomever he wants, along with whomever happens to be with them. Over one thousand civilians killed in Pakistan, including two hundred children Sorry, you shouldn't have been there. Is this not a slippery slope?
President Obama, Secretary Carter and CIA Director Brennan have all stated repeatedly that the primary purposes of drone use by the United States is to conduct airstrikes against targets it sees as a dangerous threat to US interests and domestic security. This purpose is valid, and it is essential that we have all tools that we have developed accessible as we defend ourselves and our allies. America must defend itself and our allies against groups who perform acts of war and terror against ourselves, our citizens who are abroad, and our allies. Drone technology is vitally important to our defense; it has successfully ferreted out a significant number of our enemies who strike, then hide, and this technology prevented them from ever causing more death. And while our defense contractors and military forces are constantly improving the accuracy and means by which this technology operates, the prosecution of war is unfortunately by necessarily an imperfect task.
1
Why is he apologizing? Our mission is to kill al Qaeda. Period. We got two big ones including that worthless Adam Gadhan. We can not be responsible for hostages who probably should not have been in harm's way in the first place. Especially Mr. Weinstein, who as an American Jew knew he would be a major target for Islamist nuts. Enough apologies over everything. Nothing to apologize for. Westerners beware if you go to these areas and become a hostage this country will not be responsible for you. Stay away!
1
Words matter! I heard some creep on news radio this morning, I'm not sure whether he's a military guy or a consultant, talking calmly like, oh well, just some collateral damage, what're ya gonna do? "Collateral damage" and "friendly fire" make me want to puke. Maybe it is the only way to fight terrorists without exposing too many of our military people, but these are people, not our enemies, who were killed by our weapons. When you use that kind of emotion-blocking euphemism, you skew the debate. The debate is -- when is acceptable to kill human beings who aren't your enemy, and how far do you have to go to avoid killing those human beings? Repeat "human beings" as many times as you need to. Killing them in a thwarted rescue attempt, in my view, would be different from killing them in a raid with robotic weapons that can't distinguish the good guys from the bad guys.
By the way, Israel assassinates people it believes are terrorists. Has its situation improved? Is it safer? Maybe it just creates more people who've lost hope and believe that the only thing worth doing in their lives is to become martyr-terrorists.
By the way, Israel assassinates people it believes are terrorists. Has its situation improved? Is it safer? Maybe it just creates more people who've lost hope and believe that the only thing worth doing in their lives is to become martyr-terrorists.
The loss of life is undoubtedly tragic, but I would venture to guess that this was almost a mercy. In an ideal world, we could have rescued these innocent people and reunited them with their families. Unfortunately, this is not an ideal world. If I had been in their situation, I would imagine that the quick end they received was a far better fate than a slow and brutal public execution.
2
Isn't the party who is primarily complicit in this tragedy Al Queda, the murderous hostage takers, or do they get a pass because we made a mistake?
My sympathies to the families of the innocent.
My sympathies to the families of the innocent.
6
Innocent people are killed in any war; it's inevitable. However, the technology we are using today reduces the unintended casualties (collateral damage) to a level that would have been impossible in prior conflicts -- just contrast the precision of a drone strike with bombing from high altitude or artillery fire. It is not realistic to expect perfection in "the fog of war."
2
By similar logic, isn't it now OK for Muslim "terrorists" to just apologize after killing innocents? What really is the difference? Obama is a truly frightening piece of work.
4
I strongly agree, he doesn't deserve a golden star just for doing it.
Kind of twisted logic there. Muslim terrorists specifically target innocent people. You don't apologize for hitting your intended targets. That is the difference.
The Times is too apologetic. The other article on drone strikes stated: "By most accounts, conventional airstrikes and ground invasions kill a higher proportion of non-combatants." Clearly we need to prevent terrorists from killing us and drones are still our best option.
4
My biggest complaint about the drones is the way Obama administration hides them. A drone is nothing but a plane without a pilot physically in it. The administration should report on drone activities the same way it reports on manned aircraft actions. Because it is an unmanned aircraft Obama administration thinks it is above review or disclosure.
America has been involved in a global war against muslim terrorism since 9/11. For the moment, public opinion is against another land war similar to Iraq/Afghanistan.
Armed drones are the only available instrument to carry out strikes against elusive enemy targets hiding among the civilian population. Casualty among friends and foe is inevitable.
The war on terror doctrine has created a new reality for Americans. Extreme caution must be taken when travelling and/or residing in any muslim country in the world, particularly those in the Middle East. The government policy of NO negotiation with hostage takers means kidnaped Americans are on their own.
Armed drones are the only available instrument to carry out strikes against elusive enemy targets hiding among the civilian population. Casualty among friends and foe is inevitable.
The war on terror doctrine has created a new reality for Americans. Extreme caution must be taken when travelling and/or residing in any muslim country in the world, particularly those in the Middle East. The government policy of NO negotiation with hostage takers means kidnaped Americans are on their own.
3
News: Innocent people die in wars.
Why didn't someone tell all the American people who supported the war about this ahead of time?
Wasn't it supposed to be like a video game, where only the bad guys really die and the good guys rise again at the push of a 'new game' button?
Why didn't someone tell all the American people who supported the war about this ahead of time?
Wasn't it supposed to be like a video game, where only the bad guys really die and the good guys rise again at the push of a 'new game' button?
2
These men should not have been in a war zone.
The president should not have apologized.
The American people, no doubt many of whom are now protesting these terrible deaths, should not have supported this war.
The president should not have apologized.
The American people, no doubt many of whom are now protesting these terrible deaths, should not have supported this war.
4
Why would anyone be surprised at loss of life, albeit on the "wrong side", in a war? This is what you get when you're deploying any kind of military action. The question is when, or if can we move away from this morass?
3
These were friendly fire deaths of the sort happen frequently in wars declared and undeclared. On the wider issue of the wisdom of using drones in the sovereign territory of other nations, or indeed any air attacks to kill terrorists, there are reasons to be skeptical of their efficacy. As another article close by discusses, the number of civilian casualties which have been assessed independently is far higher than has been officially revealed. Amongst the targeted this doesn't win hearts and minds it loses them on a vast scale. If you buy the logic that our blundering invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan created more terrorists than they destroyed then the same logic applies here. Of course the American public generally like it because it doesn't cost them anything and largely happens out of mind. Unfortunately, it's at least evens that it's massively counter productive to the American interest.
10
President Obama deep;y regretted and sincere public apology on the deaths of civilian hostages in drone attacks against Al Qaeda is commendable, taking full responsibility. Comparing his behavior to the Bush/ Cheney administrations lies and distortions that eventually brought us to war in Iraq, resulting in thousands of deaths and injury to US military forces, not to mention thousands of civilians, referred to as collateral damage. And not one indication of remorse on their part that the United States paid a regrettable price and is still paying for their lawless behavior.
17
If he is taking full responsibility, he now needs to be put on trial for manslaughter. His words, as usual, are empty my friend.
3
I may consider your opinion, after Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld are brought up on charges of crimes against the state, my friend.
The words are empty in the normal moral sense. I perceive that the real point of taking responsibility himself is to let the CIA and its chain of command off the hook.
No matter how you looks at it there are still hold overs in the security services and intelligence services from the Administration of George W Bush and probably Bill Clinton. Some have an ideological bent within the field. You do what you do based on their assessment of the situation.
The biggest problem for us is not Iraq or Afghanistan but the troops stretched to the limit do to a war base on lies in Iraq. Add the instability created by that war in the region those intelligence services are also stretched to the limit. Add the actions Putin has taken knowing how badly stretched is using it for his own purposes.
The biggest problem for us is not Iraq or Afghanistan but the troops stretched to the limit do to a war base on lies in Iraq. Add the instability created by that war in the region those intelligence services are also stretched to the limit. Add the actions Putin has taken knowing how badly stretched is using it for his own purposes.
5
Looks like we have a"let's blame it on Bush again," obama sycophant over here.
2
The mother of one of the victims says responsibility lies ultimately with Al Qaeda, and that what they are doing is not in keeping with Islam, and she's right. But the question then suggests itself: Is the drone war in keeping with America?
8
It is unless there is another viable option, a dilemma delivered squarely by America's enemies and not of its creation. I don't see a way out, do you?
1
I would say yes. Being ahead of our adversaries militarily has always been our history, especially after WW1 and WW2. In an ideal world no country should possess weapons of mass destruction but if some country has to have it I am glad it is the US and not some other country. Is the US perfect? Far from it, but compared to other countries.....
1
My answer to your question is, yes the drone war is "in keeping with America". You may be among the Americans who are uncomfortable with any use of our military except as a bluff. Or you may believe that we (but not necessarily our enemies) should fight "fair" - that we should not use our technological advantages to try to take lives without putting the lives of our own soldiers at risk. Such sentiments reflect a naive delicacy that seems preposterous to me in the face of the threats against western countries and the atrocities already committed. As it is, the U.S. is bending over backwards, perhaops too much so, to use intelligence and guided weapons to keep collateral damage to a minimum level that's unprecedented in armed conflict. On the other hand, you may think that if we just talk to al Qaeda and ISIS and Boko Haram and al Shabab and find out what they really want, we can come to a peaceful solution.
So What! This is a war! How many US service men and women's lives have been spared defending our "allies" in Pakistan and other countries with the advent and use of Drones? Thousands? Unfortunately, these individuals were drawn to these areas of the world for some crazy reason and clearly put themselves in the compromising position of being taken hostage. Sorry, our enemy's Jihad does not have rules of engagement and concerns for 'collateral damage'. This are warriors who listen to the likes of the muslim religious leaders across the region. They should not have put themselves in such compromising position with the thought that their altruistic behavior would spare their lives.
6
I am a European citizen I am next the Mr President Obama
2
The President has shown magnamity in apologising for the Drone attacks that inadvertently killed two hostages.
Human rights groups have been barking up the wrong tree to halt a most successful operation to eradicate terror outfits through Drone's.
It's not possible for Drone operators to be 200% sure of the identity of the people inside a compound.
A certain degree of assumptions based on ground operatives inputs goes into authorising Drone attack.
Osama bin Laden would not have been killed if precondition exist that identities of the people inside the house in Abbottabad has to be 100% sure to authorise Naval Seals operation.
A certain risk has to taken,there's nothing like totally guaranteed intelligence.
Once again the President has been very charitable to apologise for something beyond his control.
The war on terror is not of his making. Drone's are necessity foisted by situation beyond the President's Control.
The intelligence community needs to be applauded for their yeomen service to mankind.
The unseen,unheard intelligence warriors needs to be commended for keeping the world safe.
Human rights groups have been barking up the wrong tree to halt a most successful operation to eradicate terror outfits through Drone's.
It's not possible for Drone operators to be 200% sure of the identity of the people inside a compound.
A certain degree of assumptions based on ground operatives inputs goes into authorising Drone attack.
Osama bin Laden would not have been killed if precondition exist that identities of the people inside the house in Abbottabad has to be 100% sure to authorise Naval Seals operation.
A certain risk has to taken,there's nothing like totally guaranteed intelligence.
Once again the President has been very charitable to apologise for something beyond his control.
The war on terror is not of his making. Drone's are necessity foisted by situation beyond the President's Control.
The intelligence community needs to be applauded for their yeomen service to mankind.
The unseen,unheard intelligence warriors needs to be commended for keeping the world safe.
12
It is a serious symptom of our moral depravity when we decry this as a "mistake" when two Western non-targets were killed. What about the thousands of innocent Muslim victims, many of them children and infants, who have also been killed? The only proves what the Muslim world already knows: Muslim lives don't really matter.
7
Indeed. It is only depravity when you're sitting safely in your home. Would it still be depravity when one of these low life terrorist individuals attacks your family?
11
For some context here, you’re more likely to die slipping in the bathtub than being attacked by terrorists. Summary executions by drone strikes are illegal, unnecessary, and counter-productive.
This is not about the CIA making a mistake. The CIA IS the mistake. They are not competent. If they were we would never have gone into Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Syria, etc. nor Cuba, Honduras, Korea, Vietnam, etc.
That our politicians have not completely dismantled this organization and rebuilt it with competent people under intelligent Intelligence guidelines is inexcusable.
That Obama has kept the stupid slug Brennan, father of the drone program in place makes one wonder exactly how he got through Harvard.
That our politicians have not completely dismantled this organization and rebuilt it with competent people under intelligent Intelligence guidelines is inexcusable.
That Obama has kept the stupid slug Brennan, father of the drone program in place makes one wonder exactly how he got through Harvard.
7
It's too bad we didn't have drones for the Pacific Battles and the Invasion On DDay in WW2 because they would have saved tens of thousands ... I suppose if we invade Iran we'll send in the drone army first .. these terrorist strikes are very iffy though. I think in most cases how can we know who's there. We should apologize for the wedding parties, restaurants filled with people, villages, etc we have blown up looking for one or two extremists. And when I think of how it's just a person sitting in a room operating the drones like playing a video game, it bothers me. We really should only use them when we are almost positive what and where we're after.
1
Mrs. Weinstein said that the terrorists are largely to blame for the death of her husband but the administration is not without blame for its conduct and lack of help. She is forgetting that her husband shared the blame for his own death by going to a troubled Muslim region as an 'aid worker'. An American Jewish person acting as 'aid worker' in Pakistan that created the Talebans is viewed as a CIA agent, and vulnerable to capture.
We should leave providing aid to organizations such as Red Crescent in troubled regions like Pakistan. CIA agents do not carry calling cards that identify them as working for CIA in Langley, VA.
We should leave providing aid to organizations such as Red Crescent in troubled regions like Pakistan. CIA agents do not carry calling cards that identify them as working for CIA in Langley, VA.
8
When I was in the military I was taught that unless I was absolutely certain of my target's presence I was not to take the shot. That included his being among civilians.
What the president is doing here with drones would have earned a military person a court martial and a trip to Fort Leavenworth. Instead he gets to apologize and the State Department will make a cash offering to compenate the victim's families.
What the president is doing here with drones would have earned a military person a court martial and a trip to Fort Leavenworth. Instead he gets to apologize and the State Department will make a cash offering to compenate the victim's families.
8
To all the commenters criticizing drone strikes, I ask: what would you have us do, leave al-queda operatives in peace so they can plan terrorist operations and propagandize at will? We're at war with nihlists who want to kill as many people and destroy as much Western culture as possible. The last time we were in a war with such existential stakes, we bombed Berlin and every other major German and Japanese city to rubble. I think targeted drone strikes are preferable to that. To USAID, I ask, what was Mr. Weinstein, an American of Jewish faith, doing working with little security in a mostly lawless country full of powerful, well armed groups of people who want to kill Americans and Jews? Western aid workers should not be in countries where they face significant risks of being captured for ransom, period. And if they insist on going to these places, they shouldn't expect Western leaders to give in to terrorists' demands of ransom to secure their release. They also shouldn't expect American soldiers with their own families to risk life and limb to liberate them. Elements of the peace movement in the West are dangerously naive about the kind of enemy we're fighting.
21
Well said. We, as Americans, want to fight wars like armchair quarter backs. We want to drive the US military machine...but only after the fact...so we can profess what could have been, or what should have been, or how our strategies would have worked better, or how what happened was wrong.
Drones are a good thing. I'm all about drones. They keep our enemies, the same ones that slaughter innocent men, women, and children, guessing and wondering when death will fly from the sky. And, some think that's a bad thing...not me.
Keep up the good work...find and kill not only the enemies of our people, but the enemies of true Islam...the vast majority of all muslims, a true, peaceful, and beautiful culture.
Drones are a good thing. I'm all about drones. They keep our enemies, the same ones that slaughter innocent men, women, and children, guessing and wondering when death will fly from the sky. And, some think that's a bad thing...not me.
Keep up the good work...find and kill not only the enemies of our people, but the enemies of true Islam...the vast majority of all muslims, a true, peaceful, and beautiful culture.
Maybe we shouldn't have armed and trained Al Qaeda when it fit our Geo Political goals of taking out the Soviet Union in Afghanistan.
The Americans murdered Pierre Korkie, a South African doing missionary work in Yemen, on the day he was to be released by his captors because once again they blundered in in ignorance of the facts. I do not recall reading of an apology by Obama or any American for that matter.
8
Obama apologizes when he needs a photo op. It has nothing to do with his mistake. If he were to apologize for each of his mistakes he would be at the podium every day for hours.
1
Irrespective of friends or foes, a life is always precious. However, war is hell. Drones or boots on the ground, people die. In the ideal world, everyone should live in peace and harmony, minding one's own business and helping each other to rise to the next level of enlightenment. But this is not the ideal world. And people expecting 100 percent precision kill, whatever that means, are fooling themselves. On the other hand, pacifists should look at what ISIL did to anyone who refuses to believe in their perverted faith and realize this is not the time to let the lamb lying down with the lion either
14
I fully agree Bos! The two "innocent" American hostages chose to be where they were and were being compensated for their work in such a dangerous zone. All wars have had collateral damages and will continue to. No one is praising the raid for killing the two American traitors to ISIS!
5
Here comes the trolley problem again. Is it legitemate to sacrifice the life of civilians or hostages to save more lives from possible terrorist attack? In fact, what had happened was the least evil action the US government could take in the trolley dillemma. It is tragic that those aide workers died. But Inaction could mean more fatalities.
6
You are creating a false argument. There is nothing to substantiate that drone bombings save lives.
3
And if the individual(s) killed were members of your family, helping others selflessly, you would feel the same, no doubt ...
I dare say you would be blitzing the world with your objections, and consulting attorneys as you prepared your lawsuit.
In my opinion, we need to stop this murderous rampage we are on, and begin using our on-the-ground human intelligence operatives to locate the evildoers, arrest them, and bring them to trial.
We are a nation of laws, and the moment we stop being such, makes us the same as the people we go after.
Murder cannot be apologized for.
I dare say you would be blitzing the world with your objections, and consulting attorneys as you prepared your lawsuit.
In my opinion, we need to stop this murderous rampage we are on, and begin using our on-the-ground human intelligence operatives to locate the evildoers, arrest them, and bring them to trial.
We are a nation of laws, and the moment we stop being such, makes us the same as the people we go after.
Murder cannot be apologized for.
4
"In my opinion, we need to.....begin using our on-the-ground human intelligence operatives to locate the evildoers, arrest them, and bring them to trial."
I looked this up in Websters. Found it under the definition of Naivety.
I looked this up in Websters. Found it under the definition of Naivety.
I personally never trusted in the massive use of drones, as they are often not precise reaching their target, but they save pilot's lives.
Unfortunately sometimes they kill the wrong person.
As Italian I appreciated very much the Mr. Obama's apologies, might be that action was not to be done, but that is war and we have to accept also deadly consequences.
What I don't accept is the dummy comment of Mr A. Stanton from Dallas to this article, saying: “This man had no business in Pakistan and the U.S. had no business allowing him to go there”.
Mr Stanton, for your information this man was working as voluntary help within a German aid organization and was kidnapped time ago from Pakistani bandits.
The German organization is cooperating with the USA and this man was working there also for you.
So when somebody doesn't know the compete story and has a sensibility like yours, should simply shut up!
Unfortunately sometimes they kill the wrong person.
As Italian I appreciated very much the Mr. Obama's apologies, might be that action was not to be done, but that is war and we have to accept also deadly consequences.
What I don't accept is the dummy comment of Mr A. Stanton from Dallas to this article, saying: “This man had no business in Pakistan and the U.S. had no business allowing him to go there”.
Mr Stanton, for your information this man was working as voluntary help within a German aid organization and was kidnapped time ago from Pakistani bandits.
The German organization is cooperating with the USA and this man was working there also for you.
So when somebody doesn't know the compete story and has a sensibility like yours, should simply shut up!
11
President Obama as Commander in Chief is always apologizing. I sympathise for the loss of any innocent individual especially hostages and unfortunately this is a byproduct of the war on terrorism and I suspect there are plenty of wonks calculating the chances of successful strikes vs heartache. I suggest the apologies be made private and project publicly, courage and determination to get the bad guys who brought us to these dark places in the world that took these victims hostages in the first place.
6
Although appreciable, as Italian I feel disappointed by a formal apology from the President, coming three months after the death of Lo Porto, hoping that Mr. Obama words are true.
3
Here we have a president who was closely involved in starting and fueling conflicts in Libya, Syria, Ukraine and Yemen that have killed hundreds of thousands of people. And now we are led to believe that Obama considers the death of this one American "one of the most painful moments of his presidency".
I am puzzled.
I am puzzled.
10
Don't be puzzled, this President is a facilitator, in the employ of the military industrial complex, fomenting, developing, and bringing war to whatever area of the planet they can, in a never-ending effort to enrich the .01%ters.
It's as simple as that, and a few non-combatants blown to bits, is of no consequence to him and his charlatan handlers.
The apology is a well thought out response, to prevent other sources from capitalising on the murders; the three month delay indicates that their efforts to hide the killings were about to be exposed.
It's as simple as that, and a few non-combatants blown to bits, is of no consequence to him and his charlatan handlers.
The apology is a well thought out response, to prevent other sources from capitalising on the murders; the three month delay indicates that their efforts to hide the killings were about to be exposed.
7
Blaming Obama for the crises in Syria, the Ukraine, Yemen and Libya is ridiculous. These places were tinderboxes waiting to explode back when he was a state senator in Springfield, Illinois. When the EU starts spending real money and putting its own sons and daughters at risk to defend western values, then you can talk.
1
Exactly what does the CIA do well? Everything they have touched over the last few years beyond finding OBL seems to be a giant debacle. I blame The Thug Brennan.
4
Unfortunately, drones are the "way to go"! Because American people do not want to sacrifice their soldiers. Period. Contractors like Mr. Weinstein bear the brunt of American people's displeasure.
1
Non intervention is the way to go.
3
Why should we be sacrificing our soldiers? For what? Peace? Democracy in the region? Oil? Nuclear proliferation? There will never be peace when the muslim leaders issue fatwahs and declare jihad against the west and the US. They are not interested and do not know how to create and establish and maintain any democratic institutions. We no longer need to bow to OPEC while we should be supporting the likes of Elon Musk and off shore wind energy. We have finally learned the effect of oil from 1972! How can we stop nuclear proliferation now? Iran has had nuclear technology for years. They have the 50 years of the west's wealth from oil purchases to buy the technology from he wants to sell it at any price! Maybe we should have thought about this in 1968 when we were shipping nuclear reactors to Iran for oil! Ask Kissinger about that deal before he dies.
1
This is terrible news but I think this news will help Americans to feel our pain when innocent Pakistani children are killed in US drone attack.
6
We will continue to have these situations because Obama refuses to put assets in place that would would help target much more effectively the specific targets. He needs special forces in place to carry that out. It was done with enormous success during the Gulf War
Obama I believe has used over 400 drones during his presidency My concern is his wanting to treat terrorists like criminals and giving them a criminal trial while at the same time not giving Americans targeted with drones due process. What is the difference in this situation?
We are going to continue on this path until Obama dribbles out his presidency. He does not want to deal with ISIS. He had been receiving intelligence briefings for over a year and never developed a contingency plan to deal with them. What has he done about the continued slaughter of Coptic Christians? Nothing but he has lectured Christians about their "less than loving comments"
Even though Obama touted Iraq in 2011 as stable and it's people self sufficient it's a disaster in part from his failure to get a status of forces agreement. He killed Ghadafi but had no one ready to step in and now Libya is in chaos. Yemen is a disaster. Syria is spreading their sphere of influence in the region on a massive scale. all Qaeda is not decimated but growing as is Hamas, el Shabbab , Hezbollah, and of course ISIS. And Obama has to stop ignoring a growing and visible threat
Obama I believe has used over 400 drones during his presidency My concern is his wanting to treat terrorists like criminals and giving them a criminal trial while at the same time not giving Americans targeted with drones due process. What is the difference in this situation?
We are going to continue on this path until Obama dribbles out his presidency. He does not want to deal with ISIS. He had been receiving intelligence briefings for over a year and never developed a contingency plan to deal with them. What has he done about the continued slaughter of Coptic Christians? Nothing but he has lectured Christians about their "less than loving comments"
Even though Obama touted Iraq in 2011 as stable and it's people self sufficient it's a disaster in part from his failure to get a status of forces agreement. He killed Ghadafi but had no one ready to step in and now Libya is in chaos. Yemen is a disaster. Syria is spreading their sphere of influence in the region on a massive scale. all Qaeda is not decimated but growing as is Hamas, el Shabbab , Hezbollah, and of course ISIS. And Obama has to stop ignoring a growing and visible threat
2
Can we assume that all eligible members of your immediate and extended family are ready to enlist in our special forces?
Why apologize now? Why the surprise? Drone strikes have been killing civilians for years. Estimates by the UN and human-rights groups place the number of innocent, civilian, non-combatant bystanders killed in such drone strikes at anywhere from dozens (at a minimum) to hundreds. And — look at the graphic — the vast majority of these strikes have been carried out under Barack Obama, not the much-reviled George Dubya.
