In trying to make up your mind on whether we use drones too much or too little, check out the following post by CFR.org's Micah Zenko:
After the al Qaeda bombing of two U.S. embassies in East Africa in August 1998, President Bill Clinton authorized cruise missile strikes against an al Qaeda complex in Khost, Afghanistan, in an attempt to kill Osama bin Laden. When that operation failed, Clinton pushed senior military officials to develop more innovative options.
In late 1999, Vice Admiral Scott Fry, the Joint Staff's director of operations, ordered his unit to produce new ways to find bin Laden. The most promising option was the Predator, an unmanned surveillance drone that provided live video coverage of Afghanistan in fifteen test flights before 9/11. To enable lethal strikes, the Air Force armed the Predator by mating it with a reconfigured Hellfire anti-tank missile.
Though the Bush administration's National Security Council, meeting a week before 9/11, agreed the armed Predator wasn't ready to be deployed, in the ten years since, armed unmanned drones have become the public face of America's military counterterrorism policy. Drones have fired missiles in six countries; been controlled by both the CIA and the Pentagon; seen increases in their lethality, loiter time and overall numbers; and have killed senior al Qaeda officials, mid-level operatives, at least one U.S. citizen, and innocent civilians. What was developed as a highly specialized covert option has become the default tactic used wherever potential terrorist threats emerge.
In the first prominent use of armed drones, a Predator killed Mohammed Atef, an al Qaeda military commander, in Afghanistan in November 2001. Most recently, America's drone wars have expanded into Somalia, where the first unmanned attack there targeted the militant group al-Shabaab. Over the past decade, drones have been most often used over northwest Pakistan, where a reported 258 CIA-controlled strikes have occurred since 2004 against suspected members of al Qaeda and affiliated groups.
The reliance on drones to mitigate the threat of transnational terrorism will only increase during the Obama administration, since drones have many appealing traits. They have fewer diplomatic costs in terms of assembling coalitions or securing basing rights, keep down the size of the military, create few civilian casualties, do not put U.S. soldiers at risk, and cost less than other military measures. In unveiling the administration's recent National Strategy for Counterterrorism, John Brennan, assistant to the president for homeland security and counterterrorism, said: "Our best offense won't always be deploying large armies abroad but delivering targeted, surgical pressure to the groups that threaten us," and noted that with persistent attacks on al Qaeda, "there will come a time when they simply can no longer replenish their ranks."
This is doubtful. Terrorist groups do not disappear due to military force, no matter how surgical its application. It also overlooks the second-order effects - such as turning public opinion within targeted states against the United States - of a drone-heavy counterterrorism policy, as well as the legal and operational precedent that has been set for the inevitable growth of drone strikes by others.
The views expressed in this article are solely those of Micah Zenko. Micah Zenko is a fellow for conflict prevention at the Council on Foreign Relations, where he blogs. You can also follow him on Twitter. This is part of the series "Ten Lessons Since the 9/11 Attacks," in which CFR fellows identify the top threats and responses going forward. Read more in the series. The post above was reprinted with the permission of the Council on Foreign Relations.
© 2012 Cable News Network. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
| Advertising practices | Advertise with us | About us | Work for us | Help
Sure, drones are an imperfect strategy – but how about suggesting a better strategy and discussing it’s pro’s, con’s, and limitations as well?
Drones are used because they are politically acceptable to the leadership of the countries in which they are being used – i.e. they can applaud the results in private and condemn them in public. And because the alternative of invading the country and rooting out the terrorists is not acceptable to them or the USA.
And the assumption that martyrdom will encourage enough people to join to replace the loses does not account for the fact that drones are not targeting the lower ranks but the upper, the people who run things, and have the education, experience, and contacts critical to any business. And the people who train the new recruits, without which they lose most of the effectiveness, then moral, then quit and go home.
So, what should we be doing instead, and why should it work better?
I can tell you that, My2Cents. First of all, we need to stop fighting all these useless and unnecessary wars. Secondly, we need to indict and prosecute the people who operate those cursed drones, charging them with crimes against humanity since they're no less guilty that the German criminals of WW2 who were tried at Nuremburg!
You nailed it, Onesmallvoice. Thank you.
Id be very interested to know what flawed logic you use to corelate a precision drone strike on a hostile terrorist combatant with the attempted systematic extermination of an innocent civilian populace. Your reaction is an emotional one – not a logical one. It lacks any sense or anything remotely resembling a comprehension of the legalities of armed conflict.
Travis, Well said!
Thanks for such apropos comments.
Those drones killed many more civilians (more than we are willing to admit, anyway) then Taliban fighters.