In addition, a drone strike killed an American boy named Abdulrahman al-Awlaki in Yemen. He had the bad luck to be the son of Anwar al-Awlaki, an Islamist propagandist who was also an American citizen. Despite their status as U.S. citizens, both were killed extra-judicially (and in separately strikes!), without any due process of law. But Abdulrahman al-Awlaki was a 16-year-old boy with no known ties to terrorism. By way of response, Obama's senior campaign adviser and former White House Press Secretary, Robert Gibbs, said that the boy "should have had a more responsible father."
* * * * *
In addition, a drone strike killed an American boy named Abdulrahman al-Awlaki in Yemen. He had the bad luck to be the son of Anwar al-Awlaki, an Islamist propagandist who was also an American citizen. Despite their status as U.S. citizens, both were killed extra-judicially (and in separately strikes!), without any due process of law. But Abdulrahman al-Awlaki was a 16-year-old boy with no known ties to terrorism. By way of response, Obama's senior campaign adviser and former White House Press Secretary, Robert Gibbs, said that the boy "should have had a more responsible father."
* * * * *
3
So are you ready to send your sons in to risk their lives in operations to bring back people like Mr. al-Awlaki to face justice in a fashion more acceptable to your sense of righteousness?
1
Why has this apology not been made to all the non - Americans affected by drone murders?
5
Because this is a war, and because of drone technology, a heck of a lot fewer innocent civilians are dying than in previous wars. It would be interesting to see how long your self-righteousness would last in the hills of South Waziristan.
Why is the CIA running what are essentially military operations in the first place? We have an entire department dedicated to that -- the DoD. We have the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines. Do we really need an intelligence agency being judge, jury, and executioner?
4
At least he's no longer lounging on the sofa discussing who to target with his campaign team any longer. I'm curious as to how come it took so long to notify the family of this error though. I understand review, but three months? That's a long time.
1
‘“As president and as commander in chief, I take full responsibility for all our counterterrorism operations,” the grim-faced president told reporters…’ Despite the grim face, it probably wasn’t all that hard for him to publicly take the responsibility, since he knows that he will never have to take any consequences.
6
In 2010, Private Manning leaked to the world classified video of US attack helicopters gunning down more than a dozen men in 2007 including 2 Reuters reporters and 2 children. Reuters' 2007 request for the video under Freedom of Information Act was denied so the fact of this senseless attack was hidden for 3 years until the leak.
In 2007, it was 4 pilots in 2 attack helicopters with ground troops providing intel that made a mistake. Today, one pilot thousands of miles/kilometers away in the U.S. is overseeing multiple drones and I s all by himself when making the final call and the president wants us to believe this time, with 2 dead westerners, is the only time a mistake was made. It may be years or even decades before someone leak the actual number of innocent killed but by then we would have successfully turned tens of thousands of orphans into terrorists.
In 2007, it was 4 pilots in 2 attack helicopters with ground troops providing intel that made a mistake. Today, one pilot thousands of miles/kilometers away in the U.S. is overseeing multiple drones and I s all by himself when making the final call and the president wants us to believe this time, with 2 dead westerners, is the only time a mistake was made. It may be years or even decades before someone leak the actual number of innocent killed but by then we would have successfully turned tens of thousands of orphans into terrorists.
5
Why is Obama apologizing for the death of two people, an American and and Italian, in a drone strike. Jesus, how many innocent civilians have been killed by American bombs, drones, and our military. I guess we only apologize when they are not citizens of the country.
4
This war is getting old and costly, but these al Qaeda and ISIS extremist fanatic types gotta go. These cockroaches need to be dealt with like the apathetic, inhuman, cowardly vermin they are. Their only goal seems to be to set human civilization back 2000 years by blowing up all the "infidels" (people who aren't them). I mean, just look at where they live, it looks like a post-apocalyptic Old Testament wasteland. Still riding donkeys that have more rights than their women. Still killing each other over religion.
2
We are being held hostage by our insistence upon destroying a group that gets stronge4 with each of them we kill.
1
so what would you do, bomb them with sweets and flowers? send them more usaid officers to kidnap and ransom? really, I want to read about your alternative strategy to dealing with people who want to kill every last one of us.
Really if there were Americans killed when we fire bombed Dresden during WWII would we be all out of sorts as we are now. The truth is if you don't want boots on the ground how else do you kill the bad guy? Bombs are not smart enough to identify friends from foes. To everyone wringing their hands over the killing of this American how can these same people be advocates for bombing Iran? Sadly these folks died trying to help people but in reality if you go to the badlands sometimes bad things will happen. If you go to a war zone you have to willing to accept you are going at your own risk. Idealogy should not over rule common sense. After apologizing Obama should have told people in these badlands to get out. If they stayed tell them you stay at your own risk. If you are captured how many of our troops have to die to save you? There is need at home for your skills where people are suffering. If you chose to go to the badlands sometime bad things happen. We really need to stop being Pollyanna about this. Tell these people they are not going to a sleep away camp. They are going to a war zone.
5
I worked (teaching, not military) and lived in the Arabian Gulf from January 2003 until July 2012, albeit in a country where terrorism was not expected; there were just two car bombs there that I know of during that time. I told my father "if I'm ever taken hostage, consider me dead; if the location is known, blow it up and kill as many as possible." That's how it is; we know the risks.
4
"The government is conducting two reviews of the drone strike to determine what went wrong." Let me help: drone strikes. That's what went wrong. This is what happens when you declare an endless war on an idea; you can justify any act of aggression under the pretense of war.
2
I read many comments indicating that drone pilots are detached from the battlefield and feel nothing when he/she kills in combat. That's exactly what our Armed Forces need - soldiers that won't feel guilt about following battle orders. We don't need an officer worrying about the psychological ability for his/her soldiers to conduct a mission.
1
Hmm, you must not be familiar with the Nuremberg Trials.
2
You can win them all Mr President even though you have one them all. You still have owned Cheney when it comes to defending the country.
America is all about war. And the people responsible - the !%. The USA is the economic suppression of the masses. Institutionalized. We killed millions of native Americans and haven't stopped since. As for all those "condolences" from the people reading this media arm of Obama... what total hypocrisy. Face it America - we live under one of the most corrupt governments on the planet.
3
Drone strikes are very creepy things. It is frightening where future warfare will take us all. What was it Ike said about the military–industrial complex?
2
Stuff happens. I just hope lots of terrorists were also killed.
2
"…underscoring the perils of a largely invisible, long-distance war waged through video screens, joysticks and sometimes incomplete intelligence."
"sometimes incomplete intelligence"??? Intelligence is never complete. Far from it.
"sometimes incomplete intelligence"??? Intelligence is never complete. Far from it.
2
Please remember that Dick Cheney recently was permitted on television to argue that this kind of "collateral damage", i.e., the killing of innocent people, is acceptable, because the general program of killing by the US goverment is doing so much good to make Americans safe from terrorists (and, of course, to protect the profits of Halliburton).
Or words to that effect.
Or words to that effect.
1
With regard to the Qaeda traitors:
If you're an American working with the enemy, you're a traitor, and thus forfeit your due process rights.
That the other American and an Italian were caught up in this incident is a consequence of their being in that region of the world, just as the State Department frequently warns. You play, and you might pay, and it's time for that to sink in. Deeply.
If you're an American working with the enemy, you're a traitor, and thus forfeit your due process rights.
That the other American and an Italian were caught up in this incident is a consequence of their being in that region of the world, just as the State Department frequently warns. You play, and you might pay, and it's time for that to sink in. Deeply.
2
Because you are a good person who is devoted to the welfare of others does not exempt you from following the law of common sense that tells you not to expose yourself to extreme danger, any more than it allows you to exclude yourself from following the basic laws of physics.
This man had no business in Pakistan and the U.S. had no business allowing him to go there.
This man had no business in Pakistan and the U.S. had no business allowing him to go there.
3
@A. Stanton: "... the law of common sense that tells you not to expose yourself to extreme danger ..."
Mr. Weinstein was kidnapped at his home in Lahore, Pakistan. Here is a thoughtful reminiscence about him:
Warren Weinstein: A Gracious Host, Immersed in Pakistani Life
By AUSTIN RAMZY
APRIL 23, 2015
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/world/asia/warren-weinstein-aid-worker...
Mr. Weinstein was kidnapped at his home in Lahore, Pakistan. Here is a thoughtful reminiscence about him:
Warren Weinstein: A Gracious Host, Immersed in Pakistani Life
By AUSTIN RAMZY
APRIL 23, 2015
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/world/asia/warren-weinstein-aid-worker...
1
They didn't "allow" him to go there; they SENT him there.
1
This is a bizarre and ignorant statement. It's Pakistan not Afghanistan. The guy had been doing work like this for decades. US citizens go to Pakistan all the time, for business, for tourism, to visit relatives, even to work for aid agencies. Are you trying to blame him for what happened? That's like saying the victim of a car accident shouldn't have been driving because the "basic laws of physics" say that hitting something in a moving vehicle can cause death.
2
America had better wake up and smell the coffee. Al Qaeda/Isis is now a daily news occurrence, a growing problem, and a threat to all of us.
I suspect many more innocent people in the world will perish in the future because of these evil people.
I suspect many more innocent people in the world will perish in the future because of these evil people.
4
it's only Daily News and Republican news channels that wanna start a big war so they can ramp up our military and increase spending and buy lots of guns and planesfrom Lockheed Martin and others. if you own Smith and Wesson you could start a news channel and make it seem like we have to go to war and buy lots of guns
And yet Osama Bin Laden was killed by a drone.
Perhaps that fact offends the delicate sensibilities of those commenters living safely in their suburban homes, far from the threat of terrorism.
Perhaps that fact offends the delicate sensibilities of those commenters living safely in their suburban homes, far from the threat of terrorism.
He was shot and killed by a man.
There were no drones involved in the death of Bin Laded!
Osama Bin Laden was killed by a drone?! He was shot by a US Navy SEAL.
1
The death of innocent people is the reality of war. Is this war justified? Are there alternatives? Those are the questions we should ask.
3
It is a tragedy for sure but when someone puts themselves in a dangerous place, in a dangerous situation, then why are people surprised when they wind up dead?
2
I think they most likely thought they were safe, one being an aid worker, whom along with journalists and medics, aren't usually targeted except by the most cowardly and chickensh#t of enemies. The other one sounds like he was an international government worker, so I guess that being his job description explains why he was there. Shoulda taken the office gig instead.
Hey, it's a war. Al Qaeda killed these men.
Outrage Hobbyists love to hate drones, it's a convenient bogeyman for them to rail against and the disdain grows in direct proportion to how little they understand actual warfare. I'd suggest they read some John Keegan's brilliant, "The Face of Battle." War is dirty ugly hell and to the extent it can be curtailed by the use of a tool, the better.
A reasonable look into what men face when they go in to fight will make any reasonable person understand that drones are a great net reducer of tragedy and suffering.
Outrage Hobbyists love to hate drones, it's a convenient bogeyman for them to rail against and the disdain grows in direct proportion to how little they understand actual warfare. I'd suggest they read some John Keegan's brilliant, "The Face of Battle." War is dirty ugly hell and to the extent it can be curtailed by the use of a tool, the better.
A reasonable look into what men face when they go in to fight will make any reasonable person understand that drones are a great net reducer of tragedy and suffering.
4
I imagine that in his recent fence mending jobs with Bibi, the subject of collateral fatalities to military operations was not a central talkng point. Non-urban targets notwithstanding.
1
Well, even our president can learn something about collateral damage from the israelis. They are masters at killing innocents and sowing the seeds of the next generation of war.
There is not much that you can do with "Sorry" or "Ooops". Even when it comes from the President of the United States of America.
But there is lot that you can do with analyzing the cost-benefit of this entire drone program, beginning with asking whether we Americans are creating more future enemies than we are killing. Then wondering if Americans would feel comfortable, safe and secure living in a world where every nation state chose to adopt our drone practices and policies. Drone technology is cheap and widely available. Should we try to capture a few more terrorist for intelligence gathering instead of killing them is another issue. Along with questioning whether or not this program should ever be used against American citizens in the absence of a credible imminent threat from an active operative.
Is this drone program in accordance with basic American values and in furtherance of vital American interests? The President takes an oath as his primary responsibility "to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution". In other words our way of life takes precedence over our lives.
This is really about who we are as a principled moral people in a divided limited power democratic republic nation state. If we become like the enemy then there is no point to conflict or dispute.
But there is lot that you can do with analyzing the cost-benefit of this entire drone program, beginning with asking whether we Americans are creating more future enemies than we are killing. Then wondering if Americans would feel comfortable, safe and secure living in a world where every nation state chose to adopt our drone practices and policies. Drone technology is cheap and widely available. Should we try to capture a few more terrorist for intelligence gathering instead of killing them is another issue. Along with questioning whether or not this program should ever be used against American citizens in the absence of a credible imminent threat from an active operative.
Is this drone program in accordance with basic American values and in furtherance of vital American interests? The President takes an oath as his primary responsibility "to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution". In other words our way of life takes precedence over our lives.
This is really about who we are as a principled moral people in a divided limited power democratic republic nation state. If we become like the enemy then there is no point to conflict or dispute.
5
Terribly sad, tragic, and avoidable. This what happens in wars, declared or otherwise, sanctioned by Congress or not. The best way to prevent such horror is not better intelligence, more accurate targeting or apologies from on high. The best way is to stop electing people who use war as a first resort (which the current president is, thankfully, not guilty of).
I'm glad the president is being transparent and acknowledging the collateral killing of two western hostages. But let's not use this as an excuse to out blame on the President. He's the Commander in Chief. He has the authority and obligation to protect Americans and America. In war there are friendly fires and collateral killings of civilians. The President didn't target innocents.
Let's also not put blame on drones. For the first time we can attack the enemy without the risk of being shot. That's an Armed Forces dream weapon. It doesn't make us detached from the war. It is a huge advantage. Why on earth should we want to send boots to track these terrorists when you can't do it from a distance. Furthermore, what is the other option, carpet bombing?
Let's also not put blame on drones. For the first time we can attack the enemy without the risk of being shot. That's an Armed Forces dream weapon. It doesn't make us detached from the war. It is a huge advantage. Why on earth should we want to send boots to track these terrorists when you can't do it from a distance. Furthermore, what is the other option, carpet bombing?
4
Actually, it does detach us further from war. It is effortless and risk free to send the drone. The pilot in the bomber is nearly as risk free but the drone is cheaper.
And the other option is not to wage a war that does not need to be waged.
And the other option is not to wage a war that does not need to be waged.
1
I suppose the A-bomb was a dream weapon until the Soviets got it. It won't be long until thousands of drones of all sizes are pointed from all sides at their enemies, and the chances of the MAD deterrent working again are exponentially smaller. There is no advantage to drones, only shortsightedness.
Dear Dan, I also forgot to add that I am not debating the drone strike itself. As a principle I believe drone strikes are of paramount importance in weeding out terrorists, and they have made their usefulness known time and time again. I'm merely saddened by the fact that President Obama stood in front of TV cameras and apologized to the families of Mr Weinstein and Mr Lo Porto, but has never apologized to the families of those civilians killed in war zones created by his command. Not even when innocent civilians were killed "accidentally" (recall the incident when a US bomber bombed an Afghan wedding party).
1
Does the use of drones -- the technology itself and the supporting surveillance technology, for instance, including their element of remoteness -- make it too easy for their users not to be careful enough?
3
Drones are inherently weapons that lend themselves to terrorism. In traditional, accepted warfare, nations and armies face off (in one way or another) and fight each other. Terrorism is defined as war like actions that are designed not to win in a direct fight, but to inspire fear, terror, by creating attacks that might come at any time and any place, with the perpetrators in hiding, away from facing the consequences of their actions. In one sense, a factor which inspires the temptations for their use, they are an ideal weapon to combat terrorists anywhere on the planet, but they can fall over to being terrorist weapons themselves with great ease. It is a slippery slope and we continue to walk on it. To the untrained or careless observer living in nations subjected to drone attacks, there is little differentiation between one form of bombing and another.
Those who so readily accuse our country of carrying out unnecessary attacks should, however, keep a central fact in mind: had Bin Laden and company not chosen, in an act with specific, political intent, to attack the US, none of these drone attacks would be taking place. None. The same equally applies to those who currently have pledged themselves to live and die attacking "the far enemy". Bin Laden's decision will go down in history as one of the most grotesque military/political miscalculations in modern times, provided we don't allow his followers to draw us into a fatal conflict.
Doug Terry
Those who so readily accuse our country of carrying out unnecessary attacks should, however, keep a central fact in mind: had Bin Laden and company not chosen, in an act with specific, political intent, to attack the US, none of these drone attacks would be taking place. None. The same equally applies to those who currently have pledged themselves to live and die attacking "the far enemy". Bin Laden's decision will go down in history as one of the most grotesque military/political miscalculations in modern times, provided we don't allow his followers to draw us into a fatal conflict.
Doug Terry
2
If only we could establish right and wrong with the claim of "he hit me first".
"Just as the C.I.A. did not know the hostages were present, it also did not know that the American Qaeda members were at the strike targets and they had not been specifically targeted"
This proves that we don't know who our drone strikes will kill. Even when it is someone we've been looking of for years, we don't know.
Even after we kill them, we don't know for months that we killed someone we were looking to save.
The drone killing is far more random than we want to believe. It is "targeted" only in that it kills people. We don't really know who, not who will be killed, and not who was killed.
This proves that we don't know who our drone strikes will kill. Even when it is someone we've been looking of for years, we don't know.
Even after we kill them, we don't know for months that we killed someone we were looking to save.
The drone killing is far more random than we want to believe. It is "targeted" only in that it kills people. We don't really know who, not who will be killed, and not who was killed.
7
This is a very sad event, and my condolences to the families of these two men. There was always a risk for them by offering their services to work under such conditions and in such dangerous circumstances. They were brave, but what a cost to pay to take these chances, first as hostages, and then to be in the line of fire.
I understand that drones are not the best way to go, but I have to say that it is a better alternative to having thousands of troops there and our country in an all out war. We have had enough of that. President Obama must feel that way as well; had he listened to his critics clamoring for "boots on the ground" all over the middle east, we would have lost many more young Americans. We have no easy choices if we feel it our duty to intervene in wars in foreign places. As part of a global community, Americans will do their share to help where we can. But we have, luckily, a commander-in-chief who has, despite great resistance and criticism, decided to limit the number of casualties we have suffered in more than a dozen years of war. As this accidental drone incident shows, it is not without heartbreak, but it is better than it was. For this, I'm grateful.
I understand that drones are not the best way to go, but I have to say that it is a better alternative to having thousands of troops there and our country in an all out war. We have had enough of that. President Obama must feel that way as well; had he listened to his critics clamoring for "boots on the ground" all over the middle east, we would have lost many more young Americans. We have no easy choices if we feel it our duty to intervene in wars in foreign places. As part of a global community, Americans will do their share to help where we can. But we have, luckily, a commander-in-chief who has, despite great resistance and criticism, decided to limit the number of casualties we have suffered in more than a dozen years of war. As this accidental drone incident shows, it is not without heartbreak, but it is better than it was. For this, I'm grateful.
11
These deaths were inevitable, and the shame is that the administration is downplaying the number of civilian deaths:
" The Bureau of Investigative Journalism (TBIJ)... reports that from June 2004 through mid-September 2012, available data indicate that drone strikes killed 2,562-3,325 people in Pakistan, of whom 474-881 were civilians, including 176 children"
https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/category/projects/drones/
http://www.livingunderdrones.org/
I also know that every time Obama says he takes "full responsibility," it means that no one will be held responsible.
" The Bureau of Investigative Journalism (TBIJ)... reports that from June 2004 through mid-September 2012, available data indicate that drone strikes killed 2,562-3,325 people in Pakistan, of whom 474-881 were civilians, including 176 children"
https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/category/projects/drones/
http://www.livingunderdrones.org/
I also know that every time Obama says he takes "full responsibility," it means that no one will be held responsible.
9
Perhaps you are right in saying that no one will be held accountable again when it comes to these tragedies, as we sit comfortably in our armchairs, and sigh. In the meantime President Obama is perhaps more fervent than ever, in putting an end to Al Qaeda, who is not afraid of us, but knows that a Tiger is about to pounce again, while these thugs wage war and remain hidden but visible to his eye.
1
Stop apologizing, Mr. President. War is hell and collateral damage is an unfortunate consequence.
14
Warren Weinstein had a full life of which he dedicated a good part to serving the people of Pakistan. He knew the risks and he knew the possibility that he would never return. He was used as a hostage and a human shield by Al Qaeda who took him away from his calling and it is unfortunate that he was accidentally killed in a US strike. I would not fault the Drones which have been one of the most successful weapons in Pres Obama disposal that have carried out strategic surgical operation without the loss of boots on the ground or numerous civilian deaths. Having said that I still feel that there should be a peaceful resolution of the conflict in South Asia so that people like Warren Weinstein can continue their good work. Shalom and RIP Mr. Weinstein. Deepest sympathies to the family of Mr. Weinstein. no matter how old a person is when he or she dies, to the loved ones he always have gone too soon.
10
So let's see if I understand the reaction here. It's split down the middle between people who think that the President's apology isn't sufficient and people who think that the President has no cause to apologize in the first place. Interesting. Whatever happened to nuance?
2
Nuance is a long forgotten word. At present, we are maximalists and deeply divided.
1
Your poetry confounds me. Nuance doesn't cut it in life and death situations. Talk nuance to a combat second lieutenant and he'll (I'll) think you are a madman!
2
I really do not see why the president should apologize for this accidental killing of these two men who were in the wrong place at the wrong time. It was their own choice to go there and put themselves in harms way.
The American may have had the very best intentions, but he could have done good deeds in other places where it was not so dangerous.
The American may have had the very best intentions, but he could have done good deeds in other places where it was not so dangerous.
8
In other words, we are free to declare the entire world a battlefield and rationalize any deaths of noncombatants as "collateral damage," or as you do, by blaming the deceased for being on a "battleground." Seems a little irresponsible to me.
2
Yes, that's correct. If you want to go there and help, then maybe you better have a GPS on your back. The government can't track ever do- gooder in foreign lands. My heart goes out to all the women and children of those foreign places that are killed often by our drones. Tjeu don't have a choice of location.
I am well and truly sorry that two humanitarians were killed in the drone attacks. My heart goes out to their families.
I feel just the opposite about the two Pakistani-American allies to Al Qaeda who were killed. In fact I cheer it. Good riddance. They took up arms against the U.S. and paid the price.
As for Rep. Duncan Hunter, and his fellow hypocrites, he was one of the cheerleaders of invading Iraq. He has some nerve criticizing Obama.
I feel just the opposite about the two Pakistani-American allies to Al Qaeda who were killed. In fact I cheer it. Good riddance. They took up arms against the U.S. and paid the price.
As for Rep. Duncan Hunter, and his fellow hypocrites, he was one of the cheerleaders of invading Iraq. He has some nerve criticizing Obama.
20
Collateral damage.
If you haven't done so in the past 50 years, get used to it.
It happens to be Americans that died this time... but how many hundreds of thousands of other innocents has America bombed to death in the past 50 years?
Either you're with us... or you're (with) the enemy.
If you haven't done so in the past 50 years, get used to it.
It happens to be Americans that died this time... but how many hundreds of thousands of other innocents has America bombed to death in the past 50 years?
Either you're with us... or you're (with) the enemy.
8
Any attack on hostage takers has inherent risks. If it was me, I would want our military to try to free me. And if it failed, I would much rather be blown up in a rescue attempt than to be ritually tortured and executed. Kudos to our President for keeping up this fight.
8
Oh, by all means let's go around killing people we don't like in independent small countries that are no threat to us. How come we don't do that stuff in England, France,Russia, China, etc? Well, we're brave but not that brave. Ever hear of that United Nations thing? Ever see them protect their members from us? Ever hear of that Constitution thingy? Slavish judges have shredded it to where it looks like a piece of cheesecloth you use to clean a kitchen sink. Why bother with courts? Why not just make the president supreme dictator and let him kill anybody he wants to (unless they tortured prisoners, of course)? Oh, wait a minute, we already did that. See how easy it is to run a country?
7
Warren Weinstein is one in a long line of American heroes who work quietly and humbly to make the world a better place. He set a very high bar for all of us, and for that we should all be grateful. May God bless him and provide his family solace in this time of grief. Long may we remember Mr. Weinstein.
8
What's being accomplished? In traditional warfare, we'd have a sense if we're making progress or not. Presently, news media report drone strikes in Yemen, Pakistan, Afghanistan. We don't hear how the overall battle is going, whether our adversaries are weakening and closer to defeat or holding their own. We need to know what's being accomplished in an overall sense. Even in unconventional warfare there's a sense about how the effort is going. Reports of individual drone strikes, casualties and more drone strikes fail to help us understand what's being accomplished. Worse, we may be becoming too accepting of what's being done.
5
Drones are not the issue in determining the success or failure to win battles and the war. Middle Eaatern Arab culture is very macho-like. As long as we are careful not to use too much force, they see it as weakness and won't surrender. You need to show tremendous overpowering force to make them stop and fall in line. How did Saddam Hussein managed to keep Iraq under control? These terrorists are mass killers and they put fear in the general population. That is why they are winning territory and we will never win this war.
¿"Counter-terrorist op."? The US carries terrorist ops.
1
Why has it taken so long to reveal this?
4
Because this is the least transparent Administration in the history of the Republic. It makes Richard Nixon look like Ralph Nader.
6
Coverups eventually are revealed. People more likely to say "par for the course". This administration is so inept. Puts John Cleese and Peter Sellers in the rear with respect to farce.
@Robert Dana and Tullymd:
One word: Iraq.
The GOP will never, ever be in the position to point fingers about transparency and ineptitude.
EVER.
One word: Iraq.
The GOP will never, ever be in the position to point fingers about transparency and ineptitude.
EVER.
1
Would you go to THAT region knowingly that you may be killed, tortured, kidnapped, etc? I wouldn't. They chose to, nobody held a gun to their head to go. They were not our brave solders either. So, move on...
7
It's called " suicide by terrorist". Difficult to empathize.
2
They were humanitarians. The world could use morel of them, but I can't say the US government is responsible for their deaths. I can say that many innocents have died as a result of drone attacks. People who are just trying to live in the place where they were born and raised.
Drones are cowardly. The use of them will come back to haunt us from this enemy.
Mark my word. Alea iacta est.
Mark my word. Alea iacta est.
6
Why are drones cowardly? I rather be a living coward that killed the enemy than a dead hero in the hands of the enemy. The enemy is dead and we are alive. Guess who the winner is.
1
Robert, only a matter of time. Of course when we are attacked in kind it will be a huge war crime against America and will demand maximum response. We are trapped in our own negative feedback loop, and don't know it. Our very own actions will land us in a huge war.
2
This is disgusting. Droning is NOT WORKING America. It's a huge recruiting tool. Imagine if Bush were doing the Droning, ok? OK? Nope. BHO has been co-opted by the MIC, just like every president since the end of WWII. Here's the thin about America; We double-down on monumental mistakes until we are ruined by said mistakes. See Vietnam, War on Drugs, War on Terror, War on Crime, War on the Border. All losing endeavors and should never have been started in the first place. Now we have a MIC killing with impunity, like our police. Obama looks sad in this pic, but WTH did he expect would happen? Gigantic crimes are being committed in our names across the world. Please, never wonder why 'they' hate us.
13
You mean all we have to do is stop the drone strikes to end terrorism? Stop it already.
1
The President graciously apologizes for the deaths of two non combatants. I don't seem to recall Bush & Cheney apologizing for the deaths of several hundred thousand innocents in Iraq and Afghanistan. This President is head and shoulders above the previous debacle owners.
22
Sadly he isn't. Sure, Mr. Obama apologizes, and I believe he is sincere. But Obama has in so many ways "stayed the course" that Bush and Cheney started, especially in Afghanistan and Pakistan, which are hopeless.
And even if Obama is better somehow than Bush or Cheney, the American people in November of 2014 gave complete control of Congress to Bush and Cheney's supporters because most Americans support the carnage of the drones on innocent civilians around the world. So it doesn't really matter if Obama is better than Bush and Cheney.
And even if Obama is better somehow than Bush or Cheney, the American people in November of 2014 gave complete control of Congress to Bush and Cheney's supporters because most Americans support the carnage of the drones on innocent civilians around the world. So it doesn't really matter if Obama is better than Bush and Cheney.
5
I don't understand why this is getting so much media attention. First of all, is this the first time that armed conflict has caused collateral damage such that it would warrant a front-page headline? Second, does the fact that this was a drone strike really make it any worse? Fighter jets could have made the same mistake just as easily. Third, do we really need another excuse to unfairly criticize a president who has received just about the largest amount of undue flak in history?
14
I read the Reporter's Notebook, and the other articles, including this one, about this man. We lost a great man, there can be no mistake about it. His service to others, his deep intellectual hunger and a hunger to be a part of the everyday lives of those he helped, to me are the virtues of a truly well rounded man, an accomplishment not always as sought after today as it perhaps once was.
May he rest in peace.
With respect.
RS
May he rest in peace.
With respect.
RS
6
Drone warfare will come back and haunt us eventually. It will be used to harm innocent people. Spying and package delivery should take a backseat to human lives. I'm surprised the use of drones has gotten as far as it has. The worst thing about our society is the recurring theme of preventable tragedies.
4
Civilians are civilians whether American or Arab. Apologies are past due for all innocent persons. And it is time to stop using drones in this manner.
6
The nice thing about drones is that the drone pilot is completely detached from the conflict so that he or she can feel nothing each time he or she assassinates an innocent person.
2
He may apologize and take full responsibility, but the real responsibility lies with these two men, who went into countries in turmoil, for whatever reason, and had some bad luck.
6
Every colonial empire has labeled those who resist colonial power “terrorists” -- England, France, Belgium, Spain. Every autocratic government has labeled there opponents “terrorists,” also. There is a well-know saying:
“War is is the rich man’s terrorism and terrorism is the poor man’s war.”
The war hawks’ hands, in this country, are covered with blood; as are the hands of those who support them. When are we going to be honest with ourselves?
“War is is the rich man’s terrorism and terrorism is the poor man’s war.”
The war hawks’ hands, in this country, are covered with blood; as are the hands of those who support them. When are we going to be honest with ourselves?
8
And where are our colonies? We are earnestly trying to extricate ourselves from these nations. Don't equate freedom fighters with terrorists. These sickos are attacking people who have nothing to do with the USA. ISIS is now threatening Palestinians in refugee camps.
2
And then, there are actual terrorists, like Al Queda and ISIS. Did we ever declare war on Al Queda or try to take over their territory until they declared war on us? My main issue with our wars is that they are undelcared and unreviewed. It's not enough to know that some American interest is at risk somewhere -- we cannot just invade countries or kill people because they are not amenable to our economic or political interests. We and should can defend our country from people planning attacks against it. By declaring war and instituting a draft to support it, we could make a political and democratic decision about when and how we are sending people to die.
RIP Warren! You loved Pakistan, my home city of Lahore and worked tirelessly for its people. Its tragic that you were kidnapped from your Model Town home and did not live to come back to the United States. I am hopeful that Pakistan is on a path toward improvement now that the country seems more resolved than ever to fight terrorists after the Peshawar school massacre last year.
5
Secret warfare is incompatible with democracy. It doesn't matter which "guidelines" are followed. Our government does not have authorization to kill in our names and we, as citizen voters in charge of what our government does, cannot make informed decisions about killings taking place far away and in secret. The whole idea of the CIA being authorized to kill so that both governments can look the other way is absurd. Secret warfare and democracy are fundamentally in contradiction in all but the most extreme circumstances and, even then, all information would need to be declassified in a timely manner (months, not years).
Doug Terry
Doug Terry
13
Unfortunate to be sure. It's amazing to me that people expect us to conduct a war without any accidents. No other power in the world has made such an effort to avoid innocent casualties. It's either drones or boots on the ground. Personally, I think we need both, recognizing that the Arab nations need to take the lead in cleaning up the Mideast mess.
6
No, a Drone did not kill these men, a man or a woman sitting at a desk in an air conditioned office near Las Vegas somewhere pushed a button that launched a missile from the drone that he or she was flying that killed these men. A HUMAN BEING did this!
11
A human being pushed a button that killed Osama Bin Laden too.
It is interesting that the majority of those who object to drone warfare live safe and cozy in cities that have never experienced a terrorist attack.
It is interesting that the majority of those who object to drone warfare live safe and cozy in cities that have never experienced a terrorist attack.
@markmark: "... a man or a woman sitting at a desk in an air conditioned office near Las Vegas somewhere pushed a button ..."
This was a CIA operation, so the "air conditioned office" would be in Virginia or Afghanistan:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Intelligence_Agency
@NM: "A human being pushed a button that killed Osama Bin Laden too."
US Navy SEALs killed Osama bin Laden in person:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Osama_bin_Laden
This was a CIA operation, so the "air conditioned office" would be in Virginia or Afghanistan:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Intelligence_Agency
@NM: "A human being pushed a button that killed Osama Bin Laden too."
US Navy SEALs killed Osama bin Laden in person:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Osama_bin_Laden
In one way or another it's called friendly fire. It has happened in every war we have ever had including plenty in WWII and Korea and Vietnam. It is terrible. It is all but inevitable in war even high tech war.
10
Speaking of 'friendly fire' yesterday was the commemorative of the murder of Corporal Pat Tillman, US Army Ranger and former NFL star who volunteered to fight in Afghanistan but once there became convinced we should not be there which resulted in 2 bullets in the middle of his brow by fellow rangers. No one has ever been prosecuted and Tillman's diary which kept account of their actions was never returned even after investigation. RIP..
1
There's nothing friendly about friendly fire.
It's never an easy choice to make - Hope springs eternally BUT I don't think I would care to live as a POW -- to have it end this way is the best way.
His captors are animals and should be destroyed 1000 fold.
His captors are animals and should be destroyed 1000 fold.
4
Again, interesting that you only consider to be "animals" the "bad guys" on the other side... What about the CIA torture program (sorry, "enhanced interrogation techniques")? Are the "animals" always on the other side of the fence?
2
WE are animals as well. WE murder innocent women and children as well.
Animals do not kill wantonly.
We malign animals when we suggest we humans are like them.
We humans are quite simply depraved.
We malign animals when we suggest we humans are like them.
We humans are quite simply depraved.
It's called the civilian casualties of war. Not too much you can do about it except be as careful as possible.
8
What's with all the blather about "innocent civilians" killed over the years by U.S. military action? How can we possibly know if these people are accomplices, casual supporters, family members, police spies, or simply bystanders? It all sounds to me as suspiciously like a broken record mantra left over from the rhetoric popularized by the old-new-left who demonized the younger Bush. Politics needs to stop at the water's edge. There is very little room for adolescent emotion in the determination of foreign policy. I suspect these are lessons Obama picked up in undergraduate school and I am very glad he did. I wish him luck.
7
I don't believe the "innocent civilians" myth either. Civilians support the actions of their government no mater how absurd or brutal its policies are. Iranian civilians still regard America as 'The Great Satan" and chant "Death to America" in the streets of Tehran. Enough already with this innocent civilians myth--it's old, stale and should be discarded right along with the "when in doubt blame America first" fable. And let's not forget to blame Israel for every Mid East disaster too!!!
1
Hmm, you know that rationalization is what bin laden used for 9/11. Those people were taxpayers (well, probably tax dodgers - but they were citizens of the USA) and supported the government that they blamed for great evil. You are doing the exact same.
Right now Iran is being used to justify massive bombing in Yemen. Plenty of civilians are being killed - "bey their own government."
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/04/23/citing-iran-to-justify-yemen-slaug...
Civilians are being killed by the US puppet regime in Ukraine as well, that is, people who demanded autonomy got a response in the form of tanks and shells. And our Nobel winning President at no point suggested dialogue.
What happens if drones have to be used internally - 'because ISIS' - or whatever the newest golem of US/Israeli/Saudi ME destabilization is.
If drones kill civilians in the US - will it still be "collateral damage?"
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/04/23/citing-iran-to-justify-yemen-slaug...
Civilians are being killed by the US puppet regime in Ukraine as well, that is, people who demanded autonomy got a response in the form of tanks and shells. And our Nobel winning President at no point suggested dialogue.
What happens if drones have to be used internally - 'because ISIS' - or whatever the newest golem of US/Israeli/Saudi ME destabilization is.
If drones kill civilians in the US - will it still be "collateral damage?"
7
“Josh Ernest, The White House Press Secretary,rejected Mr.Hunter’s assertions
that and said that the strikes did not deviate from normal practices and added that the families would receive financial compensation.”
Does Mr. Ernest actually believe that financial compensation can replace loved ones?
I assure Mr.Ernest that this is not the case. My father died suddenly and unexpectedly at the age of 51.
My mother,siblings and I received substantial "financial compensation "for my
father’s death in the form of life insurance payouts.
While I remain forever grateful that my father went to great lengths to ensure his family’s financial security in the event of his death, the substantial “financial compensation” I received as a result of his death, did not make the loss of my father any less devastating.This Sunday will mark the 31st anniversary of his death.Thought the pain is far less acute, the loss remains substantial.
As great a shock as the death of a seemingly healthy father who went to work on April 26,1984, like he did every day,never to return, was,and as great as our loss was,my family did not have to deal with the horror of our father being killed by a U.S.drone strike “That did not deviate from usual practices.
My heart goes out to the families of those who were killed. I hope they can find some small solace in Mr.Obama’s taking " full responsibility “ for their deaths,
as opposed to Mr. Ernest’s unfeeling remarks.
that and said that the strikes did not deviate from normal practices and added that the families would receive financial compensation.”
Does Mr. Ernest actually believe that financial compensation can replace loved ones?
I assure Mr.Ernest that this is not the case. My father died suddenly and unexpectedly at the age of 51.
My mother,siblings and I received substantial "financial compensation "for my
father’s death in the form of life insurance payouts.
While I remain forever grateful that my father went to great lengths to ensure his family’s financial security in the event of his death, the substantial “financial compensation” I received as a result of his death, did not make the loss of my father any less devastating.This Sunday will mark the 31st anniversary of his death.Thought the pain is far less acute, the loss remains substantial.
As great a shock as the death of a seemingly healthy father who went to work on April 26,1984, like he did every day,never to return, was,and as great as our loss was,my family did not have to deal with the horror of our father being killed by a U.S.drone strike “That did not deviate from usual practices.
My heart goes out to the families of those who were killed. I hope they can find some small solace in Mr.Obama’s taking " full responsibility “ for their deaths,
as opposed to Mr. Ernest’s unfeeling remarks.
4
As with Benghazi, it's our aggression that's responsible for this. Whether it's a crude video made by Christians or a war started in the name of Oil, Our Lord and Sacior, the U.S. thinks it can mess with other countries with impunity. It's time we grew up and learned to accept responsibility.
4
Huh? Have we occupied Pakistan? We have had a tortured relationship with all the of the recent regimes in Pakistan. Some folks just love to blame the USA.
1
Let's not lose sight of the fact that these men were among the best humanity had to offer. Committed to the people of Pakistan. Our deepest gratitude and respect.
9
President Obama,
(1) Please don't call our actions, "counterterrorism operations." We are committing acts of terrorism and wars of aggression throughout the Middle East.
(2) Something is not quite right with you. You apologize for killing two Americans but offer no condolences or reparations to the millions of innocent Muslim civilians that we have slaughtered since 9-11 in which you have played a major role to rack up the body count.
(1) Please don't call our actions, "counterterrorism operations." We are committing acts of terrorism and wars of aggression throughout the Middle East.
(2) Something is not quite right with you. You apologize for killing two Americans but offer no condolences or reparations to the millions of innocent Muslim civilians that we have slaughtered since 9-11 in which you have played a major role to rack up the body count.
17
Did Bush apologize? Let's start with him first for all the post-9/11 deaths. And since we are on it, how come we or the world never ask Bibi or Putin to apologize for killing people?
1
@kk in DC,
Please don't get me wrong. Every president starting with Harry Truman has committed war crimes against humanity and we have never apologized for our atrocities. I disagree with you in general on your points regarding Bibi/Putin. The U.S. is always pointing a holier than thou finger criticizing other nations for deplorable conduct- but it's hypocritical because we do the exact same thing, only much more often. Bush/cheney did not apologize and obama violated the constitution for not holding the previous administration accountable for torture. Obama, contrary to his primary promises to change our war policies in the Middle East, instead has continued the same policies as Bush-Cheney only on steroids.
Please don't get me wrong. Every president starting with Harry Truman has committed war crimes against humanity and we have never apologized for our atrocities. I disagree with you in general on your points regarding Bibi/Putin. The U.S. is always pointing a holier than thou finger criticizing other nations for deplorable conduct- but it's hypocritical because we do the exact same thing, only much more often. Bush/cheney did not apologize and obama violated the constitution for not holding the previous administration accountable for torture. Obama, contrary to his primary promises to change our war policies in the Middle East, instead has continued the same policies as Bush-Cheney only on steroids.
3
First of all, Obama does not have to apologize for the actions of those who preceded him. He has, nonetheless, acknowledged mistakes by this country, for which he was attacked viciously by the right wing. Secondly, if you refer to "innocent Muslims" as being the families who have lived with their warrior husbands, no apology is required. True warriors would never take their families into battle. Many of the terrorists in training, however, want to live with the comforts of home while they prepare for terrorist acts. It is those who took their families into a battle situation who bear responsibility for that decision, not the president. You also, Paul Cohen, refer to "millions of innocent civilians". I wonder where this figure comes from. It appears to discredit your entire comment. Millions?
Doug Terry
Doug Terry
1
Mr. Obama, all peoples lives matter.
10
Every death in war is a tragedy. Every one. The soldier. The NGO employee. The civilian in NYC coming to work on a Monday morning. None is more valuable than the other.
4
No death in war is a tragedy. If it were, we wouldn't keep killing people in wars that have no end and that solve no problems.
It is sad, but collateral damage is just a fact of war. Radical Islam has been at war with the US for years, the sooner we defeat them, the less lives will be lost.
9
(reply to Kenneth Lindsey; recently, my replies have been posted as stand-alone comments.)
You really think they'll be defeated? One day, they're just gonna go, "well, I guess that it. They've got us beat. We give up"?
This isn't to say we shouldn't be doing things to minimize their killing, their damage, the size of their organizations and their funding, etc. But to think they'll one day be completely gone because they just can't take any more casualties is delusional. Ho and other N. Vietnamese leaders were willing to send a million or so of their own to their deaths for the cause, and would never have stopped until they ran out of men. The terrorists won't run out, because they don't need to front actual armies. Some movements just can't be crushed; they can only be managed, in one way or another.
You really think they'll be defeated? One day, they're just gonna go, "well, I guess that it. They've got us beat. We give up"?
This isn't to say we shouldn't be doing things to minimize their killing, their damage, the size of their organizations and their funding, etc. But to think they'll one day be completely gone because they just can't take any more casualties is delusional. Ho and other N. Vietnamese leaders were willing to send a million or so of their own to their deaths for the cause, and would never have stopped until they ran out of men. The terrorists won't run out, because they don't need to front actual armies. Some movements just can't be crushed; they can only be managed, in one way or another.
1
That theory led to 3 million collateral dead in SE Asia in the Vietnam war. Oh yeah, it was a big war.
Mr. Weinstein and others who choose to work in areas affected by terrorists put themselves in danger. We have the responsibility to help American citizens, but I'm not sure how many other American lives should be lost in doing so. There is no country against which to declare war, but we are in a war against terrorism. Terrorists are in a war against humanity. We need to use drones to target sites in areas that are geographically almost impossible to reach.
7
Why do we "need" to do that? If they're in a remote area of the world, then how much of a threat are they, really? Sure, maybe they are "training" for war, the same way some nut job militia is training to fight the gummit "someday." We don't bomb them. If our reaction is not proportionate to the threat we face, then it is unjust.
"oops. our bad."
Maybe if we stopped trying to dictate policy around the world, this stuff might not be necessary.
Maybe if we stopped trying to dictate policy around the world, this stuff might not be necessary.
5
I thought the UAE was "handling" Yemen but here we are giving out free weapons to one side (who arent good in any sense of the word) and performing drone strikes. Galling.
2
Can we agree at least that these drone killings of our enemies aren't as clean and "surgical" as advertised?
7
I'm a contractor who has worked in Afghanistan since December of 2010. I am compensated for my job (30%), hardship (40%), and hazard pay (30%.) I accept the risk for the pay I receive. Two of my friends and fellow coworkers were killed in a rocket attack late one night last year. If the worst should happen to me, I wouldn't want my survivors to blame the US government. In the case of the American and Italian hostages that were mistakenly killed in a drone strike, their relatives should realize that their loved ones by virtue of their presence in a war zone, accepted their own individual risk. The bottom line is that in this part of the world, human life doesn't mean what it means to most Americans. It should come as no shock that bad things will occasionally happen to good people over here. I don't want to seem callous, but the ultimate responsibility for the hostage's death resides with the hostages themselves. Regardless whether or not they were financially compensated, they knew he risks and chose to engage just the same. And ultimately, they paid the price. The president, and the CIA had nothing to do with it.
28
Well, there is a big difference. These two men went to help their fellow human beings. Given your hefty compensation, I doubt you were doing likewise.
On an individual level, sure, people who choose to be there are responsible for being there. But in the bigger picture, *someone* had to be there to do the work that has to be done. Whether it's you, or the guy who didn't get hired, someone would be there, and they should not be marginalized simply because they weren't there at gunpoint.
An argument can be made for either motivation, financial or moral. But in any case, if someone chooses to operate in a war zone where human life often lacks value, they assume a risk.
All I can think of is shame on the United States. Shame on us
4
No, shame on the terrorists. We're there trying to help.
1
George C, Well, if it was helping it would be one thing, but this policy is a complete failure from the top down. The key is to stop hurting ourselves first. You know that America is not capable of helping over there?
Yet another carefully targeted drone strike. No big deal when innocent Muslim women and children are killed. A tragedy when an admirable American is the victim. I mourn them all. The reason for this policy is that no one, including those in the media, pay much attention to the deaths of innocent Muslims in far off lands, and more significantly because drone strikes and night raids keeps US casualties low, making this immoral policy politically uncontroversial.
11
Warriors, or those who have declared themselves to be at constant war with the west, America and western values, do not take their families into battle. You don't jump on a tank and say, "Here, wifey, let's go for a ride." In the case of those hiding in Pakistan and elsewhere, they have unfortunately chosen to have their families with them in many cases. They want to have the comforts of family life while waging war. This is a contradiction.
What is an innocent person? Surely, it is a child, but an adult who makes a decision to take children to live with announced, dedicated warriors has accepted full responsibility of the potential for their deaths, however sad and tragic those deaths might be.
At the same time, I do not approve of drone strikes generally when conducted in secret. I am posting a separate comment in that regard.
What is an innocent person? Surely, it is a child, but an adult who makes a decision to take children to live with announced, dedicated warriors has accepted full responsibility of the potential for their deaths, however sad and tragic those deaths might be.
At the same time, I do not approve of drone strikes generally when conducted in secret. I am posting a separate comment in that regard.
Tom, Additionally this policy isn't even helping. It's hurting. It's destroying any goodwill toward America and has become a recruiting and rallying cry for the extremists there. Every drone strike is the equivalent of pounding our own fist into our own face. Here's the sobering truth that Americans don't want to face; Our own government and military regardless of party or branch are squandering our wealth and losing this 'war on terror' on a vast scale. The loss in Vietnam will look like Romper Room by comparison.
I wish all the do gooders would go to work in American ghettos. We have many problems here screaming for their attention. No need to go to Pakistan or Syria to die. Your families deserve better.
21
I was just looking at pictures of Syria with two friends who are war refugees from Liberia. They were utterly shocked. They couldn't believe people would let Syria get so bad.
2
Unfortunately the pay is poor working in the US. Our contractors and workers in Afghanistan are paid giant pay checks. When I was there people were making over 200K per year processing paperwork on a FOB or supervising and Afghan construction crew.
The people who assign blame for this tragedy to the United States airstrikes and drone policy are totally misguided. The terrorists are the only ones with responsibility. They were the ones who kidnapped a humanitarian who was attempting to assist the people of Pakistan and held him in despicable conditions. They were the ones who waged war on innocents and repeatedly attacked the United States. The United States military response was provoked by their conduct and constituted a just response by a government which was directly threatened b their actions.
14
"They" attacked the U.S. ??? When? Where? And don't talk about 9/11 -- those guys have been dead a long time.
If there is such a risk of collateral damage, with the elite operatives we have around the world, why not have a sniper eliminate a target? Let's be honest, these drone strikes are assassinations, plain and simple, so why not be precise about it?
3
Because drones are not boots on the ground.
Sanitary actions only, nothing to see here..
We wouldn't want the citizenry disturbed.
Clinton marveled at our 'smart bombs' and Barack relies on his drones.
Sanitary actions only, nothing to see here..
We wouldn't want the citizenry disturbed.
Clinton marveled at our 'smart bombs' and Barack relies on his drones.
3
Yet another proof there is nothing better than on the ground real time intelligence gathering.
3
This is warfare, pure and simple, American death or not. If you are in a war zone, you may get killed. Once a war breaks out, get out of the war zone. If you stay and die, that is evolution in action. The president has nothing to be sorry about. The only Americans who should be in a war zone are soldiers.
11
In addition to the death of the hostages, think of all the innocent women, men and children who have been killed by America's drones in the Mideast in the name of peace. Shameful!
10
If Dubya did this people would be rightly critical.
Yet, our inspirational leader does it and we remain blissfully ignorant.
Nice New Silent Majority we have here...
shame on us.
Yet, our inspirational leader does it and we remain blissfully ignorant.