If we deem killing innocent people from 8000 miles away as acceptable collateral damage, then we should go killing, and
at the same time losing the war(s), by instilling hate among the populace.
Really? Let point out one fact to you: Wars used to be decided by people with uniforms designating them as combatants.
Now you have a bunch of cowards that hide behind innocent civilians and their religion. Do you want it the way it was? Then make these very few fanatics stand away from innocents. People who like to blame the U.S. for all the problems in the world need to wake up and look at both sides...
It's funny how liberals claim they're actually patriotic and support the troops after getting called on their anti-Americanism, but time after time all you see is how leftards trip over themselves to call the troops Nazis.
If you knew anything about tribal warfare, which you clearly don't sipping your latte in the San Francisco gay organic espresso shop while typing on your MacBook, you'd know not a single one of the so-called "civilians" was innocent. Shockingly, they were even more guilty than you. Though not by a whole lot.
Norm: Your statements have one fatal flaw: They are contradicted by facts.
Hey now, might want to dial the rhetoric back a bit there. Drones aren't rounding up entire towns and gassing them because they're there.
As I see it, drones are great for attacks against purely military targets- smaller and less expensive than jets, don't put an expensive pilot in danger, etc.
They're slightly less good against clearly military targets willingly hidden by a "civilian" population: IMHO, if civilians knowingly provide aid, support, and camouflage to combatants they become de facto non-combat military assets (like a training camp or supply depot would be), but are still arguably civilians (and intelligence can be wrong) so it's not always great.
For targets you want confirmation on or who are screened by unwilling civilians, drones aren't a good choice. For those you still need boots on the ground.
Give your head a shake, they are targeting Americas enemy. Would you rather see American and Nato lives shed instead? Yes sometimes there will be collateral damage but that happens in any war. This terrible war wasn't started by the USA. Remember 911????. Retribution buddy.
You're an idiot, plain and simple. If anyone should be arrested its you. You're probably some terrorist sitting back in some al quaeda internet cafe spewing anti american propaganda. Just do the world a favor and go bury yourself in a sand dune somewhere. As for everyone that agrees with onesmallvoice here just do the same. We don't need weak, asinine people in this world who should have been naturally selected a long time ago.
Agree to get out of the useless wars. But to compare drone usage to the Nazi atrocities of WWIi indicates you really don't understand WWII.
Hey Frangilbe, I'm a liberal and I happen to support our troops and the use of drones. Stop trying to lump everyone in the same category and assuming that everyone that happens to disagree with you is a liberal. Kind of makes you sound the same as the people you're bashing.
Absolutely, well said. At least the suicide bomber believes enough in his cause that he is willing to sacrifice his own life. And we call them cowards.
So Im a war criminal for following orders that have been passed down from people in elected posistions, and for killing several people that hate you, and hate your freedom? They hate you because you are american, and if are a women because you have this freedom of speech. Yeah they dont have that there. Sure keep on talking smack. How about you actually go vote people in that you think will voice your opinion, instead of all the other reasons that people think make a good politician (Race, countless promises, if they wear a flag pin or not), and blaming those of us who serve. We all dont want to kill, we do it, because we have to. We are part of a bigger picture, and if we dont do our jobs, my brothers and sisters in arms get hurt, and yes there have been civilian casulties, but a lot less in reality than has been reported, the enemy will claim there were women and children in a truck that we hit, but they dont mention that instead there was men carrying weapons and bombs in that bus instead.
What a load of steaming fertilizer.
"Crimes against humanity"? Killing our enemies isn't a sporting event. They would be just as dead-and they need to be dead-is we were dropping bombs on them from manned aircraft or having super-secret ninjas slit their throats. But those options would mean a lot more dead Americans.
It's that lack of more dead Americans that has "onesmallvolice" and "matt" and the rest of the America-hating jihadists so upset.
The entire civilian population of the Middle East is an acceptable level of collateral damage. If we don't know who "they" are or where "they" are hiding, exterminate everything that moves.
One small voice indeed. Attached to one very small brain... The ignorance, both for and against in this thread is appalling. As is the canard asserting drones have killed more civilians than militants. Utterly, contemptably false.
Al Qaeda leadership is being eviscerated by the dedicated, extremely well-trained and hardworking drone teams of the CIA and USAF. You people have NO CLUE how much training and discipline goes into these efforts. You have NO CLUE how effective they are. This is no video game. It is in fact our PRIMARY defense against another 9-11.
I can think of 3,000 reasons why the war on al-Qaeda and its surrogates is necessary. If you want to surrender and submit, be my guest. I rather not.