Nice New Silent Majority we have here...
shame on us.
11
No one is silent, on the contrary, many Democrats to the left of Obama criticize him constantly. Snark about inspirational leader only magnifies the mess made by the most ignorant former leader that created the mess over there.
8
Clark, W killed 4500 innocent Americans in Iraq, many more Iraqi civilians,and he was asleep at the switch when over 3000 Americans died on 9-11. What was your point?
4
If this had happened on Dubya's watch, he would've lied about it, tried to cover it up, blamed everyone but his administration and then accused anyone who disagreed with him of not being patriotic or being anti-American. At least Obama is taking full responsibility and admitting they screwed up. Dubya's biggest screw up was getting us sucked into the area in the first place. I'll take the "Nice New Silent Majority" any day of the week over the borderline fascist McCarthyism of the Dubya days.
3
Drone strikes kill people. Seems it's only really news when they're our people.
19
Drones in warfare should be banned! If the threat isn't worth dealing with on-site, that should tell us something. Someone pressing a button somewhere in the mid-west is not a solution. Bad as this is, our government is developing fully autonomous weapons systems. How bad will it be if they succeed?
2
Many innocent Pakistanis have been killed including
women and children. No one knows the number
precisely because there is no verification. Journalists
are not allowed. Only the families know.
women and children. No one knows the number
precisely because there is no verification. Journalists
are not allowed. Only the families know.
8
Many innocent Pakistanis and others aroeund the world have been killed by terrorists. We are trying to protect them.
2
GLB,
You are kidding, right? I'm gobsmacked. You do understand that all the secret wars, attacks, deniability etc. are for Americans, not anybody else? Everyone else knows what we are doing. The 'secret' is being kept from the American electorate. It's like the Phoenix Program, but it's now and they're using drones. We, the American people, are the ignorant ones.
You are kidding, right? I'm gobsmacked. You do understand that all the secret wars, attacks, deniability etc. are for Americans, not anybody else? Everyone else knows what we are doing. The 'secret' is being kept from the American electorate. It's like the Phoenix Program, but it's now and they're using drones. We, the American people, are the ignorant ones.
“You can go down to a gun show at the local convention center and come away with a fully automatic assault rifle, without a background check, and most likely without having to show an identification card,” he said in the video. “So what are you waiting for?”
This has been a glaring danger for years, yet Republicans block every effort to keep terrorists from backing up a truck at a gun show and driving away with an instant massacre's worth of weapons.
This has been a glaring danger for years, yet Republicans block every effort to keep terrorists from backing up a truck at a gun show and driving away with an instant massacre's worth of weapons.
7
That is simply not true. Fully automatic "assault" rifles are not even legal in the US to own unless you have a Federal permit. And even then, you can't sell it, as it's a felony to do so.
3
Yes. If it were a true statement. But it isn't.
1
You can not buy a FULLY automatic weapon without a federal permit. Just because an AR-15 looks like an M-16 does not mean that it has full automatic capability.
2
Perhaps the bitter lesson of these deaths is that human lives not just American lives should men to the US administration. Hundred of innocent Pakistanis, Yemenis, Iraqis and others were killed by the US's aggressive drone strikes with no acknowledgement, no apologies whatsoever. That is what makes this sound so cruel because they are not from the 'overlooked' judged guilty people?
11
Maybe we should care so much about the innocent Afghanis, Pakistanis and Iraqis that we've been killing over the last decade plus.
19
It would be interesting to find out what efforts our government made to find and return Warren Weinstein. From what I have heard on the news about it, his family is not pleased with the government's efforts.
2
Another outlet I subscribe to on the web, Foreign Policy, has full details of Elaine Weinstein's comments. The family is furious. Even worse, they only found out their husband/father was dead on Wednesday. Up until then they were trying to find out what efforts were being made to get him released.
I feel strongly this will not go away. And it will be widely reported.
I feel strongly this will not go away. And it will be widely reported.
1
While i am not Obama's biggest fan (understatement here) during all conflicts there have been POW's killed by the armed forces of their own nation.. American POW's were killed during the nuclear attacks on Japan (those that survived were subsequently literally crucified by angry Japanese). During that same war, Japanese POW camps and ships holding American and British soldiers were mistakenly bombs by American planes. Even German death camps in Poland were mistakenly bombed by the Allies...as if the Germans did not inflict enough pain.
4
I can't speak for everyone, but personally I'm not upset that collateral damage happens. It's a fact that we will make mistakes, and that those mistakes have consequences.
The problem I have is that we're killing people who are not a direct threat to us, or to people who have asked for our protection. These aren't people on a battlefield, as much as they may aspire to be, but people in their homes. Let's save the killing for actual combat, if it comes to that, instead of preemptively murdering people who may someday be a threat. The fact that hostages were killed only makes this policy more tragic, it is far from the only objection.
The problem I have is that we're killing people who are not a direct threat to us, or to people who have asked for our protection. These aren't people on a battlefield, as much as they may aspire to be, but people in their homes. Let's save the killing for actual combat, if it comes to that, instead of preemptively murdering people who may someday be a threat. The fact that hostages were killed only makes this policy more tragic, it is far from the only objection.
One question? How do you accidentally kill some one? Is that known as collateral damage?
4
This is a perfect metaphor for our foreign policy.
Support repressive regimes and corporate exploitation that provide a breeding ground for terrorists, then bomb people who are working on a solution by means of prosperity and enfranchisement.
Support repressive regimes and corporate exploitation that provide a breeding ground for terrorists, then bomb people who are working on a solution by means of prosperity and enfranchisement.
3
Would it be too much to ask of the New York Times to not be breathlessly flogging tragic news like this? The tone of hand-wringing and self-flagellation is not consistent with the origins of this horror, nor respectful of the innocent deceased. It's very easy to sit in a cubicle in New York City and bemoan the inhumanity of all this, but what would you recommend we do instead? Catch the 5:46 to Larchmont? Turn the page? I am sickened every day with what I see and hear from this part of the world. It doesn't require embellishment or exploitation. Very hard decisions have to be made constantly. It is left to others to second-guess them constantly.
9
Jeff,
absolutely,
None of that self flagellation nonsense for us. We're clean!
absolutely,
None of that self flagellation nonsense for us. We're clean!
1
Actually, this is entirely the fault of the United States government. First, they draw the ire of far-flung peoples who they know little about by manipulating foreign governments. Second, once American citizens are captured, the government refuses to pay ransoms which are relatively minor compared to the exorbitant military budget. And third, government actors merely hit a button in order to cause much death and destruction: in this case the execution of an American citizen. As we learned with nuclear bombs, no one man should have this much power.
3
The ransoms will not remain minor if kidnappers know the US will pay.
As a Pakistani American, I blame the government of Pakistan for not doing enough to secure Warren's and others release. The faulty intelligence on the drone stroke was also most likely provided by ISI. However, having said that, my immediate concern is the rising violence in my current home of Baltimore, where on average, one person gets shot everyday. Its time to focus on the home front, on our own cities plagued by violence, drugs and gangs.
14
I think we must chalk this one up to the inherent cruelty of war, and not try to lay blame on the U.S. The hostages were probably kept hidden, so it's not surprising they were missed by pre-strike surveillance. At least Obama must be given some credit for going public with it, which he did not have to do.
Drone warfare is, after all, a pretty successful means of killing people who are trying to kill us, and in a way that does not put our soldiers at risk. Collateral victims in any sort of warfare are inevitable, but the use of drones do allow their numbers to be reduced to the minimum possible. If there is to be a war on the jihadi terrorists dwelling in Pakistan at all, we must accept that things like this will occasionally happen.
Drone warfare is, after all, a pretty successful means of killing people who are trying to kill us, and in a way that does not put our soldiers at risk. Collateral victims in any sort of warfare are inevitable, but the use of drones do allow their numbers to be reduced to the minimum possible. If there is to be a war on the jihadi terrorists dwelling in Pakistan at all, we must accept that things like this will occasionally happen.
14
This is a tragic loss of a good man, but shouldn't be construed as the fault of the Obama Administration, nor should it stall the Drone offensive on our enemies.
The United States policy of no ransom for captives , is understandingly conceived as Callous by the Loved ones of Mr.Weinstein, and should be reviewed, & perhaps changed.However, our drone offensive has done away with terrorists that were a threat to the security of Americans & our allies, & must be continued.This is the world we live in and the innocent & the good are periodically caught up in the insanity that exists in the world, But, we must continue to put fear in their hearts until we rid ourselves of those that mean us harm.
My Sincerest condolences to Mrs Weinstein & her family.
The United States policy of no ransom for captives , is understandingly conceived as Callous by the Loved ones of Mr.Weinstein, and should be reviewed, & perhaps changed.However, our drone offensive has done away with terrorists that were a threat to the security of Americans & our allies, & must be continued.This is the world we live in and the innocent & the good are periodically caught up in the insanity that exists in the world, But, we must continue to put fear in their hearts until we rid ourselves of those that mean us harm.
My Sincerest condolences to Mrs Weinstein & her family.
7
Killing handful occasionally will take hundreds of
years to get rid of "those who mean harm" to you.
The male member of the family gets angry, voluntary
join the group. Their ranks keep swelling. It is now 14 years
since 9/11 and jihad is still going on. It is morphing into another war on drugs-going on since days of Nixon.
Drones will never get rid of jihadis just like capturing
and imprisoning handful of drug deals. It makes for good
headlines when a leader of a drug gang or a jihadi is killed.
Overall, it seems to make no dent.
years to get rid of "those who mean harm" to you.
The male member of the family gets angry, voluntary
join the group. Their ranks keep swelling. It is now 14 years
since 9/11 and jihad is still going on. It is morphing into another war on drugs-going on since days of Nixon.
Drones will never get rid of jihadis just like capturing
and imprisoning handful of drug deals. It makes for good
headlines when a leader of a drug gang or a jihadi is killed.
Overall, it seems to make no dent.
3
Given our current political leadership (or lack thereof), this may have been more attractive than seeing them dressed in orange in a "Jihad Johnny" video while Obama gives us a press conference from a golf course.
2
Just wait until our enemies figure out a way to make their own drones. Then we will find out how immoral these weapons really are.
22
It won't be very difficult. Amazon will be delivering drones via drone.
3
No weapons are truly immoral, only the uses they're put to. Nuclear warheads may seem immoral to you now, but if they were used as in the silly movie Armageddon, to destroy a meteor before it hit earth and wiped us out, they'd suddenly seem pretty moral.
1
And they will find out that we were just playing nice before.
The president didn't "cause" these deaths. They were caused by the kidnappers who held them hostage in a highly dangerous location. That said, I see the president's apology as essentially the collective apology of world leaders to those they govern -- an apology for our leaders' failure to stop the violence.
5
Killing civilians, whether US citizens or foreigners, with drones is a WAR CRIME. Thank you, George W. Obama and Barack H. Bush.
9
Dear Jon Davis,
Sorry but that's incorrect. Intentionally killing civilians is a war crime. Attacking one's enemy and inadvertently killing civilians in the process is not.
Sorry but that's incorrect. Intentionally killing civilians is a war crime. Attacking one's enemy and inadvertently killing civilians in the process is not.
Jon, are you thanking Bush and Obama because they have strived to minimize the loss of innocent lives while our enemies target innocent people?
Given the wall-to-wall coverage on news programs and the Times and all of the angst over the use of drones and the unfortunate deaths of two aid workers, I would make the following comments and observations: 1) I feel for the loss of Messrs. Weinstein and Lo Porto. I can only imagine the devastation their families must be feeling. I think that it is proper for our government to offer some compensation. 2) Unlike soldiers who must go in harm's way under orders of their government, civilians, however good and true their motivations, choose to go into danger. I can only hope that they and their families understand those dangers. It is unclear to me exactly what the government's responsibility to such civilians actually is. 3) Al Qaeda took and held these men. They bear the responsibility for their deaths. 4) Hawks of all political stripes who are willing to send our young men and women off to fight in our wars seem to do so in the belief that only enemy combatants will die in the conflict. People die in war zones. Soldiers, terrorists, civilians, the innocent, the captive. Our soldiers even occasionally kill each other in "friendly fire" incidents. It is a dirty business. 5) Some of the commentary I have been hearing seems to want to call this a failure of intelligence. How can we possibly know where Al Qaeda keeps hostages or when and where they are moved. I guess we should imbed a GPS chip in every potential hostage. 6) Waiting to see how Congress weighs in on this.
8
Why do we ever think it appropriate to take full responsibility for anything that happens on this planet? I understand why President Obama does. Who would ever leave him alone if he does or he doesn’t?
There is the element of our souls, of destiny, of randomness, of something so much greater, of mother nature at work we can be accountable for the decisions we make, but not always the outcome.
Personally I cannot see President Obama saying anything remotely close to these couple of Americans and Italians will just have to be part of the collateral damage. If the best decision is to take such an action then we have to.
It’s so unclear why or how some of us die when or how we do, or who or what decides when we will go.
I wonder if death was a gift. Its hard to think of in that light when there is someone to point the finger at. We can grieve and be angry, not understand, feel misunderstood, confused for the loss of life, but I think that’s about all that is truly ours’ to deal with when it comes to death.
Why would a 23 year old who was doing nothing but good throughout the world take a walk with friends on the last day of training and somehow slip into a waterfall and perish? None of us know.
Life is random and separately or not, with the advent of social media we have become a subculture to the one that once existed.
When something devastating happens there is always the opportunity to go outside ourselves and make a magnanimous gesture rather than staying small and petty.
There is the element of our souls, of destiny, of randomness, of something so much greater, of mother nature at work we can be accountable for the decisions we make, but not always the outcome.
Personally I cannot see President Obama saying anything remotely close to these couple of Americans and Italians will just have to be part of the collateral damage. If the best decision is to take such an action then we have to.
It’s so unclear why or how some of us die when or how we do, or who or what decides when we will go.
I wonder if death was a gift. Its hard to think of in that light when there is someone to point the finger at. We can grieve and be angry, not understand, feel misunderstood, confused for the loss of life, but I think that’s about all that is truly ours’ to deal with when it comes to death.
Why would a 23 year old who was doing nothing but good throughout the world take a walk with friends on the last day of training and somehow slip into a waterfall and perish? None of us know.
Life is random and separately or not, with the advent of social media we have become a subculture to the one that once existed.
When something devastating happens there is always the opportunity to go outside ourselves and make a magnanimous gesture rather than staying small and petty.
2
Ever since Pearl was kidnapped and horribly murdered, we should have banned US civilians from travelling to, or being in, Pakistan. The death of the two captives and the awful effect of this whole matter on their families is tragic. This is why we need to flat out ban civilians like Mr. Weinstein from remaining in Pakistan. If I were in his shoes I would have begged for my life also, and strongly begged for the release of the hostages Al Queda wanted released.
However, releasing hostages involved in 9-11 in trade for a man who volunteered to stay in a land he knew was life threatening is simply not realistic. If anything, I'm sorry the 9-11 convicts were not executed.
If anything, this tragedy reveals the questionable value of our continued presence in Afghanistan and the Mideast. There is always going to be another terrorist to replace the one killed. The extent of our aid to Israel under Netanyahu is morally questionable and should be radically reduced and spent on Americans in the US. Playing the tricky game of taking sides in sectarian warfare is futile, because these groups will always fight. Finally, it would be great if we got a good agreement with Iran; but if we don't we should increase sanctions and that is all. If Israel wants a war, it cannot look to us to fund or fight its battles.
However, releasing hostages involved in 9-11 in trade for a man who volunteered to stay in a land he knew was life threatening is simply not realistic. If anything, I'm sorry the 9-11 convicts were not executed.
If anything, this tragedy reveals the questionable value of our continued presence in Afghanistan and the Mideast. There is always going to be another terrorist to replace the one killed. The extent of our aid to Israel under Netanyahu is morally questionable and should be radically reduced and spent on Americans in the US. Playing the tricky game of taking sides in sectarian warfare is futile, because these groups will always fight. Finally, it would be great if we got a good agreement with Iran; but if we don't we should increase sanctions and that is all. If Israel wants a war, it cannot look to us to fund or fight its battles.
2
Philip you do read like someone who has been spending too much time reading and listening to the US news media.
1
I find myself unable at the moment to consider the politics or policies. Instead, I am thinking about those who commit themselves to bettering the lives of others, and the courage such caring sometimes demands. My condolences to families of Warren Weinstein and Giovanni Lo Porto. May we learn from their lives.
7
“The cowardly actions of those who took Warren captive and ultimately to the place and time of his death are not in keeping with Islam and they will have to face their God to answer for their actions,” she added.
One might argue that they same may well hold true for those who try and defy the stark realities of real war by trying to virtually fight it, by shooting first and then asking questions later.
This kind of warfare will never end as long as it's tried to be fought from the safety of home, where the consequences go unseen and unfelt. What has ended wars in the past has been the collective mutual direct sufferings of both sides finally saying they've each had enough and only then is common sense allowed to prevail and they stop. Our abstract "war on terror" is a classic example of real war isn't and only called a war so those who wish to perpetuate it can do so with complete impunity for themselves and totally at the expense of others. It's a entirely selfish way to wage war, and so in keeping with how things have become.
It feels to me as is "peace" as well has become an abstract concept as well and therefore never to be felt again, because by making the definition of one side no longer reality, so thereby it must be true for the opposite. Just because we'd like to delude ourselves in thinking that it is within our power alter reality, those things won't abide no matter how hard we may wish.
One might argue that they same may well hold true for those who try and defy the stark realities of real war by trying to virtually fight it, by shooting first and then asking questions later.
This kind of warfare will never end as long as it's tried to be fought from the safety of home, where the consequences go unseen and unfelt. What has ended wars in the past has been the collective mutual direct sufferings of both sides finally saying they've each had enough and only then is common sense allowed to prevail and they stop. Our abstract "war on terror" is a classic example of real war isn't and only called a war so those who wish to perpetuate it can do so with complete impunity for themselves and totally at the expense of others. It's a entirely selfish way to wage war, and so in keeping with how things have become.
It feels to me as is "peace" as well has become an abstract concept as well and therefore never to be felt again, because by making the definition of one side no longer reality, so thereby it must be true for the opposite. Just because we'd like to delude ourselves in thinking that it is within our power alter reality, those things won't abide no matter how hard we may wish.
1
Give President Obama credit for apologizing, although personally I don't believe it was necessary.
What is interesting is that, to my knowledge, not one member of the Bush 43 brain trust ever apologized for the disastrous, unnecessary invasion of Iraq. And most of them have said that they would do it again, in Dick Cheney's words "in a heartbeat". And now Jeb Bush is lining up these same people as his advisers for a run in 2016? Amazing.
What is interesting is that, to my knowledge, not one member of the Bush 43 brain trust ever apologized for the disastrous, unnecessary invasion of Iraq. And most of them have said that they would do it again, in Dick Cheney's words "in a heartbeat". And now Jeb Bush is lining up these same people as his advisers for a run in 2016? Amazing.
6
When Americans venture into areas that are dangerous they should not expect other Americans to die trying to rescue them!
6
Anyone in this comments section pretending to not understand why the President of the United States feels politically compelled to apologize for the accidental death of an American is clearly enjoying their first week on Earth. Stop being obtuse.
3
Think it is time for people of good will to stay away from the Middle East until the cancer of the ISIS militants is eradicated.
6
This is another drone strike guaranteed to engender, "apologies" notwithstanding, more hatred of the US. In turn, more people will act against the US. No other country in the world accepts our drone strikes as legitimate. They must end; they must end now
5
@koyaanisqatsi: "No other country in the world accepts our drone strikes as legitimate."
Not even Pakistan? From the article: "Under the terms of a secret arrangement brokered in 2004, the C.I.A. was allowed to conduct lethal strikes inside the tribal areas of Pakistan, but neither the American nor the Pakistani government could acknowledge their existence."
Not even Pakistan? From the article: "Under the terms of a secret arrangement brokered in 2004, the C.I.A. was allowed to conduct lethal strikes inside the tribal areas of Pakistan, but neither the American nor the Pakistani government could acknowledge their existence."
1
It's sad when innocents are swept up along with terrorists bent on killing innocents. President Obama doesn't take his responsibilities lightly and I thank him and our military for their efforts to keep me and my wife safe and free.
3
@Grandpa Scold: "... our military ..."
The CIA is not part of the US Dept. of Defense.
The CIA is not part of the US Dept. of Defense.
2
@Steve: although there are a lot of ex military in the CIA. Perhaps that's part of the problem.....
Here we go again. Somebody is tragically injured, the pubcli get scared, and then the United States stops removing a powerful tool to deter those who would harm us. Our enemies are given an opportunity to get stronger, and learn that Americans flee when they get hurt. I imagine every terrorist is now thinking -- Ill keep a hostage around me from now on, to make the US less likely to strike me with drowns. Far better would be to continue to use effective tools, mitigate the costs when we can, but continue to deter those who would harm us.
3
I think the headline on this piece is very misleading. Mr. Obama did not apologize for the deaths of the two aid workers. He expressed his regret and his sympathy for the families of the two men. It is tragic that these men died as they did but Al Qaeda is to be held responsible for their deaths not the U.S. government or its military. The government and the military must give account, and take responsibility for what happened in the drone strike but that is far different than taking the blame for these men's tragic deaths.
6
Undeserved, unlitigated executions are what we get when we have a self-appointnted, self-annointed presidential hit man, Democrat or Republican, Obama or Bush. I voted for Obama to become then remain president. I was not authorizing such extra-constitutional rub-outs.
27
How do you figure that the US constitution covers those that leave the country to go abroad to fight the US constitution? What sort of warped world view leads people to think that terrorist fighting on the battlefield deserve US constitutional right?
1
Some throughout our history have been comfortable as well with lynching.
Tragic.
The deaths of these men underscore the significance of using diplomacy rather than weapons. No bomb or drone is smart.
The deaths of these men underscore the significance of using diplomacy rather than weapons. No bomb or drone is smart.
7
Drones are only robotic part-time; when the time comes for the attack, they are guided directly by human intelligence and are very smart indeed. But no wiser than those who set them upon their mission.
How would diplomacy work? The state that is supposedly in control of the areas bombed is not able to exert any law in that region. Diplomacy only works when you are dealing with soft developed world where rules apply and the state has power to enforce the rule of law.
The President acknowledged the costs of war: the lives of innocent civilians, who are put in harm's way by terrorists. I'd like to hear him also acknowledge the pain and suffering of those innocent Pakistani and other civilians killed in drone attacks. Why are the deaths of an American and Italian tragedies, whereas those of innocent Pakistanis don't even merit a press conference, let alone an apology? Are these other civilians - not hostages, not American or Western European - mere "collateral damage," whereas Western hostages and other casualties are real human beings with grieving families?
I have always had doubts about the efficacy and ethics of drone bombing, and today's disclosures only confirm those doubts. We have to fight terrorism, agreed. The disputed question is - "How should we engage in this conflict?"
I have always had doubts about the efficacy and ethics of drone bombing, and today's disclosures only confirm those doubts. We have to fight terrorism, agreed. The disputed question is - "How should we engage in this conflict?"
16
I agree with your comment. But much more troubling is the failure of the MSM, especially this publication, to investigate and report on those civilian killings. It is a form of collusion, placing them in the role of a propaganda machine for the government as opposed to being a check on the government, such a check the hallmark of a functioning democracy.
1
Calling these machines "drones" or UAVs is very Orwellian. We cleanse something very deadly and bloody by giving it a neutral name for people to call it by.
In reality they are flying robot assassins, a name used more and more in other parts of the world. There is no use an FRA can be put to that is good or honorable.
The work of holding together the global empire of finance and oil in service of a tiny moneyed class is becoming more and more desperate, more and more a butcher's job. The butchery must be concealed and must be given to machines and an elite corps of trained killers and mercenaries.
And, every once in awhile, America gets a hint of what's being done to others in its name. Almost every day.
In reality they are flying robot assassins, a name used more and more in other parts of the world. There is no use an FRA can be put to that is good or honorable.
The work of holding together the global empire of finance and oil in service of a tiny moneyed class is becoming more and more desperate, more and more a butcher's job. The butchery must be concealed and must be given to machines and an elite corps of trained killers and mercenaries.
And, every once in awhile, America gets a hint of what's being done to others in its name. Almost every day.
22
In reality they are no different than Human flown USAF jets. That's a truth that those who live to give support to terrorist can't face.
1
Let's call them UFO's then, it'd make it more interesting.
Actually, Mr. Bleeding Heart, FRA's, or any other version of a "flying robot assassin" seem pretty honorable to me, when used against animals who enjoy beheading innocent people. What is wrong with you?
Did FDR ever apologize? Obama should follow his example. If Obama feels the need to apologize every time an innocent civilian is killed, he is unfit to be Commander in Chief.
9
What could go wrong? The CIA vetted this, and they brought us the Bay of Pigs!
3
Cleo, I agree Obama is unfit to be Commander-in-Chief but disagree that FDR killed innocent civilians.
While it is unfortunate the two innocents died, ANYONE heading into this region these days, does so knowing full well the risk they are taking, and MUST accept it could end in their death and not expect anyone is going to save them.
10
Easy enough to criticize Obama for killing Al Queda and ISIS in Afghanistan . So.. what is the alternative? Stop fighting and withdraw?
This could easily destabilize countries in central Asia - in much the same way that the Obama's precipitous withdraw from Iraq led to the rise of ISIS , the attendant horrors we see in Iraq and Syria..
Lots of folks assert that drone strikes are murder.. and they make a good case. However, I remain unconvinced that mayhem would not intensify were the US military to pick up & go home
This could easily destabilize countries in central Asia - in much the same way that the Obama's precipitous withdraw from Iraq led to the rise of ISIS , the attendant horrors we see in Iraq and Syria..
Lots of folks assert that drone strikes are murder.. and they make a good case. However, I remain unconvinced that mayhem would not intensify were the US military to pick up & go home
2
It would die right down, after a nasty adjustment period, if there were no more demand for Mideast oil. There would be no terrorism, no "strategic alliances" with dictators and oligarchs who keep the oil flowing, no oil money flowing from "allies" to terrorist organizations, no well-funded Palestinian/Israeli sideshow to keep the Arab street distracted, and on and on.
We'd want nothing from them. They wouldn't care about us. They'd resolve their own issues and "western interests" would care about as much as the man on the street cares about, oh, Serbia.
We'd want nothing from them. They wouldn't care about us. They'd resolve their own issues and "western interests" would care about as much as the man on the street cares about, oh, Serbia.
I guess some would call that 'collateral damage'. This one made the headlines but we can be sure there have already been many more innocent people killed by mistake with drones. This clone technology is way to imprecise and risky to be used in such expansive ways !
5
One asks how many civilians have been murdered by the U.S. drone strikes from Somalia to Pakistan? How many weddings, funerals, schools and markets?
And the American mantra that troops are being withdrawn from Afghanistan is countered by the employment of 40,000 mercenaries from firms such as Blackwater.
We are told little about bombings and state murder carried out by the U.S.
The comment of jb posted just before this illustrates well the attitude of arm chair generals sitting in American living rooms: bomb them, bomb them all.
The people in the countries where the U.S. is dropping bombs thing, I suggest, very differently. And the U.S. simply hardens hearts and wins more recruits for ISIS and el Quaeda.
And the American mantra that troops are being withdrawn from Afghanistan is countered by the employment of 40,000 mercenaries from firms such as Blackwater.
We are told little about bombings and state murder carried out by the U.S.
The comment of jb posted just before this illustrates well the attitude of arm chair generals sitting in American living rooms: bomb them, bomb them all.
The people in the countries where the U.S. is dropping bombs thing, I suggest, very differently. And the U.S. simply hardens hearts and wins more recruits for ISIS and el Quaeda.
8
You ask how many have been killed? You should ask it to the Public Editor of the NYT, the largest, most influential publication in the world.
Recently, a child was killed in Yemen. It took me searching beyond the front webpage, beyond World, beyond Middle East to using the search engine to find it. It had been covered by a Reuters story on this website but it was impossible to find unless you knew the story. Even when you found it, he headline was totally deceptive.
The child was described as a militant. He was 11.
Interestingly, his two teenage brothers were killed in two other, separate strikes. No coverage there but yet the journalist had no trouble finding the information because he included it in the story.
The press is protecting the president.
Recently, a child was killed in Yemen. It took me searching beyond the front webpage, beyond World, beyond Middle East to using the search engine to find it. It had been covered by a Reuters story on this website but it was impossible to find unless you knew the story. Even when you found it, he headline was totally deceptive.
The child was described as a militant. He was 11.
Interestingly, his two teenage brothers were killed in two other, separate strikes. No coverage there but yet the journalist had no trouble finding the information because he included it in the story.
The press is protecting the president.
1
Let's face it people.....call a spade a spade.......we are in the midst of WW III.
And those that "govern" are only interested in one thing......more war for profit.
Shameful.
And those that "govern" are only interested in one thing......more war for profit.
Shameful.
Agree about your WWII comment . Think POWER is the goal , not profit.
The importance given to this story provides additional evidence in support of Steven Pinker's thesis, in "The Better Angels of Our Nature," that we're becoming admirably sensitive to unnecessary deaths.
Criticism that the world is indifferent to would-be immigrants' drowning in the Mediterranean is belied by the urgent European summit held today on this problem. And contrary to posts below complaining that we don't care about the deaths of innocent drone-strike victims, the fact is that if a strike kills a dozen innocent people in Afghanistan it is major news, accompanied by apologies and compensation.
Contrast today's attitude against events not that long ago, in Cape Verde, the archipelago off West Africa that was then a Portuguese colony. "Two of [Cape] Verde's worst-ever famines occurred in 1941-43 and 1947-48, killing an estimated 45,000 people. The augmenting disaster was not reported in the Portuguese press, and no food was dispatched by countries fighting World War II." (G. E. Brooks, "Cabo Verde: Gulag of the South Atlantic," History in Africa 33 (2006), p. 134.)
Criticism that the world is indifferent to would-be immigrants' drowning in the Mediterranean is belied by the urgent European summit held today on this problem. And contrary to posts below complaining that we don't care about the deaths of innocent drone-strike victims, the fact is that if a strike kills a dozen innocent people in Afghanistan it is major news, accompanied by apologies and compensation.
Contrast today's attitude against events not that long ago, in Cape Verde, the archipelago off West Africa that was then a Portuguese colony. "Two of [Cape] Verde's worst-ever famines occurred in 1941-43 and 1947-48, killing an estimated 45,000 people. The augmenting disaster was not reported in the Portuguese press, and no food was dispatched by countries fighting World War II." (G. E. Brooks, "Cabo Verde: Gulag of the South Atlantic," History in Africa 33 (2006), p. 134.)
1
There are 300 comments on this story and the top ones justify this killing as a product of war. There were 3,000 comments on a story about Orthodox men on planes asking women to change seats.
The Europeans are beefing up their systems to imprison migrants and to keep them out. Hypocritically, they are spinning the migrants death as a problem of stopping smugglers who prey on the migrants, while conveniently ignoring the situations that make these people vulnerable to smugglers, much of which situation is the result of Western colonial policy, both past and present, and a failure to use their power to stop clear atrocities as in Syria.
Better angles? Only in our very hypocritical, self satisfied rhetoric.
The Europeans are beefing up their systems to imprison migrants and to keep them out. Hypocritically, they are spinning the migrants death as a problem of stopping smugglers who prey on the migrants, while conveniently ignoring the situations that make these people vulnerable to smugglers, much of which situation is the result of Western colonial policy, both past and present, and a failure to use their power to stop clear atrocities as in Syria.
Better angles? Only in our very hypocritical, self satisfied rhetoric.
Pakistan never paid attention to the human life. Killing, militancy and war were part of Pakistani military fantasy since 1947. Unfortunately, Pakistan brought many current woes among them by themselves. To Ms. Weinstein's plea I sympathize but Talibans/ALQuaida do not have any heart. As for Hamza's comment, all lives matter. But when you behave like beasts/animals as ISIS does in a civil society - what do you expect?
6
India is no different dude. can your sister walk the streets of Delhi alone? this forum is not to air your prejudice and bigotry against Pakistan.
No idea why this keeps getting blocked but I'll try again, with simple terms.
All those who criticize drone strikes offer no alternatives. Terrorists must be dealt with (not dealing with them is not an alternative). What method is better than drone strikes?
To criticize when one cannot offer any options other than what is being done, is purely useless.
All those who criticize drone strikes offer no alternatives. Terrorists must be dealt with (not dealing with them is not an alternative). What method is better than drone strikes?
To criticize when one cannot offer any options other than what is being done, is purely useless.
6
Pray tell, Dan, how are these terrorists in Pakistan an existential threat to our national security?
You create false assumptions. You have nothing to prove that non intervention will work. Intervention apparently doesn't work as terrorism continues to rise.
We now know drone pilots also suffer from PTSD, and I'm guessing it happens mainly because, as in this case, they have no idea who they're killing or why.
A soldier fires his weapon in self defense. He's preserving his own life. These poor men and women follow orders, push buttons and then go home, half a world away from the damage they've done.
You take full responsibility, Mr. President? Isn't that a given?
A soldier fires his weapon in self defense. He's preserving his own life. These poor men and women follow orders, push buttons and then go home, half a world away from the damage they've done.
You take full responsibility, Mr. President? Isn't that a given?
3
These are unmanned drones remotely controlled. No pilots to fly them.
I think that drone pilots suffer because they do know who they're killing.
One common UAV attack tactic is to make the initial attack then circle back over a period of minutes and make a second attack after "enemy forces" have had time to gather in rescue. The problem is that "enemy forces" can and do include civilian ambulance and paramedic staff, innocent and helpful passers-by, relatives, friends, and what have you. In fact, that may be all who's there, no enemy at all.
But the pilots follow orders and push the buttons that murder them all. I think it's a mark of humanity that they do have breakdowns.
One common UAV attack tactic is to make the initial attack then circle back over a period of minutes and make a second attack after "enemy forces" have had time to gather in rescue. The problem is that "enemy forces" can and do include civilian ambulance and paramedic staff, innocent and helpful passers-by, relatives, friends, and what have you. In fact, that may be all who's there, no enemy at all.
But the pilots follow orders and push the buttons that murder them all. I think it's a mark of humanity that they do have breakdowns.
I thought President Obama's policy was to refuse to admit his use of drones. Is he a whistleblower on himself??
3
It is interesting, but perhaps not surprising, that the tenor of the comments from NYT respondents is that the U.S. shoulders the major portion of the blame for this tragedy. For some reason no or little opprobrium assigned to al Qaeda who seized the hostages in the first place.
70
We helped assemble the Al Q club in the eighties in Afghanistan, with out man in Afghanistan, OBL. According to FBI, CIA wire transferred 100k to Mohammed Atta to pay the 9/11 hijackers through Mahmud Ahmed. And we fund Daesh through our purchases of gasoline, since those brilliant folks in Texas have Saudi Motiva of Texas operating the largest refinery in the US,and the Saudi fund Daesh.
Further, there is no valid authority for the drone strikes. Not the legal memo written by Barron when he worked for the White House, before he got appointed to the First Circuit Appellate Court, confirmed on a ghost vote in the Senate, and not by authority under the War Powers Act. Nor is there a Declaration of War, nor a valid AUMF from the Congress, since the only one passed was passed just after 9/11 when the agency now operating the drone program briefed Congress with disinformation prior to the vote.
War profiteers, military contractors and hangers on use US taxpayer dollars to kill people in our name in and effort to stabilize regions where heroin, oil and gas cartels operate.
Those who created this mess are responsible for the deaths, those intended and those not intended.
Further, there is no valid authority for the drone strikes. Not the legal memo written by Barron when he worked for the White House, before he got appointed to the First Circuit Appellate Court, confirmed on a ghost vote in the Senate, and not by authority under the War Powers Act. Nor is there a Declaration of War, nor a valid AUMF from the Congress, since the only one passed was passed just after 9/11 when the agency now operating the drone program briefed Congress with disinformation prior to the vote.
War profiteers, military contractors and hangers on use US taxpayer dollars to kill people in our name in and effort to stabilize regions where heroin, oil and gas cartels operate.
Those who created this mess are responsible for the deaths, those intended and those not intended.
Sorry doesn't help much. Why are we there in the first place? While President Obama prefers to not delve in the past and right the wrongs, he carries on the same wrongs. I think it is time for a real accounting of what has happened in the Middle East for the past fifty years. The American people deserve to know how this all happened.
4
Why are we there...in Afghanistan fighting Al Queda, who use the lawless region of neighboring pakistan as a safe haven...hum...does 9-11 come to mind? Man, some folks have no memory.
1
I am sorry for the deaths of both men. They at least died for a cause they believed in. How blessed is that?
But Pakistan is not a US ally.... nor is Egypt.... nor Saudi Arabia. We dump boatloads of money in those countries (and several others) only to have it diverted to their 1% .... or to arms purchases which promptly fall into the hands of their enemies and ours.... all of it wasted in a thousand ways. And when it is convenient for those corrupt governments, they betray us to our enemies.
Stop the aid. It's insane.
But Pakistan is not a US ally.... nor is Egypt.... nor Saudi Arabia. We dump boatloads of money in those countries (and several others) only to have it diverted to their 1% .... or to arms purchases which promptly fall into the hands of their enemies and ours.... all of it wasted in a thousand ways. And when it is convenient for those corrupt governments, they betray us to our enemies.
Stop the aid. It's insane.
12
It was good if President Obama to apologize but let's not forget that their blood is on al Qaeda hands.
13
Our technology is out of control. I say that unless you can give me 150% proof that the drone is controlable to the nth degree, then it needs to be grounded. Killing innocent lives does nothing to further our agenda. And that's another thing altogether isn't it. Our foreign policy and headmasters at the Industrial Military Complex, since Bush, Cheney & Co. have done nothing more than kick the hornets nest, with predictable results all round. With the entire Middle East and parts of Africa destabilized like never before seen in the history of mankind. We have accomplished nothing, done great harm and created a monster. What's that old saying? "What you reap, so shall you sow."
2
Collateral damage. Anyone who signs up to go into enemy territory for whatever reason must be willing to accept the fact that they may never come out alive, regardless of why/how they got killed. We must not let a couple of individuals derail our fight with Al Qaeda and ISIS.
6
My condolences to the families of the hostages. Obama is showing real leadership by taking responsibility for giving the go command to hit the terrorist. Such is the heavy responsibility of his office. He should be commended for that. However, it is important that we must not waiver in our fight against the radial Islamist. Al Queda killed these people, not the USA. God bless our troops and our president.
5
Queue the liberal, pacifist outrage. The fact is these drone attacks are not going to stop and they shouldn't stop. We must continue hunting and killing terrorists for the foreseeable future. When other countries are not able to police their own lands and handle these plagues on civilization themselves we are left with no choice but to do it for them. We cannot sit back passively waiting for the next attack. Sep 11 proved that. Some have forgotten. Some think "Things seem safe to me! Why do we need these unpleasant drones? Live and let live I say!" That is a horribly naive attitude to have. We are safe due to the diligence of our armed forces, CIA, and yes, NSA. There will be mistakes and there is no way around that. It doesn't mean we stop the offensive though...not a chance.
4
Of course you are correct, many social liberals will use this to make their points and justify their anti-Americans views...but let's not forget to que the rabid conservatives who will not let event go by without making some attack on President Obama. Both sides are so locked into their knee-jerk positions that no one bothers to listen to them anymore.
When a politician says, "I accept full responsibility," what exactly does that mean? If a burglar is caught robbing a house, does he say to the police officer, "I accept full responsibility" and walk away? If a child breaks a lamp in his home while playing catch with his brother and his mother comes rushing in when she hears the crash, does the child say to his mother, "I accept full responsibility" and move on with his day? What does "I accept full responsibility" mean?
Here is a thought: STOP DOING IT!! Killing innocent people in the pursuit of killing a terrorist or two is wrong.
Here is a thought: STOP DOING IT!! Killing innocent people in the pursuit of killing a terrorist or two is wrong.
5
What United States officials did not know, he said, was that Al Qaeda was “hiding” the captives at the site.
-----------------------------------------------
The drone campaign has to be premised on near-solid intelligence, not on hunches. The administration should have know that the two captives could be used as human shields in any targeted strike. So, for Obama to insist that US officials did NOT KNOW that AQ was HIDING the captives at the site speaks to the cluelessness of this strategy.
Obama came out and said his apology because WSJ was planning to reveal this information anyway. So, his talk of transparency is a lot of hokum.
-----------------------------------------------
The drone campaign has to be premised on near-solid intelligence, not on hunches. The administration should have know that the two captives could be used as human shields in any targeted strike. So, for Obama to insist that US officials did NOT KNOW that AQ was HIDING the captives at the site speaks to the cluelessness of this strategy.
Obama came out and said his apology because WSJ was planning to reveal this information anyway. So, his talk of transparency is a lot of hokum.
4
A tragic consequence of dealing with the type of foe extremist Islamists represent.
Holding innocent parties as hostages is, of course, a violation of the Geneva Convention, but civilized norms are not something acknowledged by religious fundamentalists of any ilk.
Obama's statement was concise and brilliant, making me proud, once again, that I voted twice for this courageous man.
Holding innocent parties as hostages is, of course, a violation of the Geneva Convention, but civilized norms are not something acknowledged by religious fundamentalists of any ilk.
Obama's statement was concise and brilliant, making me proud, once again, that I voted twice for this courageous man.
10
I read comments in the NYT everyday about the killing of civilians by other nations. The top comments use words like genocide, war criminals. These are countries actually being attacked to whom these epithets are applied. One in particular.
Now the top comments tell me regarding the US drone strikes, there is a fog of war, those who think there is another way can go volunteer in the military, millions of civilians died in WW2 or my favourite - this drone attack on Pakistan is George Bush's fault.
According to these commentators, there is also no problem with US self investigation. But comments on other nations highlight internal investigations as untrustworthy, without even bothering to explore the mechanisms and checks. The implication is clear. It is because, unlike Americans, THOSE people are liars and don't respect human life.
The hypocrisy and double standard is breathtaking. America makes up rules - one set for you. One set for others. Your rules are different because you are "exceptional". This isn't a government thing. It is how Americans see the world and their rights in it. Most galling, Americans combine this with a lecture it believes it is morally entitled to deliver. Amazingly, it is delivered without a hint of irony.
That, not any alliance you have with others in the Mideast, is why you are hated in the Muslim world. And elsewhere.
Now the top comments tell me regarding the US drone strikes, there is a fog of war, those who think there is another way can go volunteer in the military, millions of civilians died in WW2 or my favourite - this drone attack on Pakistan is George Bush's fault.
According to these commentators, there is also no problem with US self investigation. But comments on other nations highlight internal investigations as untrustworthy, without even bothering to explore the mechanisms and checks. The implication is clear. It is because, unlike Americans, THOSE people are liars and don't respect human life.
The hypocrisy and double standard is breathtaking. America makes up rules - one set for you. One set for others. Your rules are different because you are "exceptional". This isn't a government thing. It is how Americans see the world and their rights in it. Most galling, Americans combine this with a lecture it believes it is morally entitled to deliver. Amazingly, it is delivered without a hint of irony.
That, not any alliance you have with others in the Mideast, is why you are hated in the Muslim world. And elsewhere.
9
Out of all the people denouncing these drone strikes, because they hate our President or our country, or just because they hate war in general (reasonably), not a single comment has any alternatives.
So it's nearly pointless to make this request but I'll go ahead anyway. Dear reader, if you're about to add to the useless criticism of the drone strike policy in any way, could you please suggest an alternative method to reduce terrorism? I can't conceive of anyone really believing these murderous terrorists are the good guys, so how else can we deal with them? Is there any other way?
If there's another way, that's great, let's hear it. If not, then please note that you're criticizing but you have no alternatives so it's akin to criticizing the human tendency to eat food.
So it's nearly pointless to make this request but I'll go ahead anyway. Dear reader, if you're about to add to the useless criticism of the drone strike policy in any way, could you please suggest an alternative method to reduce terrorism? I can't conceive of anyone really believing these murderous terrorists are the good guys, so how else can we deal with them? Is there any other way?
If there's another way, that's great, let's hear it. If not, then please note that you're criticizing but you have no alternatives so it's akin to criticizing the human tendency to eat food.
9
Get boots on the ground and collaterall damage be damned and get it over with. we have no problem anymore with Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan. If you are at war with an enemy the enemy needs to be destroyed. Nothing else works.
1
Dan, you keep asking and I keep telling you (scroll down below...)
Make the Saudis stop funding Sunni extremists. Repeat until memorized...
Make the Saudis stop funding Sunni extremists. Repeat until memorized...
1
There was something that existed before drones called...oh i don't know...good old fashioned intelligence gathering and infiltration?
It is ridiculous to be blasting and killing people in the same manner as video games essentially.
It is ridiculous to be blasting and killing people in the same manner as video games essentially.
2
The President will disclose and apologize for the American lives lost, but refuses to extend the same humanity to the nameless other innocent civilians murdered by our drones abroad, not to mention the palpable stress and agitation it is causing innocent people everyday to wake up and go to sleep with the hum of invisible drones in the sky.
9
Yeah - we call those other people "enemies". If they don't want American drones rockin' their world, they can shut down the jihad and try building something worthwhile (yes, its harder).
Our military goes to great lengths to avoid civilian casualties, an effort vastly improved by the use of drones. Our enemies hide amongst women and children, enjoy Pakistani protection, and keep their prisoners close for protection. But when they're relaxing at the al Qaeda clubhouse, well - expect trouble.
Our military goes to great lengths to avoid civilian casualties, an effort vastly improved by the use of drones. Our enemies hide amongst women and children, enjoy Pakistani protection, and keep their prisoners close for protection. But when they're relaxing at the al Qaeda clubhouse, well - expect trouble.
This is the result of fighting the antiseptic war. We want to fight wars from a control panel with no boots on the ground. Since the idea of sending ground forces repulse us now this is what we get. What happens when the bad guys get drones? We can't even keep a guy out of the White House. I am afraid we have let the genie out of the bottle.
5
Why is he apologizing? For saving lives? For giving innocent people a chance to live? For keeping more people from having their throats slit or burned alive?
How many French and other European civilians died in the invasion of Europe during WWII? Should we apologize for that too? There's a difference between regretting the accidental loss of life in war and doing something for which we should apologize. Why isn't this recognized?
How many French and other European civilians died in the invasion of Europe during WWII? Should we apologize for that too? There's a difference between regretting the accidental loss of life in war and doing something for which we should apologize. Why isn't this recognized?
75
Why is he apologizing? For saving lives? For giving innocent people a chance to live? For keeping more people from having their throats slit or burned alive?
-------------
He isn't actually doing any of that. Killing terrorists 2 at a time may sound good in a headline but it doesn't even slow them down.
-------------
He isn't actually doing any of that. Killing terrorists 2 at a time may sound good in a headline but it doesn't even slow them down.
1
So, Michael, are you suggesting we should increase (like with boots on the ground?) or give up? I couldn't tell from your response.
Its laughable that are implying Obama saved lives and gave innocent people a chance to live. Just to clear it up, this drone strike KILLED two INNOCENT people. Pretty much the opposite of what you are saying.
These drone strikes aren't stopping an act of terror that is in the process of taking place. They are simply taking out a target of interest when the opportunity arises. It's an assassination with collateral damage.
These drone strikes aren't stopping an act of terror that is in the process of taking place. They are simply taking out a target of interest when the opportunity arises. It's an assassination with collateral damage.
Easy to take responsibility when there is only credit for doing so, not cost.
1
Hmmm. No apology forthcoming for all the thousands of non-American civilians slaughtered by drones?
10
It's been a few hundred, not thousands. And there have been apologies for every such occurrence. Try to get your facts straight please.
Cannot believe people still blindly praise Obama. Two white westerners died so we hear this news. Every day tens to hundreds of people died from undisclosed drone strike and we hear not a beep because the dead are brown. They got all tossed into "terrorist" or "collateral damage" on report and never "innocent victom of war crime".
8
@Amateur Historian: If they're brown, they don't count. It's the American Way.
1
Obama should have apologized for his decision - as a policy - to employ drone as a weapon of choice in combating terrorism. The US is currently the only country using drone for the purpose of killing. Drone, despite the government claims, is imprecise and overkill. The US policy of using drone has opened a floodgate for other countries to use drone in future conflicts with deadly and unpredictable consequences. It is a cowardly regrettable policy for it is innocent people who will be killed as collateral damage. Obama has few legacies to claim of, but he will be remembered as the first American president who authorizes the use of drone as a weapon of war. The world is no safer because of drone for drone has enable killing without the real horror of killing.
5
I find it astounding that the NYT could not find one dissenting voice to quote in this article. I was my understanding that a core principal of journalism was impartiality, which requires the reporter to examine the issue from many different perspectives. This article failed to do that. The Administration was quotes multiple times and does not challenge their assertion that this was a justified, legal action.
5
So when the government kills white people by mistake they deserve an apology and remorse. But when a wedding party gets droned, then it's business as usual...move along, nothing to see here.
10
You are correct, but we are the good guy so the worst we do is make mistakes. So the the countless examples of US invasions, bombings,coups against popular elected government's etc, etc, are just mistakes.
This is a mistake, and mistakes can happen obviously. But when it comes to American lives we have to go above and behind to make sure the government serves the people. Therefore we need to demand that the rules in the use of drones and drone strikes be published so that we can feel more certain the use of force was right.
1
What is this, an episode of 'Homeland'?
I thought we had made drones "smart enough" to be able to tell the friendlies from the terrorists. No? Can't the operators of these drones tell from 2 miles in the sky, through building walls? Back to the drawing board.
My condolences to the families of Mr. Weinstein and Mr. Lo Porto.
It's more likely their 'pilots' are sitting in their flight suits at a gaming console at Nellis AFB outside of Las Vegas, NV.