I'll second what MQ-9 Pilot said. Yeah there may be some unfortunate collateral damage, but that's war, and it's far better than the carpet bombing campaigns we did in WW2, Korea, and Vietnam. I don't like the fact that we're in all these conflicts either, but as long as we are, we need to make sure we have our best weapons systems and best assets doing the work. Predators, Reapers, Global Hawks, etc... are exactly that. They're small, stealthy, cheap, and capable, all without putting a single American life on the line. They are EXACTLY what we need... aside from getting out of these wars altogether of course, but that doesn't look like it'll happen no matter who is in charge.
One small voice and to others of the same ilk. You would have us get rid of the drones then what? Just ignore the people who want very much to kill us any way they can? Go back to sniveling over you spilled chi tea and get a grip.
I doubt we will ever stop the morons over there but you can bet they will do any and everything they can to bring that battle here and when they do who are you going to cry to then?
First off, the media needs to stop calling them drones. They are UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles). UAVs cost a heck of a lot less to operate than an apache helicopter. They can stay aloft with 2 hellfire missiles for 10-20 hours usually depending on current conditions. There are no human casualties that result in having one destroyed. They have the capability of detecting IED emplacements before a convoy runs over it. They can silently, or otherwise, save ground troops with precision missile strikes. How can that be overused?
Travis, your point is well thought out and very logical – an excellent verbalization.
I'm sorry but I didn't realize that defending our country against it's enemies was useless and unnecessary. I was also unaware that the Geneva Convention made soldiers who are targeting enemies a war criminals.
Oh hello, Mr. Gaddaffi. Why don't you come out of your cave and greet the rebels who run your country now, due in no small part by those drones.
Those drones can be menacing, aren't they? Yep, that' was the point.
Onesmallvoice, Are you high? I mean crimes against humanity? 1st, humanity and muslem are mutually exclusive terms. Second after finding OBL in pakistan, all bets are off. And the nuerenberg thing, you do know that under Project Paperclip (look it up) the US government took all of the top nazi scientists and used them ourselves, clearing there records. If it were not for vanbraun, we would never have made it to the moon. And at the same time nazis were being convicted of getting prisioners sick to study them, at the same time the US GOVERNMENT WAS DOING THE SAME THING TO TEST PENICILLIN.
The reason why anti-Americanism is so strong among those who are targeted by drones can be explained that they can't fight back. They could shoot down the aircraft, but there will be no American casualty, no way for them to settle the score of an eye for an eye.
"The reason why anti-Americanism is so strong among those who are targeted by drones can be explained that they can't fight back."
Before drone strikes were used against them, al-Qaeda wasn't anti-American? Two blown up embassies, two destroyed world trade center towers, and one almost sunk U.S. warship shows evidence to the contrary.
Killer robots from the future are people too!
I think we've found our next Air Force pilot volunteer! Remember: Pull back on the stick...the aircraft goes up. Push over on the stick...the aircraft goes down. Good Hunting!
To a reasonable mind, drones or no drones, history has taught us that whatever we are trying to eliminate "ain't going anywhere" till the Palestinian and Indian Occupied Kashmir issues are resolved.
NEVER, EVER go to War until you have to.....NEVER........ BUT.....if you're going to do it......cut down on your casualties as much as possible. Drones don't have pilots. Ergo....no pilot casualties. Light weight, prop, Drones can fly many hours. Pilot's in heavy prop or jet aircraft can't. Not enough fuel! DON'T CUT DOWN ON DRONES. USE MORE OF THEM.
"Strapping an aircraft to your butt"(in a air combat environment) is no way to make a living. I'll take the Drones...ANYTIME!
I don't understand the logic here. Are you saying that a manned aircraft bombing people is, somehow, less "cursed" than an unmanned aircraft bombing people? In either case, the same people are dead. If you don't like the bombing, stop the war! Don't blame the drones!
My2Cents, i support everything you sid; we cant always run into another country guns blazing and expect other countries to think less of us or our military. Many of these countries allow us to use drones 1) their forces are not at risk 2) were not targeting civilians 3) IT'S EFFECTIVE!!! 4) and in the end they can play it off as if they didn't know our drones were there.....