Seems you have empathy for everyone but the pilots. Why not walk a mile in their shoes before judging them
This was another intelligence failure - and one where I'm certain the analysts feel terribly - but that doesn't change the fact that all the surveillance Mr. Obama spoke of was meaningless in the end.
This was *not* the "fog of war" that Obama spoke of today but a planned strike after significant surveillance. Rest in peace, Dr. Weinstein and Mr. Lo Porto - you both deserved better than the gross incompetence resulting in your deaths.
This was *not* the "fog of war" that Obama spoke of today but a planned strike after significant surveillance. Rest in peace, Dr. Weinstein and Mr. Lo Porto - you both deserved better than the gross incompetence resulting in your deaths.
4
It's true then isn't it? American and western lives matter more than Pakistani, Afghan, Iraqi or "brown" lives. I've never heard President Obama, or his predecessors apologize for the literally hundreds of thousands of civilians that have been murdered in drone strikes and air strikes and wars that were inflicted upon people who did not get a say in whether they wanted them.
Sorry sir, but your apology rings hollow and is a slap in the face of all those nameless, voiceless and faceless people who die in your wars.
Sorry sir, but your apology rings hollow and is a slap in the face of all those nameless, voiceless and faceless people who die in your wars.
8
Dear Hamza,
It isn't literally hundreds of thousands of civilians dead from drone strikes. It's literally a few hundred. Over the last several years. However, it's about a hundred thousand dead from the terrorists by now, so why not direct your outrage at them?
It isn't literally hundreds of thousands of civilians dead from drone strikes. It's literally a few hundred. Over the last several years. However, it's about a hundred thousand dead from the terrorists by now, so why not direct your outrage at them?
1
Dear Hamza,
Forgot to mention, it is true that American lives matter more to Americans than Pakistani, Afghan, and other lives do. There's nothing wrong with that because that's true of every single nation or group on earth. In Pakistan, Pakistani lives matter more than Bangladeshi ones do. In Iraq, Iraqi lives matter more than Americans'. For everyone, the lives of their family matter more than the lives of people a hundred miles away. That's how humans think, and there's no way to blame one group without blaming all humanity for this perspective.
Forgot to mention, it is true that American lives matter more to Americans than Pakistani, Afghan, and other lives do. There's nothing wrong with that because that's true of every single nation or group on earth. In Pakistan, Pakistani lives matter more than Bangladeshi ones do. In Iraq, Iraqi lives matter more than Americans'. For everyone, the lives of their family matter more than the lives of people a hundred miles away. That's how humans think, and there's no way to blame one group without blaming all humanity for this perspective.
Blessed be the gentle peacemakers. America makes most of its own problems and there's no end in sight (because there's money in it). Violence's momentum continues apace. What a terrible thing for Obama to have to be an agent of that.
9
No, America doesn't make most of its own problems and the fight is not about money. Those that want to take every opportunity to slam the USA and excuse the radical thugs that captured and held these people innocent are the problem.
3
Keep hitting Al Qaeda and ISIS with anything and everything.
Regardless how hostages die it is their captors who bring their death. Those who take hostages must be destroyed.
Regardless how hostages die it is their captors who bring their death. Those who take hostages must be destroyed.
25
So goes the neocons. Because 10 years of drone bombing has already been so successful.
"Responsibility" without accountability is a sham. Desperate to get out front on the deaths of two innocents, this time an American and a European, (the hundreds of deaths of non-Americans and non-Europeans get no such self-serving regret) President Obama wants us to feel his pain. Sensing political fallout that might compromise a policy of extra-judicial assassinations, he thinks that by being apologetic he can escape repercussions that might endanger the policy and his legacy. Americans need to repudiate drone killings that generate the very hatred that it purports to seek to defeat. They are cowardly and self-defeating, and we will rue the day we allowed this deadly policy in our name.
1
Had it been an all Pakistani or no whites involved in the most recent, as far as we are told, Drone s by the USA massacre would the President have apologized ?
or is it that no J/C are of the same disposable quality as Pakistanis, and Muslims in general, are ......being USA favored DRONE victims
For an America that presumes high moral levels in its dealing with the rest of the world and shamelessly advocates Rule of Law Drones stand as the irrefutable proof of the fallacy, travesty and hypocrisy of ALL American advocacies!
or is it that no J/C are of the same disposable quality as Pakistanis, and Muslims in general, are ......being USA favored DRONE victims
For an America that presumes high moral levels in its dealing with the rest of the world and shamelessly advocates Rule of Law Drones stand as the irrefutable proof of the fallacy, travesty and hypocrisy of ALL American advocacies!
1
You go to a war zone, you have to accept a degree of risk. Its not Florida.
These guys were already captured by AQ! Were they about to be released? I doubt it. What were their chances of getting out of their alive anyway?
Keep the drones flying!
These guys were already captured by AQ! Were they about to be released? I doubt it. What were their chances of getting out of their alive anyway?
Keep the drones flying!
5
People signing up for such missions are psychologically prepared for possible deaths. But it's outstanding that President Obama can publicly offer his apology and condolences to the families.
7
If we are firing missiles into other countries, we have to know what we're hitting. It's not enough to just say, "we didn't know." What did we do, precisely, to find out?
Also, if we had known that two innocent hostages were going to die, would that alone have stopped the mission?
Or would this collateral damage be weighed against the value of the targets?
Also, if we had known that two innocent hostages were going to die, would that alone have stopped the mission?
Or would this collateral damage be weighed against the value of the targets?
President Obama is following this announcement with a visit from the New England Patriots. That is not a thoughtful response to a thoughtless drone strike.
4
All of our nation is shattered to once again read of an innocent life taken by the relentless policies of Islamists. Mr. Weinstein is an extraordinary example of a righteous man whose life with 180 degrees away from men, who never built up a community, rather his captors who only good at terrorizing their women and helpless neighbors.
6
What are the alternatives to drone strikes? Boots on the ground, searching the mountainous regions of Afghanistan and Pakistan, getting mowed down? Or do we give up the search and destruction of terrorists because they could be holding hostages? Anyone going into Pakistan, Libya, Syria, etc. knows there is risk of kidnapping. Anyone who joins Al Qaeda or ISIL knows the risks they take.
If only Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc. had not destabilized the Middle East, we wouldn't be in this mess.
If only the Republicans would work FOR the American people instead of having hysterics over these manufactured scandals on a daily basis, our country would be in a much better place.
If only Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc. had not destabilized the Middle East, we wouldn't be in this mess.
If only the Republicans would work FOR the American people instead of having hysterics over these manufactured scandals on a daily basis, our country would be in a much better place.
13
Bush Cheney Bush Cheney
Wake up this is 2015
Obama Biden Obama Biden
Wake up this is 2015
Obama Biden Obama Biden
Very sorry about Mr. Weinstein and Mr. Lo Porto; condolences to their families.
Not at all sorry about Mr. Farouq and Mr. Gadahn.
Not at all sorry about Mr. Farouq and Mr. Gadahn.
7
Would this killing be shrugged off as collateral damage? If it were Afghan, Pakistani or Iraqi civilians killed that is what they are termed as. A heartless 'Sorry!' for the catastrophe, upending people's lives irreversibly. And don't blame the drones. They are machines and can be tuned only this much.
2
A lot of the comments refer to the collateral damage that takes place during a war. What war? Who is our defined enemy? I thought the war in Iraq and Afghanistan was over. Now we are at war in Pakistan? We "accidentally" killed two innocent people? Two? I think we have killed a lot more than 2 people. I voted for Obama - but am glad he won't be president for much longer.
2
By what right is Obama permitted to bomb anything anywhere? The Saudis? The Israelis?
If Obama takes full responsibility for the killing of two hostages, is he prepared to face charges for (as a minimum) manslaughter?
1
Do you feel that way about the chicken-hawks Bush and Cheney or the architects of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Powell, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Rice, etc., etc?
Most certainly. The Bush-Cheney behavior is beyond despicable. But, despite Obama's welcome apologies, this does not excuse what he's doing: cowardly, shameful, bound to lead to horrendous blow-backs. Not the kind of action that merits a Nobel Peace prize.
Obama was right to order this raid and right to apologize.
21
It is war, and there will be death. If we really care about lives, say no to war.
4
Even if one side says NO to war, if the other side does not say no there will be war.
1
Somehow I don't think just saying no is going to make terrorists vanish.
1
War is hell and mistakes will be made. It is good we have a President willing to admit when this happens.
25
Has Obama spoken with any of the families of those that died trying to find and rescue deserter Bow Bergdahl? Did he speak with the families of the four Americans killed in Bagdad when he knew it wasn't random violence due to a video? Did he speak to the families of those killed by Nadal Hassan at Fort Hood? Has he spoken to the family of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry who was killed as a result of Eric Holder's fast and furious fiasco? Just wondering.
They happened 3 months ago and the Wall Street Journal was about to report it. No Obama is still a liar and a coward.
Very classy of the President to apologize to the families and take responsibility for the terrible tragedy though we all know no Commander-in-Chief is personally responsible for "friendly fire" incidents during war. I doubt any Republican leader would have the heart or courage to accept responsibility for the tens of thousands of Iraqi and Afghan civilians killed in those wars, or any other under their leadership. People also need to understand that when you go to these hot spots in the Middle East where lives have so little meaning, especially the lives of foreigners, that you're putting yourself in danger. These people mean well but should not be so naive that they believe their presence can change the millennium long trajectory of hate and violence that plague that part of the world.
19
Well, your doubts are wrong. Search "Bush Apologies" and you will find a number of times he did just so.
1
President Obama should have expressed regret, but not apologized.
Attacking Al Qaeda strongholds is a necessary part of the war on terror,
and civilian casualties can't be completely avoided.
More than 50,000 French civilians were killed in Allied bombing raids before
and during the Normandy invasion. I don't hear people saying we should have
refrained from attacking the Germans to avoid those deaths.
Today's technologies have greatly reduced civilian deaths, but cannot eliminate them. That's one of the many tragedies of war.
There may have been intelligence failures involved in this case, but the
ultimate responsibility is with the people who kidnapped two innocent men and held them for no good reason.
Attacking Al Qaeda strongholds is a necessary part of the war on terror,
and civilian casualties can't be completely avoided.
More than 50,000 French civilians were killed in Allied bombing raids before
and during the Normandy invasion. I don't hear people saying we should have
refrained from attacking the Germans to avoid those deaths.
Today's technologies have greatly reduced civilian deaths, but cannot eliminate them. That's one of the many tragedies of war.
There may have been intelligence failures involved in this case, but the
ultimate responsibility is with the people who kidnapped two innocent men and held them for no good reason.
13
Exactly! Why do we insist on turning the situation around to show us as the bad guy?
I beg to differ. The killing of civilians by allied bombing is a VERY controversial issue. There was an alternative to such a war of attrition was diplomacy. The result was a Pyrrhic victory for France and England and it is Germany which is the manufacturing giant today.
maybe it's time - finally - for President Obama to return that Nobel Peace Prize?
16
Why?
If these two dead guys had not been Americans, nobody would much care. Right? It's amazing that where a person was born seems so important to people. No banner headlines for thousands of dead kids in any number of nations (Syria, North Korea, Iraq, or Yemen). They simply aren't important enough -- because they were not born inside the boundaries of the US. Honestly, after seeing 54,000 + dead Americans in Vietnam, not to mention the hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese the US government killed there, it's hard to really care much about two guys. My condolences to their families. My condolences also to the families of every mom, kid, grandma, and grandpa around the world killed by governments. Ours. Other governments. The surviving famliles all grieve equally.
5
Mr. Obama sounds as if he thinks apologizing for Mr. Weinstein's death in a drone strike offsets in some way the misjudgments he and his administration are making in their apparent strategy of "accidental" killings that all too often fail to distinguish between local wedding parties and small children gathering firewood.
9
Bill M, please specify what he said to make you think that. It is my view you are projecting that on him for other reasons. I saw nothing that indicated he was trying to diminish the mistake he - unlike previous Presidents - took responsibility for. He could have kept quiet about this as most leaders do.
Issuing meaningless statements of sorrow in no way atones for failure to stop the actions that one is engaging in that cause the innocent deaths. Mea culpa's, it seems to me, are a dime a dozen and more an attempt to polish public image than a sincere change in the things one is doing that give rise to the need for the public image polishing.
Another empty "apology" from someone in the 1%. Mr. Obama joins a long list of CEOs and celebrities that "apologize" for something they did or were responsible for. Another over use of "I'm sorry". In this case, "I'm sorry I killed two Americans using remote controlled drones". Little comfort to their families.
Though, this is also an example of the United States being more of an aggressor by sending unarmed drones into someone else's territory. Never mind the reasons, again the United States violated territory of a sovereign nation, and, in the process killed two Americans.
I feel for the families that suffered this needless loss, because a president is trying to try to leave a legacy. A legacy which is full of foreign policy missteps, and weakness. A legacy that more and more benefits, the 1%, the health care industry Wall Street and special interests, than the American people. But, the worse legacy of all, the killing of innocents by remote control. No Mr. President "I'm sorry" just does not go far enough.
Though, this is also an example of the United States being more of an aggressor by sending unarmed drones into someone else's territory. Never mind the reasons, again the United States violated territory of a sovereign nation, and, in the process killed two Americans.
I feel for the families that suffered this needless loss, because a president is trying to try to leave a legacy. A legacy which is full of foreign policy missteps, and weakness. A legacy that more and more benefits, the 1%, the health care industry Wall Street and special interests, than the American people. But, the worse legacy of all, the killing of innocents by remote control. No Mr. President "I'm sorry" just does not go far enough.
6
I feel sorry these hostages were killed. I am also sorry that these people were taken hostage in the first place. But I still don't see serious problems using drones when we think there is a target that merits it.
A reminder that when we most emphatically *did not* use a drone -- which is when Obama sent in Seal Team 6 to kill Osama Bin Laden -- the Pakistani government and the Pakistani people did not and still do not complain that Bin Laden was hiding in their nation. They complain instead that we breached their territory to get him.
Drones have a place, I say.
A reminder that when we most emphatically *did not* use a drone -- which is when Obama sent in Seal Team 6 to kill Osama Bin Laden -- the Pakistani government and the Pakistani people did not and still do not complain that Bin Laden was hiding in their nation. They complain instead that we breached their territory to get him.
Drones have a place, I say.
23
It is tragic, these unnecessary deaths, but we in the West rarely shed a tear over the innocent civilians often killed in these attacks: the fruit cart sellers, the funeral goers, any number of those unlucky enough to be caught in our drone sights. Are they any less important because they are not Americans?
137
Warren Weinstein, at the time of his kidnapping in Pakistan was an employee of the Washington DC Company J E AUSTIN, under contract with USAID. As usual, USAID let the NGO fend for itself and as usual the NGO let the employee (Weinstein) fend for himself in a dangerous area (Pakistan), not giving him reliable security and secure housing. Now Obama is apologizing while indeed, under his non-watchful eyes, USAID messed up. The same thing happened in Cuba with Alan Gross working with DAI also under a USAID contract and also under Obama's watch. USAID takes full responsibility for its employees (try to enter their office in Kabul) but shows no sentiments whatsoever when its contractors are in danger. Obama may want to check this out before disaster strikes again rather than apologizing when damage is done.
12
Blaming Obama and not the kidnapping terrorists doesn't pass the smell test.
6
How can we watch everything that happens in the world?
Of course, if this had happened when Bush was President you all would be calling him a murderer.
Why is it different because it is Obama?
Hypocrisy anyone?
Why is it different because it is Obama?
Hypocrisy anyone?
1
Man, it's one thing for a hostage to be killed "in the crossfire" of a rescue op, and another thing for a drone kill. This really needs to be studied.
5
It was an accident, regrettable part of war on terror. Hopefully, the ant-drone people will not use it to diminish the value and desirability of the best anti-terrorism tool.
You can bet the Republicans, who have never imagined a war they have disliked, will blame and criticize Obama. Comparison to Jimmy Carter will be accelerating. They will also find some angle to blame Hillary.
You can bet the Republicans, who have never imagined a war they have disliked, will blame and criticize Obama. Comparison to Jimmy Carter will be accelerating. They will also find some angle to blame Hillary.
16
Personally I'd rather be dead than a prisoner of any terrorist.The fortunes of war have smiled upon them.
2
It's seems like the "best anti-terrorism tool" is creating terrorists faster than it can kill them: by killing so many civilians in the process (including those few western ones that alone cause us so much anguish) they only create more enemies.
The way this story appears on my computer screen right now, there are THREE pictures of Mr. Weinstein (actually four if you count the thumbnail appearing in the menu banner running across the top of the page) and NONE of Mr. Lo Porto. Really, NYT? We're going to be that Ameri-centric? If Mr. Weinstein had not been killed, would we be hearing about this at all? This brings to mind the many times I have heard and read news stories over the years that ended in "No Americans were killed in the [crash, storm, fire, attack, whatever]" and that's the last we hear of the whole event.
13
"The White House did not explain why it has taken three months to disclose the episode"
Focus groups, polling and spin control.
Expect Susan Rice to blame it on an anti-Islamic YouTube video on this Sunday's talk shows.
From the most transperent administration in history.
Focus groups, polling and spin control.
Expect Susan Rice to blame it on an anti-Islamic YouTube video on this Sunday's talk shows.
From the most transperent administration in history.
12
The story was published in the WSJ today and therefore this required a response. If not, Weinstein would have been just another hostage that disappeared.
3
Interesting the story comes out today. I mean with the Hillary $$$ happening at the same time . . .
3
To be honest, I'm not surprised. My condolences to Mr. Weinstein's family. Obama is corrupt and quite honestly, one of the worst presidents are once great country has ever and will ever have. Turning away from the core of what made America once great is what has destroyed us. I am truly sad.
10
And Guantanamo, Iraq, Abu Ghraib, Wall St. and a bunch of other stuff that has diminished our morale authority that Obama had nothing to do with makes you happy?
You can't possibly believe that Obama is the worst and most corrupt. I'd put him up against Bush and Chaney any day.
Our unrestricted use of drones to kill amounts to nothing more than robotic assassination. War creates enough random carnage even when enemies are face-to-face. Haven't we made enough mistakes in this trumped-up "War on Terror"? The more convenient and more bloodless we make war, the easier it is to get involved, and the more difficult it becomes to stop.
5
Fighting terrorism with drone strikes can kill innocent people and doesn't address the root causes. It will only provoke anger in the areas where it's directed, doesn't address the root causes; it's a complacent approach to a serious problem. Warren Weinstein and Giovanni Lo Porto should not have lost their lives to it.
4
Drone strikes are just another form of terror, but aimed at terrorists and those that support them. Is it right? I would put this in the same lame category as Guantanamo, lets do to them what they do to us mentality.
2
So then what would work?
Unless he surrenders himself for trial at The Hague, Obama actually has NOT taken the "full responsibility" that he claims to have taken for the deaths of these hostages.
As to "why it has taken three months to disclose the episode", this is standard operating procedure for our government (and many others) when their military or civilian agencies are responsible for actions such as certain non-combatant deaths that might result in revulsion and backlash from their own citizens.
There is in fact usually a fairly predictable sequence in governmental response: ignore, then deny, then double-talk, then excuse (though perhaps overlaid with lip-service to contrition). If evidence is sufficiently disseminated and public outrage sufficiently pronounced that prosecutions of the perpetrators are undertaken (which is rare), expect that charges will be less than warranted, and that prosecutions will be done in a manner that permits successful appeals; if all else fails, presidential pardons or other forms of parole will be issued.
For instance, for the My Lai massacre, Wikipedia states that "Most of the enlisted men who were involved in the events at My Lai had already left military service, and were thus legally exempt from prosecution. In the end, of the 26 men initially charged, Lieutenant Calley was the only one convicted." And as they also note, Calley only served three and one half years, mostly under house arrest, for what was originally a life sentence to prison.
As to "why it has taken three months to disclose the episode", this is standard operating procedure for our government (and many others) when their military or civilian agencies are responsible for actions such as certain non-combatant deaths that might result in revulsion and backlash from their own citizens.
There is in fact usually a fairly predictable sequence in governmental response: ignore, then deny, then double-talk, then excuse (though perhaps overlaid with lip-service to contrition). If evidence is sufficiently disseminated and public outrage sufficiently pronounced that prosecutions of the perpetrators are undertaken (which is rare), expect that charges will be less than warranted, and that prosecutions will be done in a manner that permits successful appeals; if all else fails, presidential pardons or other forms of parole will be issued.
For instance, for the My Lai massacre, Wikipedia states that "Most of the enlisted men who were involved in the events at My Lai had already left military service, and were thus legally exempt from prosecution. In the end, of the 26 men initially charged, Lieutenant Calley was the only one convicted." And as they also note, Calley only served three and one half years, mostly under house arrest, for what was originally a life sentence to prison.
6
Your "fairly predictable sequence" sounds a lot like responses to insurance claims
The Hague is about war crimes. A drone strike is not a war crime. Whereas, the invasion of Iraq based on lies, and the hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths that resulted IS a war crime. The people who need to be charged in the Hague are - Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice and Powell. Four of them were aware of the lies, and one was used to peddle the lies, but needs to be charged to reveal that role.
@LuckyDog:
You'll get no disagreement from me about your point that Bush, Cheney, et al should be charged at The Hague. In fact, I so advocated years ago, in various forums including the reader comments here at the New York Times. But while it is true that the Bush administration caused far more civilian deaths through its completely unwarranted invasion of Iraq than has the Obama administration, I'm not sure that it has ever been established --- or even COULD be established --- that any particular lower level of civilian deaths resulting from military actions that are deliberate and offensive, not defensive, precludes a charge of war crimes. Obama IS waging an offensive war; it's a limited one compared to the previous administration --- but an offensive war nonetheless, and many civilians are dying. However, since U.S. drone operators themselves suffer no casualties, the civilian deaths associated with their operations receive little attention from most of the U.S. public.
You'll get no disagreement from me about your point that Bush, Cheney, et al should be charged at The Hague. In fact, I so advocated years ago, in various forums including the reader comments here at the New York Times. But while it is true that the Bush administration caused far more civilian deaths through its completely unwarranted invasion of Iraq than has the Obama administration, I'm not sure that it has ever been established --- or even COULD be established --- that any particular lower level of civilian deaths resulting from military actions that are deliberate and offensive, not defensive, precludes a charge of war crimes. Obama IS waging an offensive war; it's a limited one compared to the previous administration --- but an offensive war nonetheless, and many civilians are dying. However, since U.S. drone operators themselves suffer no casualties, the civilian deaths associated with their operations receive little attention from most of the U.S. public.
What is the meaning of "full responsibility?"
9
@Paul in Cali: "What is the meaning of 'full responsibility'?"
Nothing. It means nothing. It is meaning-less. Nothing will happen, nothing will change, we'll still keep killing brown people for no good reason and they won't get any apology from any American president - EVER.
Nothing. It means nothing. It is meaning-less. Nothing will happen, nothing will change, we'll still keep killing brown people for no good reason and they won't get any apology from any American president - EVER.
Not the biggest fan of this administration by a long shot, but this is the right thing, the gracious thing, to do, as it acknowledges the reality of the losses and their impact on the lives of those immediately concerned and those who must bear witness.
9
I can imagine what might have happened if the West had today's communication's technology back during World War 2.
The demands that the bombing of Germany and Japan be stopped in order to spare civilian casualties might have been so deafening that FDR and Churchill might would have sued Germany and Japan for peace years before either totalitarian regime was finally defeated.
One ironic byproduct of the drone campaign is that so many Sunni terrorists may have been killed by drone attacks since Obama became President, that he has felt emboldened enough to fantasize about a meaningful deal with the power hungry Shia in Iran.
The demands that the bombing of Germany and Japan be stopped in order to spare civilian casualties might have been so deafening that FDR and Churchill might would have sued Germany and Japan for peace years before either totalitarian regime was finally defeated.
One ironic byproduct of the drone campaign is that so many Sunni terrorists may have been killed by drone attacks since Obama became President, that he has felt emboldened enough to fantasize about a meaningful deal with the power hungry Shia in Iran.
5
The Bureau of Investigative Journalism is an independent not-for-profit organization based at at City University London that tacks US drone strikes. These are their numbers:
Total strikes: 415
Obama strikes: 364
Total killed: 2,449-3,949
Civilians killed: 421-960
Children killed: 172-207
Injured: 1,144-1,722.
President Obama has two apologies down and just 419 to 958 to go.
Total strikes: 415
Obama strikes: 364
Total killed: 2,449-3,949
Civilians killed: 421-960
Children killed: 172-207
Injured: 1,144-1,722.
President Obama has two apologies down and just 419 to 958 to go.
31
And by a show of hands, whom wants to confront the terrorists by putting their boots on the ground? Hands? Anybody? Anybody at all?
2
Drone strikes are only as accurate as our intelligence and information gathering skills. Unfortunately, I have little confidence that we have credible intelligence sources in Pakistan. Pay for information and you will get all sorts of questionable characters telling you "credible" information.
4
On and on goes the drone strike killings with no attempt to meet with Al Qaeda and try to work out some modus operandi for us both that deals with the complaints we each have. Meanwhile a bunch of contractors and corporations are rolling in profits as the hostilities go on consuming resources and lives. Of course, Mr. Obama offers his apologies for the whole rigamarole and that supposedly wipes out the evil being done by our side. This may be tops in a way to make enormous profits but it has to be some form of insanity from the standpoint of continued human existence.
3
Do you want us to send ambulances instead?
1
Bill M, it should be so easy and logical. Why would a terrorist organization that wants to destroy or kill westerners want to meet with the U.S. What naivete would lead you to believe or trust anything they say.
Do we believe and trust anything Putin says? Should we believe or trust anything Iran says? Should we believe or trust anything Raoul Castro says?
Even Obama the naive arch liberal is not that foolish. Only in California!
Do we believe and trust anything Putin says? Should we believe or trust anything Iran says? Should we believe or trust anything Raoul Castro says?
Even Obama the naive arch liberal is not that foolish. Only in California!
1
@Bill M: "... with no attempt to meet with Al Qaeda ..."
US Navy SEALS met with Osama bin Laden in Pakistan on 2 May 2011.
US Navy SEALS met with Osama bin Laden in Pakistan on 2 May 2011.
Proof that we fire drones without really knowing who will be killed. At least Obama gave a meaningless apology to the American family. I wonder if he apologizes to the families of all the innocent people he kills......doubt it.
5
I am not going to slag on the President or anyone else for making this call. When a terrorist organization out to kill people has hostages, if you hold back from fighting them because of that, they'll just use the advantage to kill more people. This was absolutely the correct call to make. Someone taken hostage by terrorists should be rescued if possible, but if it comes down to having to shoot to stop more people from being hurt and killed, then that is the decision that must be made. The Mongols drove captives before them into battle as well. If you have to fire to stop the terrorist, the damage done is their responsibility and not yours. You are preventing further attacks and death by firing and stopping them.
18
The terrorists and no one else to to blame for this horrible event. if I am ever held captive by them and our government can take out some of their leadership by attacking them and killing me in the process, they have my permission to do so without hesitation or any reservations..
12
The story that is not being reported on concerns the intelligence failings that have resulted in this and many other snafus, as we repeatedly have bombed the wrong people over and over again, and then always says oops, our bad. Is this a problem with personnel qualifications, skills or training not meeting the demands of the intel mission? A systemic problem? Both? Something else?
2
Since the comments feature isn't available on the related story about Mr. Weinstein, I'll just ask here what he thought he was doing. When people behave foolishly, bad things can happen. If he was more than he presented himself as, bad things were inevitably going to happen.
I've been familiar with Pakistan since 1976, have lived there at various times, always as a private citizen and sometimes as a spouse and in-law of Pakistanis, and founded a women's center in a very conservative part of the country.
If Mr. Weinstein was all that familiar with Pakistan and its culture, he should have known that the Pakistan of the '70s and '80s was not the Pakistan of this century, and that a nice American Jewish man living there among locals had the clock ticking on him. If the American Embassy wasn't telling him that regularly, then diplomatic staff knew he was more than a kindly private aid worker; if he was just a nice guy trying to do good in the world, he gets prime position in the Naivete Hall of Fame.
I've been familiar with Pakistan since 1976, have lived there at various times, always as a private citizen and sometimes as a spouse and in-law of Pakistanis, and founded a women's center in a very conservative part of the country.
If Mr. Weinstein was all that familiar with Pakistan and its culture, he should have known that the Pakistan of the '70s and '80s was not the Pakistan of this century, and that a nice American Jewish man living there among locals had the clock ticking on him. If the American Embassy wasn't telling him that regularly, then diplomatic staff knew he was more than a kindly private aid worker; if he was just a nice guy trying to do good in the world, he gets prime position in the Naivete Hall of Fame.
8
Unless we have good intelligence about the target, we should not use drone strikes especially there are captives, hostages and innocent civilians nearby. Protecting captives should always have priority over killing terrorists who are not immediate threat to us.
2
Sorry, collateral damage. Drone strikes are helpful. We worry about the lives of two people who knowingly went into a danger-zone, yet what about the lives of countless others that have been saved by CIA and our intelligence services.
Small price to pay.
Small price to pay.
13
It is most assuredly not a small price to pay, but you are clear eyed ans correct. It is the price one pays in fighting fanatical cowards.
5
Maybe if Republicans in Congress would stop ducking their constitutional duty to instruct the CinC on his limits on the use of force with an updated authorization, then there would be some over sight on these drone strikes.
But, more important to insure a 14 year old girl made pregnant when being smuggled across borders can't get an abortion at US taxpayer expense or more important to insist on interfering with the president negotiating an agreement to slow the development of nuclear weapons in the middle east than to discharge one's Article 1, Section 8 responsibilities.
So much for all that constitutional conservative nonsense.
But, more important to insure a 14 year old girl made pregnant when being smuggled across borders can't get an abortion at US taxpayer expense or more important to insist on interfering with the president negotiating an agreement to slow the development of nuclear weapons in the middle east than to discharge one's Article 1, Section 8 responsibilities.
So much for all that constitutional conservative nonsense.
6
You do realize that Obama is a democrat and that Republicans would be glad to glass all of the middle east for their own motives.
1
Wrong word: These people are not conservatives: they are radical reactionaries, cruel, vicious, mean and power-mad. They are loathsome, yet they are accepted as mainstream.
6
This unfortunate episode needs to become a national conversation on the merits of American drone policy. While these weapons are preventing the risk of manned air strikes there continues to be mistakes made regarding civilian casualties, especially in Pakistan.
Funny how little outrage there is over this. I'd like to see independent counsel assigned to this and report back on if the administration even checked to see if there were hostages at this location or if they knew there were hostages and didn't care. This administration seems to think that drone usage is nothing more that a video game, just dots on a screen.
3
Then why are there so many guidelines for use of them and why did he order a review already of how this happened? Do you not read the entire article?
I'm sorry to be callous, but this was and currently is a war zone and those who chose to travel there and work there take a significant risk. But on the other hand, I also have to ask why are we there? Money for big corporations. "Taking out" sites of possible "terrorist" operations doesn't seem to make individuals living in America any safer. So why? It's a question that all of us have to ask. War increases revenue for our "economy". Again why? Take a moment to think about it.
6
@chole199: "... this was and currently is a war zone and those who chose to travel there and work there take a significant risk."
Mr. Weinstein was kidnapped in Lahore, Pakistan, which is not a "war zone".
Warren Weinstein’s Devotion to Pakistan Was Part of a Lifetime of Service
By MICHAEL D. SHEAR
APRIL 23, 2015
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/world/asia/warren-weinsteins-devotion-...
Mr. Weinstein was kidnapped in Lahore, Pakistan, which is not a "war zone".
Warren Weinstein’s Devotion to Pakistan Was Part of a Lifetime of Service
By MICHAEL D. SHEAR
APRIL 23, 2015
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/world/asia/warren-weinsteins-devotion-...
So much for the efficacy of the US Drone Center of Operations for targeting Middle Eastern Foe (MEF) that's located in a US Airbase near Ramstein, Germany, and the level of quality control exhibited by our drone game-boy operators…
BTW, it was a former drone pilot who revealed that the data for all drone deployments "in the ME" is routed through the military base. Denied by our military, of course.
Needless to say, you give the joy-stick to some young kid in the military who is barely out of his tweens, and collateral damage (such a nice, painless euphemism) will happen.
One can only imagine how they carefully choose who is and who isn't an enemy combatant, especially when it comes to non-white targets…you know. Arabs. Since everything in the vernacular is "awesome" these days, the hoo-ahhs after each "kill" and the high-fives between evaporating death-dealing must be…well, "Awesome, dude."
Then, of course, there are the children…who pay with their lives because they "happened to be in the vicinity" of "terrorist activities" and as Obama might say…"some folks get evaporated."
But, don't expect our Nobel Peace Prize winning President to apologize to those families. Two apologies in almost 12 years is a piece of cake.
A few million that are way overdue…well, that's another story.
BTW, it was a former drone pilot who revealed that the data for all drone deployments "in the ME" is routed through the military base. Denied by our military, of course.
Needless to say, you give the joy-stick to some young kid in the military who is barely out of his tweens, and collateral damage (such a nice, painless euphemism) will happen.
One can only imagine how they carefully choose who is and who isn't an enemy combatant, especially when it comes to non-white targets…you know. Arabs. Since everything in the vernacular is "awesome" these days, the hoo-ahhs after each "kill" and the high-fives between evaporating death-dealing must be…well, "Awesome, dude."
Then, of course, there are the children…who pay with their lives because they "happened to be in the vicinity" of "terrorist activities" and as Obama might say…"some folks get evaporated."
But, don't expect our Nobel Peace Prize winning President to apologize to those families. Two apologies in almost 12 years is a piece of cake.
A few million that are way overdue…well, that's another story.
4
Firstly condolences to Mr Weinstein's family. He was a good man.
I guess the previous claim from the Obama administration of no civilian deaths was always a lie.
Condolences to all those other poor souls killed.
I guess the previous claim from the Obama administration of no civilian deaths was always a lie.
Condolences to all those other poor souls killed.
2
When did the administration make a "previous claim from the Obama administration of no civilian deaths"? I am not familiar with that as I remember a previous speech at West Point where he said he has to live with decisions which cause civilian deaths.
You do realize, of course, that if they never made that claim, then it is you who is telling a lie.
You do realize, of course, that if they never made that claim, then it is you who is telling a lie.
How about that?
The president says he got faulty intelligence ("Based on the intelligence that we had obtained at the time, including hundreds of hours of surveillance...").
Sounds vaguely familiar.
The president says he got faulty intelligence ("Based on the intelligence that we had obtained at the time, including hundreds of hours of surveillance...").
Sounds vaguely familiar.
6
We have established that we can't and won't eradicate Al Qaeda using conventional military tactics. Drone strikes and targeted assassination are our best strategy for success at disabling their command structure and a campaign of relentless harassment is the best solution to keeping Al Qaeda from expanding. They represent a committed and permanent threat to our safety and security, and inaction will only embolden them. The tragic loss of innocent lives is far outweighed by our ability to neutralize this threat , one that is capable of and intent on inflicting horrific damage on the civilized world and disrupting the normal lives of good people everywhere in the range of their bloody reach. As an American, I can live with this. We should expand this program to lawless areas infested by Al Qaeda in Africa and Arabia.
7
"We have established that we can't and won't eradicate Al Qaeda using conventional military tactics."
Then maybe it is time to go nuclear.
Then maybe it is time to go nuclear.
@Malabar Considering the lawless, criminal behavior that often plagues Florida and disrupts the lives of the good people of FL, would you be in favor of drone strikes in FL? Further, if you and/or members of your family were the tragic loss of innocent life in such a campaign to neutralize the criminal element in FL, would you, as an American, be able to live with that (though given the presumed tragedy, perhaps that's not the correct phrase)?
Nothing like endless war to keep our economy growing for some. But then others will have to pay the high costs with interest added--generation after generation. We need to bring our military home before it gets us into trouble we can't handle.
3
It is hoped President Obama's critics will take this tragedy into consideration as they try goading him into starting a conflict with Iran. When a president gives orders to kill our enemies sometimes even good people die.
Last summer Obama approved of nearly a battalion size US military group to secure hostages held by ISIS (a JV Team compared to ours) which were not there, but just think of the uproar had many of those brave souls been killed in that quest.
Last summer Obama approved of nearly a battalion size US military group to secure hostages held by ISIS (a JV Team compared to ours) which were not there, but just think of the uproar had many of those brave souls been killed in that quest.
4
This a very unfortunate story, however the Hillary story today could have far greater long-term impact.
Interesting that President Obama chose to release this information today.
The Left is getting ZERO good news these days. Expect this to continue.
Interesting that President Obama chose to release this information today.
The Left is getting ZERO good news these days. Expect this to continue.
5
“ 'As president and as commander in chief, I take full responsibility for all our counterterrorism operations,'...Mr. Obama said in a statement to reporters in the White House briefing room." This is an Owellian statement. These drone strikes are not counterterroism operations. They are terrorist attacks by the US in and of themselves.
4
Interesting that the US is now killing its own people on foreign territory. That's a welcome change from the previous practice of killing thousands of innocent non-Americans in other countries.
Good, keep it going, the rest of the world will very much appreciate the change in "strategy".
Good, keep it going, the rest of the world will very much appreciate the change in "strategy".
5
@Max Headroom: "Interesting that the US is now killing its own people on foreign territory."
US citizens have been killed in drone strikes before. Anwar al-Awlaki and his son, Abdulrahman, were both US citizens. Abdulrahman was not accused of any wrong-doing.
The Drone That Killed My Grandson
By NASSER al-AWLAKI
JULY 17, 2013
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/18/opinion/the-drone-that-killed-my-grand...
US citizens have been killed in drone strikes before. Anwar al-Awlaki and his son, Abdulrahman, were both US citizens. Abdulrahman was not accused of any wrong-doing.
The Drone That Killed My Grandson
By NASSER al-AWLAKI
JULY 17, 2013
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/18/opinion/the-drone-that-killed-my-grand...
1
Perhaps President Obama has grown a title too drone happy in using them to kill American Al Qaeda terrorists without trial and then inadvertently executing two innocent hostages with them. It appears that the President has gotten as trigger happy with drones as have too many police officers firing lethal weapons at unarmed people. Perhaps President Obama should suspend the drone strikes until real intelligence is provided and a more secure system is put in place for use of them as a last resort, and at the same time it seems that police departments around the nation need to do better training in use of lethal weapons. People should not be killed for broken tail lights or being hostages.
6
Oops, huh?
And so much for America, land of the rule of law.
We're always OK with illegality as long as it's us doing it to them.
Yes, it's troublesome and inconvenient to bring individuals to justice. That's why laws are written and judiciaries enforce them--because it's so much easier the other way. Governments, composed of, you know, human beings, must be compelled to do the right thing.
And the "bad guys" we're getting with these drones? Many of them were the good guys we bought and paid for, before they slipped their leashes and became the enemies we've got to kill.
Want to stop Al Qaeda and ISIS? Force the Saudis to stop funding them. See how easy?
And so much for America, land of the rule of law.
We're always OK with illegality as long as it's us doing it to them.
Yes, it's troublesome and inconvenient to bring individuals to justice. That's why laws are written and judiciaries enforce them--because it's so much easier the other way. Governments, composed of, you know, human beings, must be compelled to do the right thing.
And the "bad guys" we're getting with these drones? Many of them were the good guys we bought and paid for, before they slipped their leashes and became the enemies we've got to kill.
Want to stop Al Qaeda and ISIS? Force the Saudis to stop funding them. See how easy?
25
You are actually talking logic. But here in the U.S., very few do it. Law, legality, due process, etc. are words expunged from our dictionaries. We now have some new words replacing them: kill them, get them, shoot them, bomb them. You know the rest of it.
4
Forcing Saudi Arabia to stop funding them is easy? And would that even be effective if it worked?
If I were - heaven forbid - a captive of Al Qaeda or ISIL, I would welcome a drone strike to stop the terrorists, even if it meant dying in the event. President Obama made the right decision, and his openness in talking about it and the tragic events of the loss of innocent lives, is truly inspiring. He is not hiding it behind talking heads on news programs, or false information planted in newspapers, as a previous administration did. While we mourn the loss of the captives, we rejoice in an American president that we can be proud of again. Thank you, Mr. Obama, for your true leadership in an increasingly difficult world.
25
Somehow I doubt you'd be saying these same words while tied up in a compound in Pakistan.
1
Agreed! Given the scenario of being an Al Queda or ISIL captive I'd die cheering the predator drone or F-16 blowing my captors (and me) to blue blazes. American can die as martyrs too!
Thank you President Obama for leveling with the American People and thank you Mr. Weinstein for your service to our country. These are two examples profiles in courage in service to our country.
Thank you President Obama for leveling with the American People and thank you Mr. Weinstein for your service to our country. These are two examples profiles in courage in service to our country.
1
It seems the Air Force and CIA too are having problems recruiting drone
pilots, according to accounts in the service magazines. Pilots are not volunteering, and they're having to order trained service pilots to do it, and to rely heavily on contract mercs. For the ones doing it now, there's apparently a high incidence of PTSD and associated life and family problems.
Given the immorality and hubris of the whole program, this shouldn't come as a surprise.
Every one in the chain of command, and everyone who acquiesces to or ignores this, ought to be feeling some of this guilt too. Obama is quite adept at faking emotion, but he's just a mouthpiece anyway.
This anonymous drone program has made the antiterrorism war or whatever the heck it is a lot worse, not better. The only beneficiaries are the MIC, finding another way to throw away money on counterproductive efforts, and demagogic political shills in or out of office
for the MIC. This is what the US exports now. Arms maker to the world, a force for peace.
The cost has been the destruction of the reputation of the former United States. It won't be coming back. Our so-called leaders won't even face the issue.
pilots, according to accounts in the service magazines. Pilots are not volunteering, and they're having to order trained service pilots to do it, and to rely heavily on contract mercs. For the ones doing it now, there's apparently a high incidence of PTSD and associated life and family problems.
Given the immorality and hubris of the whole program, this shouldn't come as a surprise.
Every one in the chain of command, and everyone who acquiesces to or ignores this, ought to be feeling some of this guilt too. Obama is quite adept at faking emotion, but he's just a mouthpiece anyway.
This anonymous drone program has made the antiterrorism war or whatever the heck it is a lot worse, not better. The only beneficiaries are the MIC, finding another way to throw away money on counterproductive efforts, and demagogic political shills in or out of office
for the MIC. This is what the US exports now. Arms maker to the world, a force for peace.
The cost has been the destruction of the reputation of the former United States. It won't be coming back. Our so-called leaders won't even face the issue.
12
There will never be a real shortage of killers for those jobs. If need be, the US government and military will recruit gang members, but those seats will continue to be staffed. This is not after all about morality or good intentions. It is about every possible negative reason you could imagine. Power, money, greed, sadism, exceptionalism...a long list.
1
If you lived in NYC, and worked daily next to the Ground Zero Memorial as I do, you would know that the work being done to stop the actions of inhumane terrorists is done by heroes. Every day. Please heaven that Spain never forgets what terrorism has done in its own soil, in addition to throughout the world.
Regrets, sure. Apology not necessary.
20
I guess the drones don't have the pin-point accuracy Obama boasted about. Ah well Tant Pis.
6
This was an intelligence failure, not a targeting error. From the article: "He [Mr. Obama] said that it [the drone strike] was conducted after hundreds of hours of surveillance had convinced American officials that they were targeting an Al Qaeda compound where no civilians were present, ..."
1
“As president and as commander in chief, I take full responsibility for all our counterterrorism operations,” including the one that inadvertently took the lives of the two captives"
President Obama, will you also stand up there and apologize when
American Pastor Saeed dies in an Iranian jail for the sole crime of practicing his Christian religion.
This American Pastor has received no trial yet, although he has served 2 and a half years of his 8 year prison in one of the worst jails in Iran. His crime was practicing Christianity. And they are now demanding that he recant his Christian faith
How could the US sit across a table from Iran and negotiate out a deal for atomic weapons, and no one in the US thought to negotiate for this man's release as every day his health gets worse?
There are three other Americans being held in Iran ( our new friend).
Jason Rezaian, Amir Hekmati, and Robert Levinson
Will they be released or suffer torture there?
President Obama, will you also stand up there and apologize when
American Pastor Saeed dies in an Iranian jail for the sole crime of practicing his Christian religion.
This American Pastor has received no trial yet, although he has served 2 and a half years of his 8 year prison in one of the worst jails in Iran. His crime was practicing Christianity. And they are now demanding that he recant his Christian faith
How could the US sit across a table from Iran and negotiate out a deal for atomic weapons, and no one in the US thought to negotiate for this man's release as every day his health gets worse?
There are three other Americans being held in Iran ( our new friend).
Jason Rezaian, Amir Hekmati, and Robert Levinson
Will they be released or suffer torture there?
6
It's very easy to take full responsibility when you are capable and willing to bomb anybody out of existence that would actually have the nerve to ask for punishment.
It Is his responsibility the Iranians are holding him? How's that? Next you'll hold him responsible for some of KIm Jong-Un's antics.
Can we all agree that Obama is the Drone President?
21
No, sounds like a pretty meaningless and inaccurate statement.
2
Collateral damage,
from joy stick wars,
the video games are on, my boys,
so easy to kill when the fog is far,
with the enemy if friends also fall--
a late apology we will toll,
they'll be forgotten at the polls,
and though they'll be privately mourned
by families beset by broken hearts
we're satisfied we've played our parts.
We'll crank out the drones
for our military machine--
No blood letting stones--
We're staying clean!
from joy stick wars,
the video games are on, my boys,
so easy to kill when the fog is far,
with the enemy if friends also fall--
a late apology we will toll,
they'll be forgotten at the polls,
and though they'll be privately mourned
by families beset by broken hearts
we're satisfied we've played our parts.
We'll crank out the drones
for our military machine--
No blood letting stones--
We're staying clean!
7
"I take full responsibility" has become a rote and almost meaningless phrase. It is best interpreted to mean the opposite of what it states, that the government official who employs it take no personal responsibility for the event. He or she is neither fined, demoted, or chastised officially. It would be interesting if a NY Times reporter asked the President at the next news conference to inform us just what the "I" means in that phrase when applied to him?
30
The question is not necessary. The President began, "As Commander in Chief..." so he leaves no doubt that he is referring to himself.
There is no quibble about "what the meaning of 'I' is."
There is no quibble about "what the meaning of 'I' is."
1
Our drone wars kill more good guys than they kill bad guys. In fact our world wide operation to defeat terror creates more terrorists daily. We need an economic operation world wide , not the self defeating military operation we now have. The world was a much safer place before we decided to regime change Iraq. And things have only gotten worse since the regime changes in Libya, Syria, etc.
27
When you considered that more war means more millions for contracts, mercenaries and weapons, there is little incentive not to press the trigger.
1
"Our drone wars kill more good guys than they kill bad guys."
Do you have any evidence at all to support that claim? Or is it just a feeling?
In all of human history, there has never been a war without "collateral damage." Many thousands of innocent civilians died in the firebombing of Dresden and the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I doubt there will ever be a war in which civilians do not get killed. But drone strikes are the closest thing we've ever seen to a surgical attack that only kills the "bad guys." The very fact that we can list the victims of our drone strikes should make it clear that the number of unintended victims in this form of warfare is very, very low.
Do you have any evidence at all to support that claim? Or is it just a feeling?
In all of human history, there has never been a war without "collateral damage." Many thousands of innocent civilians died in the firebombing of Dresden and the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I doubt there will ever be a war in which civilians do not get killed. But drone strikes are the closest thing we've ever seen to a surgical attack that only kills the "bad guys." The very fact that we can list the victims of our drone strikes should make it clear that the number of unintended victims in this form of warfare is very, very low.
3
Let's blame Bush, Cheney, Rummy, for the continuing deaths of many people worldwide. They are the ones that threw the stone into the hornets nest and upset the apple cart.
71
How about the Dems like Hillary Clinton and John Kerry who lent it their votes in support?
3
Based on faulty intelligence?
1
Ok. What next?
Of all the places in the world for an American to travel to, why Pakistan? China sends its Premier to work out the details of a substantial development program in the form of infrastructure and billions for development. We send individual agency representatives at great risk with the promise of little reward. The root cause of Mr. Weinstein's death is a misguided, weak policy of treading water in and around a country that barely cooperates with us, in many cases undermines us and is its worst own enemy in every category. What was the point of his visit in the first place? My deepest regrets to Mr. Weinstein's family.
18
Unfortunately for Mr Weinstein's family he chose this path in life and knew the potential consequences. He obviously believed in what he was doing, took a chance, and he was wrong. As the President suggested, there were hundreds of hours of video of this compound with no prisoners visible so they bombed it. We can be empathetic to the Weinstein family situation but we still made the right decision.
As we share in some small measure the grief of the families of these two men, and rightfully so, let us not forget the grief of the families of countless strangers whom we do not know who die in war. The political consequences of visiting death upon people, whether combatants or innocents, are awful enough. Too often, killing becomes a justification for more killing in a cruel perpetual cycle.
As we take time to humanize these two men, it is an opportunity for us to remember that ALL the victims of war are human beings, all born innocent into this world and almost all with grieving families, whether we know them or are told about them or identify with them or not.
As we take time to humanize these two men, it is an opportunity for us to remember that ALL the victims of war are human beings, all born innocent into this world and almost all with grieving families, whether we know them or are told about them or identify with them or not.
283
I don't share in their grief. I oppose the use of drones to indiscriminately kill women and children. The use of drones in this way is a war crime.
The two victims whose deaths are the focus here are neither women nor children but I hope that is not the distinction Jon is making. Jon, I understand your second and third sentences, while the first escapes my comprehension.