To every other person that is uneducated on the facts of what is really going on:
i honestly feel bad for all you people who dont support the troops that are out there fighting for you type this dribble on this page.....the media only points out the down side to any situation that happens in the war, never do they tell you what was actually happening and what good actually came from that event. people all around this country get spun up about us ACCIDENTALLY killing a few civilians in a drone strike on known Taliban, but does anyone ever think that those civilians were actually supporting the Taliban and helping them giving them food, water and a place to hide from us? No because all they fixate their eyes on is what the media always puts in bold is "CIVILIANS KILLED IN US DRONE STRIKE" no one never reads the underlying facts to what happened. There are alot of smart people in the military that put many sleepless nights and days into looking for the people who want to kill us and them. We are not just running around Afghanistan guns blazing hoping we hit the ones who wish to destroy our way of lives, but we are actually putting countless man hours into looking for and finding the ones we want, and i will comment on the last part of your statement My2Cents; we are looking for the higher individuals not the lower fighters....without the higher level ones with the education and know how they become less and less effective as the time goes on......
I welcome anyone's debate on my statement.
As a recent incident has revealed, when Momo claimed that his adoptive daughter was killed when his palace was bombed in 1986; he lied. Turns out Hana is now a doctor, married and has two children, that's quite an accomplishment for a dead infant. If you get your news from Al Jazeera the numbers are always manipulated, fewer combatants killed – more civilians killed. And another point, it is against the geneva convention to commit an act war while out of uniform, as is using civilians as human shields. America is not responsible for those civilians deaths which result from the cowardly tactics routinely employed by our enemies.
Of course we're overusing these cursed killing machines overseas. How would one of these cursed warmongers here feel if one of their loved ones were to be on the receiving end of one of those "wonderful" drones themselves? In fact, the majority of the people being killed are civilians caught up in the middle of these obscene wars and not the "militants" so claimed by the right-wing news media!
Ignorance...
Well said Onesmallvoice. I am saddened that so many people think the use of these drones is good and/or that we need to be using them more. Killing people is wrong. I believe killing anyone who isn't immediately threatening someone's life is wrong. But I think everyone can agree that killing innocent people is wrong. "Collateral damage" should not simply be taken as a necessity for fighting the "bad guys". What do we call those who kill innocent people: Bad guys.
Killing is wrong. Unfortunately it happens, and the only way to stop it is to kill your enemy first. See, in the real world hugs and kisses just don't do the job. In the real world – the one that exists far beyond the cushy comfort of your bedroom, the 'good' that comes with using drones lies in the ability to eliminate the threat without putting our own sons and daughters in harm's way, and without having to mobilize additional army, navy and airforce units just to take out individual enemy command elements. Understand this, civilian causalties are tragic. That never changes. What does change is how few there are as tech progresses and, unfortunately, there IS a metric to justify collateral damage if losing your target puts more lives at risk. THAT is the real world, and is not always just, and it is not always fair. It simply is. Drones are the best way to engage the enemy unless you have another tactic to mitigate the threat.
I have....
another way....
.....
Hugs and kisses!
I already have a metric for determining collateral damage. It's extremely simple. 0 is a perfectly acceptable level. 100 is an unacceptable level. For every local national that gets caught in the crossfire, add 0 points. Add 1 point for each camel killed. Kill every person in sight and you're still well within acceptable levels. Have a nice day.
Clearly CNN is right-wing since we don't hear about the tens of thousands of people proven innocent that have been killed by these drones.
"Tens of thousands". Really? Where do you get your numbers from? Didn't they teach you to cite your (reputable) sources in college? Oh wait... that would mean....
Lagos, considering that everyone in AQ is a civilian, I say kill em all.
The majority of the people killed by the drones have been innocent civilians? If I thought doing drugs was okay then I would ask you to share whatever you are using, it must be some good stuff.
One of my family members was killed by one of these "cursed drones" as you call them. 342 of his brothers and 1000s of his fellow citizens were killed when a group on MUSLIM TERRORISTS flew four giant drones into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and a field in PA. Unlike the US Drones which target military targets only and any civilian casualties are in advertant as well as deeply regretted, these drones of 9/11 targeted civilians and their deaths were celebrated. Get off your soapbox and face reality.
And manned aircraft are going to fix the problems you mention? If anything, Drones probably cut down on casualties because the operator has more time to think and ponder compared with a pilot in an aircraft. MORE DRONES!
Stop the War....But if you don't,.don't stop the drones.
Treason has a name. In this case, its name is "onesmallvoice."
Rumor has it the U.S. is secretly building two million drones for a possible war with China.
Actually, I think they are training 2 million mice to fly the drones, and they are going to target martial arts schools, because those kung fu masters can really kick butt!
That's ok. China has been secretly (not really) engagin in cyber attacks against the U.S. for well over a decade. Easiest way to defeat an enemy, air drop them some Xbox's and flood their TV with reality shows. They'll be too glued to their couches to do anything. It worked on our population.