In any case, the point I am attempting to make is that we might pause to reflect on the awful human cost of war that knows no borders, favors no flags or religions; putting debates about drones & blame & politics & military risks aside for just a moment. Perhaps even an extended moment.
In any case, the point I am attempting to make is that we might pause to reflect on the awful human cost of war that knows no borders, favors no flags or religions; putting debates about drones & blame & politics & military risks aside for just a moment. Perhaps even an extended moment.
1
Why doesn't Obama apologize for all the innocent civilians (Arab; non-American) woman and children killed and maimed by drone strikes? Why doesn't he apologize for the constant terror these people feel when they see a drone circling their neighborhood?
60
Is it a similar terror New Yorkers feel when a plane goes overhead?
Dear NM,
Just to be clear, most New Yorkers don't feel terror when a plane goes overhead. Maybe 13 years ago, sometimes, but nowadays we're all used to the constant overhead flights again.
Just to be clear, most New Yorkers don't feel terror when a plane goes overhead. Maybe 13 years ago, sometimes, but nowadays we're all used to the constant overhead flights again.
When it comes to foreign policy and war, no Democrat is different from any Republican.
If the president really "took full responsibility" (a meaningless phrase these days) he would admit our intellience is faulty and we don't know whom we are killing and therefore he is ending drone strikes. He should apologize for playing God with people's lives and resign. President Biden could wind down our military misadventures and leave the people of the Middle East to solve their own problems. The only role left for the U.S. will be paying reparations for all the murder and mayhem we have caused.
8
Why is the President apologizing? The terrorists put hostages in harm's way and it is the terrorists who are at fault for their unfortunate deaths. Criminal law has a term for this - Felony Murder, which means that criminals are responsible for deaths resulting (even accidentally) from their crimes.
There is an important difference between expressing sorrow, sympathy and regret and issuing an apology - the President should not have suggested, through the issuance of an apology, that the American armed forces had any blame in the incident.
You don't negotiate with terrorists and you don't apologize for actions they caused.
There is an important difference between expressing sorrow, sympathy and regret and issuing an apology - the President should not have suggested, through the issuance of an apology, that the American armed forces had any blame in the incident.
You don't negotiate with terrorists and you don't apologize for actions they caused.
168
We should hear back from you if ever one of your loved ones becomes a hostage.
2
I'd agree if the hostage situation was in our own country. We have no business in the Middle East, let alone a duty to send attack drones without a declaration of war.
The apology was offered to the families of the innocents killed. What the President's statement suggests, by omitting any reference to it, is another US and allied forces intelligence failure. Because it is known how this enemy creates catastrophes for all, without regard to the loss of innocent human life, the guiding principle should be no attacks until we are affirmatively able to ensure no loss of innocent lives, particularly innocent American lives.
1
Sincere regrets, yes, but no apology is needed. No doubt hundreds, maybe more, American prisoners of war were inadvertently killed when we bombed German and Japanese military targets in WW2. Anyone with an ounce of intelligence recognizes that "precision" in warfare is a highly relative term. Fewer unintended casualties rather than more is an improvement, but the number will never get to zero. For those hand-wringers moaning about drones being the cause of all our ills, I suggest you head down to the local Marine or Army enlistment office and sign up to do the dangerous and dirty work yourselves. Otherwise, your calls for other Americans to put THEIR lives at risk (but not yours, of course) for your highly-developed moral principles is just so much empty hypocrisy.
96
Excellent Point!
The unalterable sad reality in war is that civilian non-combatants are killed, most often inadvertently. It is generally accepted by World War II historians that American P.O.W.'s were inadvertently killed and vaporized in the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima.
It is where civilian non-combatants are deliberately targeted in violation of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, such as the Hamas targeting of Israeli civilian communities, that constitutes a war crime, subject to criminal prosecution.
The unalterable sad reality in war is that civilian non-combatants are killed, most often inadvertently. It is generally accepted by World War II historians that American P.O.W.'s were inadvertently killed and vaporized in the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima.
It is where civilian non-combatants are deliberately targeted in violation of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, such as the Hamas targeting of Israeli civilian communities, that constitutes a war crime, subject to criminal prosecution.
1
@al: 'Anyone with an ounce of intelligence recognizes that "precision" in warfare is a highly relative term.'
If you read the article carefully, you will see that this was an intelligence failure. The CIA struck the compound "after hundreds of hours of surveillance".
If you read the article carefully, you will see that this was an intelligence failure. The CIA struck the compound "after hundreds of hours of surveillance".
That's exactly my point. The "fog of war" is not a novel concept.
Nice to know after the hundreds of other civilians killed by drones a full review will be done to prevent future mistakes after 2 western civilians are killed.
20
Just another sacrifice in the cause of Manifest Destiny ( aka "America will subjugate all countries of the world by any means necessary")
20
You do not know what you are talking about. If I were from Islamabad I'd be thinking about how to stop the slaughter of everyone in sight by ISIS, who only pretends to be Islamic. Your part of the world has been around a long time, but has nothing to tout to anyone, anywhere.
2
Don't agree with the drone strikes.
Don't agree with your other comment either. If America wanted to subjugate all other countries it would simply do it and you wouldn't be able to make the comment you are making.
Don't agree with your other comment either. If America wanted to subjugate all other countries it would simply do it and you wouldn't be able to make the comment you are making.
2
This is really unfortunate, but the blame for these deaths is not America's, but al qaeda's. They're the ones that kidnapped these men and held them for years, placing them in danger, and in all likelihood they were going to kill them eventually anyway. Most likely they were holding onto them in an attempt to ransom them, but as our government usually doesn't do that (prisoner swaps sometimes, ransoming is against our policy), it seems probable that al qaeda would have killed them in the end.
My condolences to the families and friends of these men, I hope they can overcome their grief.
My condolences to the families and friends of these men, I hope they can overcome their grief.
61
The men placed themselves in danger by going to the Middle East in wartime.
3
So why does everyone blame Israel for the deaths of Hamas' human shields? Are we not more of a sledgehammer for a fly than Israel is?
3
The president assumed full responsibility for the two deaths. He said he is grieved for the families of the deceased. He's a stand-up guy. The "buck" stopped at his desk. He refused to dance behind "mission accomplished."
139
This terrible tragedy and the ones that came before it, should act as a warning to even the most well intentioned-- If you, as a civilian, chose to work or volunteer in a war zone, the United States government can't protect you. As morally difficult as this policy is for all of us to accept, the government position on this issue does serve the greater good.
23
If drones can kill U.S. and European hostages, we can imagine what they are doing to kill hundreds of innocent men, women and children around the world. Please stop this new barbarism. Democrats, Republicans, all of you.
11
Drones don't kill nearly as many innocent civilians as the deaths they prevent. Every time they kill the actual barbarians, the terrorists, they save the lives of the dozens or hundreds of people each terrorist would have killed.
If you've got a better way to put a stop to terrorism, go for it.
If you've got a better way to put a stop to terrorism, go for it.
3
Like, build our foreign policy on equality and peace for all, and not war and profiteering for the 1%? Would be a welcome change.
1
Dear Brooklynforchange,
I agree, that'd be great. I really doubt that would prevent al qaeda from continuing its campaign of terror though. If we just stopped doing anything about them, they'd only kill millions eventually.
I agree, that'd be great. I really doubt that would prevent al qaeda from continuing its campaign of terror though. If we just stopped doing anything about them, they'd only kill millions eventually.
Warren Weinstein was my academic adviser during my freshman and sophomore years at SUNY Oswego. Nice man, very involved in the study of international politics. I only learned a few months ago about his captivity while reading an alumni publication. Rest in peace, Dr. Weinstein.
- Dave DiRoma
- Dave DiRoma
143
I'm sorry for your loss Dave - Warren sounds like a great guy.
6
Drones normally save American lives and American money. This is a rare, unfortunate incident.
16
Drone strikes have killed hundreds of non-combatants over a decade. This is a commonplace incident, notable only for the death of an American hostage.
18
Drones do not save American lives, they just postpone deaths. When drones kill innocent bystanders, as they so often do, it radicalizes others who then join terrorist organizations and kill Americans. Drones are a great recruiting tool for terrorists.
16
How do you know that this is a rare unfortunate incident? Simply not true. Also the best way to save American lives was to not get involved in the local tribal politics of Afghanistan.
2
The President is the only person in the World who can decide to kill anyone, anytime, anywhere in the World with impunity. No other person holds such unaccountable power. Sadly, most Americans just accept this as a way of life and see no legal problem with killing innocent civilians--be it Americans or other nationalities. State sanctioned murder is alive and well in the U.S.
The secret Drone program was sold to Americans as only targeting terrorists who pose an imminent threat to our security. The Pres. recently said no strike will be made until there is no threat, with a "near certainty," to civilian lives. The reality is civilians continue to die and the government refuses to provide any transparency unless "caught" killing civilians. Then the excuse of "we didn't mean to" is considered sufficient.
In Boston, the government is currently seeking the death penalty for the civilian deaths caused by the bomber. There is justifiable outrage for the carnage caused by those senseless bombings. Boston strong.
But when it comes our government killing innocent civilians abroad, they get off the hook with an apology and sometimes a payment of money, even thought the deaths are as painful to the survivors as those that occurred in Boston.
If we applied the same morality and criminal standards abroad as we do at home, targeted killing outside of war zones would end today.
The secret Drone program was sold to Americans as only targeting terrorists who pose an imminent threat to our security. The Pres. recently said no strike will be made until there is no threat, with a "near certainty," to civilian lives. The reality is civilians continue to die and the government refuses to provide any transparency unless "caught" killing civilians. Then the excuse of "we didn't mean to" is considered sufficient.
In Boston, the government is currently seeking the death penalty for the civilian deaths caused by the bomber. There is justifiable outrage for the carnage caused by those senseless bombings. Boston strong.
But when it comes our government killing innocent civilians abroad, they get off the hook with an apology and sometimes a payment of money, even thought the deaths are as painful to the survivors as those that occurred in Boston.
If we applied the same morality and criminal standards abroad as we do at home, targeted killing outside of war zones would end today.
189
Well said and on point.
2
When our fathers and grandfathers rained fire down upon Germany and Japan, at the behest of the government of the United States, killing countless civilians, they were doing what we are doing only a shadow of.
We have identified people who are making war on the United States. Retaliation in war does not call for due process. Those standing close to the war-makers may also get killed.
We have identified people who are making war on the United States. Retaliation in war does not call for due process. Those standing close to the war-makers may also get killed.
9
ScottW, Did it occur to you that these terrorists were using innocent hostages as human shields? And sorry but I'm missing the connect between Boston Strong and a mistake that happened in a war zone where sometimes innocents do get killed.
Your statement makes no sense.
If we applied the same morality and criminal standards abroad as we do at home, targeted killing outside of war zones would end today.
Your statement makes no sense.
If we applied the same morality and criminal standards abroad as we do at home, targeted killing outside of war zones would end today.
4
Didn't the U.S. start two unnecessary wars that opened the way for hostage taking and the rise of ISIS? Greeted with flowers and song, my foot.
Meanwhile, police at home continue to execute black citizens on the streets of the U.S. America's silence on that score is deafening.
Meanwhile, police at home continue to execute black citizens on the streets of the U.S. America's silence on that score is deafening.
148
Dear AB,
I'm afraid you're mistaken. Afghanistan started a war with us, I don't know if you've ever heard of the 9/11/01 attacks on U.S. civilians, but that was the beginning of that war. Bush started a war with Iraq on false pretenses. But the Daesh were not enabled or created by either of these events, they came about in Syria after that government fell apart and sectarian civil war ignited, and that had nothing to do with American interference. Hostage taking has been a part of the terrorist movement since it began, and again, we didn't cause the terrorist movement, it was generated by poverty, local autocratic tyranny, and fundamentalist Islam.
Also the killings of black men by police are not exactly executions, not as prevalent as the news makes it seem, and American's volume on that score is deafening, drowning out most other news whenever such a killing occurs.
I'm afraid you're mistaken. Afghanistan started a war with us, I don't know if you've ever heard of the 9/11/01 attacks on U.S. civilians, but that was the beginning of that war. Bush started a war with Iraq on false pretenses. But the Daesh were not enabled or created by either of these events, they came about in Syria after that government fell apart and sectarian civil war ignited, and that had nothing to do with American interference. Hostage taking has been a part of the terrorist movement since it began, and again, we didn't cause the terrorist movement, it was generated by poverty, local autocratic tyranny, and fundamentalist Islam.
Also the killings of black men by police are not exactly executions, not as prevalent as the news makes it seem, and American's volume on that score is deafening, drowning out most other news whenever such a killing occurs.
5
I agree with the unnecessary war comment but seriously "executing black citizens"? Yes there have been incidents between law enforcement and citizens both black and white but to state that blacks are being executed is so over the top that it makes me not take your other valid comments seriously. Yes law enforcement makes mistakes and innocents are injured or killed and if the shooting is not justified then the officers need to be held accountable. There are bad officers just like there are in any profession and they need to be dealt with. The issue is when I hear "hands up don't shoot" in reference to the MB shooting it makes me just shake my head because it was justified in that case. Unfortunate that it happened maybe but it did and denying the facts does not change the truth here and that is he attacked a police officer after assaulting someone. Things need to be viewed on a case by case basis and forget the generalizations. Like my grandpa used to say "Play stupid games and win stupid prizes"!
Do not blanket statements about police executing people because we both know it is not accurate.
I know I am gonna hear it for my only the facts, case by case approach so lets have it. lol lol
Do not blanket statements about police executing people because we both know it is not accurate.
I know I am gonna hear it for my only the facts, case by case approach so lets have it. lol lol
2
No one from Afghanistan was on the 9/11 planes. No afghan official gave the order to attack the US.
5
A sad day for America and the free world. G-d bless America for all it contributes to the world.
6
They probably got a better death than their captors would give them.
33
I guess the human mind really can rationalize anything.
And people are endorsing this?
And people are endorsing this?
1
The captors were just after money.
1
They were fed and apparently well taken care of, waiting for negotiations.
You are to quick to end other lives. Let's hope for the sake of your loved ones that they never become hostages and that if they do, that you do not tell the people in charge of rescuing them what you told us here today.
You are to quick to end other lives. Let's hope for the sake of your loved ones that they never become hostages and that if they do, that you do not tell the people in charge of rescuing them what you told us here today.
4
Say what you will about capturing and "interrogating" suspected terrorists - you have less chance of something like this happening. Collateral damage is always the risk we run and price we pay for our crazy infatuation with technology. By using drones instead on the ground intel and capable extraction forces, we think we have removed ourselves from the dirty business of warfare.
8
Newsflash: In war, sometimes innocent people die.
Perhaps accepting that sad truth would give people pause before they decide to support yet another senseless war.
Perhaps accepting that sad truth would give people pause before they decide to support yet another senseless war.
211
So just to be clear, do you believe that al qaeda and similar vicious, violent, terrorist groups should be allowed to ravage their areas of control without any interference? Do you think that the best policy is for us to just allow them to kill whomever they like, at a rate of several thousand of their neighbors a month, and we should just stand back and let the slaughter continue?
3
We didn't ask for this war, Al Queda declared it on us and, sadly, we must defend ourselves. In war, innocent people die, it brutal and horrible but it is also inescapable.
4
While Al Qaida and other affiliated organization did clearly declare war on the U.S. - let's not kid ourselves. These drone strikes aren't defending the U.S.. There is no one in the middle east that is currently an imminent threat to the U.S..
It is important to realize and remember that the kidnappers are responsible for the hostages safety or lack thereof. There has never been a modern war that did not involve collateral damage. The nature of the armaments precludes that from manageability. All that can be done is to attempt to minimize the loss of innocent life. There is no perfection and never can be in the exercise and prosecution of war as it is a human endeavor.
110
Nor was there any war in history that did not involve collateral civilian killing.
4
What war are we fighting in Pakistan?
6
Because "perfection" is the wrong-headed dream that critics of drone bombings pursue. . . not.
Is there any evidence that drone strikes are effective? They certainly don't seem to be stemming the tide of radical terrorism, and, as here, they often involve collateral damage to innocents, which only further deteriorates the standing of the US in the world. In addition, they strike me as an expression of impotent fury at not being able to take effective action, and therefore the strikes actually give our enemies greater confidence in the face of US threats and ultimatums.
I'm also perplexed that people keep travelling in regions where there's such a high risk of kidnapping and harsh captivity. If one is a committed humanitarian, there are lots of places to go where help is needed, but where there is no risk of kidnapping by terrorists. And, of course, once kidnapped, these individuals become additional bargaining chips for the terrorist groups who hold them.
I'm also perplexed that people keep travelling in regions where there's such a high risk of kidnapping and harsh captivity. If one is a committed humanitarian, there are lots of places to go where help is needed, but where there is no risk of kidnapping by terrorists. And, of course, once kidnapped, these individuals become additional bargaining chips for the terrorist groups who hold them.
16
'...Is there any evidence that drone strikes are effective?...'
Does the name 'Osama Bin Laden' ring a bell?
Does the name 'Osama Bin Laden' ring a bell?
Well, for one thing, that was not a "drone strike" - it was a seal team using a drone for reconnaissance, which is a great use of the technology. They went in and shot him personally, instead of using a rocket to blow the place up, which could have destroyed evidence of the kill and would certainly have killed the innocent children in the house. Kind or supports my point, doesn't it?
Even if a drone had been successfully used to kill Bin Laden, and occasional success doesn't make up for the many errors, much less for the collateral damage.
Even if a drone had been successfully used to kill Bin Laden, and occasional success doesn't make up for the many errors, much less for the collateral damage.
2
You've buried the lede here. Adam Gadahn has been eliminated.
11
Anyone, foreigner or native, Christian or Muslim whose actions might interfere with the rule of Al Qaeda is at risk in the Middle East, no matter how good the intentions or how much they "immerse" themselves in the culture. Drones or no, had we even known the location of these innocent gentlemen and sent in SpecOps forces the outcome could easily have been the same.
If anyone has an easy solution I'm all ears and I sympathize with any world leader faced with this tragic situation. This might be a risk worth taking for those seeking to make the region better but pure intentions will not be much of a shield. Good luck and God bless all there.
If anyone has an easy solution I'm all ears and I sympathize with any world leader faced with this tragic situation. This might be a risk worth taking for those seeking to make the region better but pure intentions will not be much of a shield. Good luck and God bless all there.
45
Hopefully their families can take comfort in knowing that they did not suffer at the end, and they were not the latest in a series of beheading or immolation videos. May they rest in peace.
12
RP Smith wrote: "Hopefully their families can take comfort in knowing that they did not suffer at the end, and they were not the latest in a series of beheading or immolation videos."
Do you really think the victims of our drones do not suffer? Do you really imagine that their heads and/or other limbs are not torn off? What possible reason can you have for believing that victims of our assassinations do not burn to death?
Even the militants among those people we kill present no imminent threat to our country; far more Western lives have been taken by disappearing planes, such as the germanwings flight downed by a very sick co-pilot, but such airplane deaths do not hold a candle to the deaths caused by distracted driving - something we could cut dramatically immediately by disabling cell phones in moving vehicles, no assassination required. And vehicle deaths are vastly below preventable medical setting deaths, such as those from inadequate hygiene. Don't kid yourself that we are doing this to save American lives, we have far more productive ways to prevent many more needless deaths and injuries.
Our drones present a constant threat to civilians in the areas we target, leaving the population living in fear. The drone missile strikes constitute terrorism by the most powerful country in the world, and they mainly gain political capital, not our safety. These assassinations should result in war crimes charges for those ordering the drone strikes and those carrying them out.
Do you really think the victims of our drones do not suffer? Do you really imagine that their heads and/or other limbs are not torn off? What possible reason can you have for believing that victims of our assassinations do not burn to death?
Even the militants among those people we kill present no imminent threat to our country; far more Western lives have been taken by disappearing planes, such as the germanwings flight downed by a very sick co-pilot, but such airplane deaths do not hold a candle to the deaths caused by distracted driving - something we could cut dramatically immediately by disabling cell phones in moving vehicles, no assassination required. And vehicle deaths are vastly below preventable medical setting deaths, such as those from inadequate hygiene. Don't kid yourself that we are doing this to save American lives, we have far more productive ways to prevent many more needless deaths and injuries.
Our drones present a constant threat to civilians in the areas we target, leaving the population living in fear. The drone missile strikes constitute terrorism by the most powerful country in the world, and they mainly gain political capital, not our safety. These assassinations should result in war crimes charges for those ordering the drone strikes and those carrying them out.
4
Perhaps giving up using drones for these sorts of "rescues" might be a good idea. A drone is clearly far too blunt an instrument to be used in such a delicate situation, as this latest problem demonstrates. I am glad they at least admitted to it this time.
2
This wasn't a rescue mission. It was a mission to kill terrorists.
25
Dear Random Castagna,
The drones weren't being used for a rescue attempt here, but for removal of terrorist threats. We didn't know the captives were there, was the problem. In a rescue attempt, also highly risky for the captives, if drones are used at all it's for surveillance not as weapons; in such actions it's always ground troops going in after the captives.
The drones weren't being used for a rescue attempt here, but for removal of terrorist threats. We didn't know the captives were there, was the problem. In a rescue attempt, also highly risky for the captives, if drones are used at all it's for surveillance not as weapons; in such actions it's always ground troops going in after the captives.
8
A raid by humans might have had the same result.
6
So easy to be a tough guy when safely ensconced down in the White House bunker....
14
So easy to take cheap shots in an anonymous comment section.
195
... especially when you get to sawgger on a flattop in front of a big sign that says "Mission Accomplished" on May 1, 2003.
179
It should be remembered that it was your "tough guy" George Bush who got us into this mess in the first place.
183
At the risk of stating the obvious, everyone who works, travels, volunteers, stumbles, etc. into that region knowingly takes the risk of being injured, kidnapped, tortured, murdered, etc., by mercs, soldiers, civilians, militants, careless drivers, criminals, etc. It is not any more scandalous that we didn't learn of it till now. If people stop going to that region, they won't be killed there.
269
Kathy--pretty heartless. Kind of like saying if you drive a car, you accept the risk of being killed by a drunk driver, careless motorist, etc. But you left out one salient fact, they were killed by their own government after working with/for their government.
But it's easier just to rationalize it all away--blame the victim--than to put any responsibility on the person who pulled the trigger.
But it's easier just to rationalize it all away--blame the victim--than to put any responsibility on the person who pulled the trigger.
15
what about those that live there and have no other choice? i guess to you their lives are worth less or worthless all together.
3
Too bad there are local people there right?
3
If our intelligence was wrong about the presence of American hostages in the compound, how can we trust our intelligence agencies to effectively monitor Iranian nuclear activities after the signing of the bad deal?
6
Because the monitoring of Iran's nuclear program is primarily in the hands of an international agency that knows what its doing. And no doubt the Israelis will be doing all they can to monitor it. A nuclear program leaves telltale signs.
Knowing where terrorists are keeping their hostages? Well that's quite different.
Knowing where terrorists are keeping their hostages? Well that's quite different.
39
Easy - we can't!
4
Gosh, I don't know. Maybe because a nuclear facility is a lot harder to conceal than a hostage who can be hidden almost anywhere in a remote, mountainous region?
26
What about POTUS Obama apologizing for the deaths of three American citizens without due process Anwar al-Awalaki, Abdulrahman al-Awalaki and Samir Khan?
Along with an apology for all of the innocent civilians and/or non-combatant human being persons killed any where by malice, negligence or incompetence?
Along with an apology for all of the innocent civilians and/or non-combatant human being persons killed any where by malice, negligence or incompetence?
6
If an American decides to go to the Middle East and join a terrorist organization, not too many tears will be shed at their deaths.
Or should we have been heartbroken if an American who decided to join the German army during WWII was killed by an Allied bomb?
Or should we have been heartbroken if an American who decided to join the German army during WWII was killed by an Allied bomb?
39
WW2 was a declared war.
4
The were traitors actively making war on the US from foreign lands. "Due process" has never applied in such situations. We should send the police to arrest them?
15
I guess that just as you can't make an omelette without breaking some eggs, you can't avert some collateral damage while you guys are busy carpet bombing the world.
Business as usual. I understand that.
Business as usual. I understand that.
15
Actually, drones don't do carpet bombing and neither do modern air forces. I don't think the problem was that the drone hit more than the target. The problem was that the target contained the hostages and nobody knew. Somebody has to fight al-Qaida.
41
This would open a can of worm as to why there's an al-Qaida in the first place and the role US foreign policy played in shaping the world as it is today.
And "carpet bombing" was an hyperbole not referred to this specific episode, but... come on, you know what I mean.
And "carpet bombing" was an hyperbole not referred to this specific episode, but... come on, you know what I mean.
3
Daniel, writing from Italy (Europe) you must be too young to know what carpet bombing is, or you did not attend school and learned about carpet bombing. In fact, had the US carpet-bombed, this war would probably be over by now, with thousands more innocent civilians dead.
1