Or you can release a CIA monitoring program disguised as several new MMORPGS like WoW. Everyone knows that China's Prime source of income is factories of Chinese "players" that farm gold or ingame currency to sell to lazy fat americans. Doubly, you could trace all the transactions and send said lazy americans to gitmo for "funding terrorist activities" (^_^)
quit spreading rumors.
If true, I would be a lot busier at work.
@ george – sounds good to me lol. When i was like ten (1995) i was saying we should do that and put remote minigun turrets on the coast to just mow them all down. At least hopefully the chinese will actually wear uniforms and we can make sure we only kill combatants unlike the coward muslim terrorists.
They're gonna give the mice a patriotic speech.....with little, white, head-bands and a complimentary cup of sake before they launch....at least...that's what I heard!
The talk of mice flying aircraft kamikaze style reminds me of the Bat Bomb story from WW II... you should Google it or its code name... Project X-ray! It's interesting, and a little funny!
George, the problem is that since all of the parts are made in China, and assembled in Mexico, its not exactly going to be a pre-emptive strike.
Drones are an absolute must if we need to reduce/avoid spilling the blood of our brave soldiers, all the more so to defend an ungrateful/lawless people in a wasteland called Af-Pak.
But, unless we DRAMATICALLY ESCALATE the drone war ALL OVER PAKISTAN, DIVIDE that wretched Terrorist nation and seize their ISLAMIC BOMB, crack down firmly on their nationals illegally gatecrashing into Europe & America, America, Europe, Israel and India (in that order) will never ever be free of our EXISTENTIAL THREAT.
You slum dog religious freak, go back to your stinky India where you came from.
BornAmerican and FCUK ( in that order )... are fake names and needs to be verified with their IP.
Please seek professional help
Can someone have this hate mongor moron (Amit-Atlanta-USA) reported to DHS and deported ?
WOW! You need to get laid!
drones deployed over american cities or used for spotting marijuana? Technology developed for the military or nasa alwys seems to find a civilian use.
The FAA refuses to allow drones in civilian airspace. Maybe in 10 years we will be able to use them to patrol our border w Mexico, but not any time soon.
they already do use drones to fly the border as far as I know.
If so, they need to be fitted with Hellfire missiles as well. Imagine how awesome that would be. Some dude jumps a fence on one side of the border and lands a smoldering pile of flesh on the other.
Frank – Homeland Security has been using MQ-9 Reaper UAS to patrol U.S. borders since 2005. They currently have 6 Reapers on border duty. But don't believe me, Google it or check Wikipedia, General Atomics MQ-9, US Homeland Security subheading.
And to the folks who deplore using "drones" (shows you're stuck in Viet Nam War-era terminology) to deploy weapons from "8000 miles away," people also thought it was deplorable to use cross bows and long bows, rather than swords, to enable killing remotely, or firearms rather than bows, or bombs rather than firearms, ... Yes, this debate has been going on a long time. So let's all return to using knives and swords!
I like the poll question... as if anyone not deeply involved with surveilance operations has any idea how often they are used. Drones have the capablilty to provide realtime, low level surveillance in a combat environment without putting a pilot at risk. Prior to drones, you would have to have to wait for satellite flyovers or recon aircraft. They only provide a point in time snapshot of a situation which requires that assumptions be made on a potential target. Now you can monitor and track targets realtime, follow them for hours to watch their behavior, identify actual targets from non-combatants and try to find an opportune time to eliminate the target with minimal collateral damage. The fact that some drones can carry hellfire missiles enables the ability to deal with a threat on the spot, rather than wait for the lengthy process of coordinating an airstrike from hundreds of miles away. During which, the target can get away, which is why we didn't get Osama bin Laden in the cruise missle strike in the late 90's. By the time the strike was coordinated, he was already gone.
@onesmallvoice First, terrorists are not uniformed combatants, therefore no war crimes. Second, the reason we have a military is so we (and you if you are a US citizen) are not on the end of this type of attack. I prefer to maintain a technological superiority over my potential enemies. Third, I love when people rush to compare anyone to the Nazi's or Hitler. It hurts your credibility. Seriously, go back and read about their crimes. The Nazi's (and Stalin during the purges) are on such a whole other level of evil and ruthlessness. What they did to civilians, they did deliberately. The US makes every effort to not target civilians, but unfortunately, some bad and cowardly people like to hide behind children.
Finally somone who actually has at least a high school education... First post that actually makes sense...
Bravo. Very intelligent post with relevancy to the topic.
Liberal nuts really need to brush up on their history. We, as a country, have done nothing to compare to the likes of Hitler, Stalin, the Khmer Rouge, Shining Path or the IRA. Stop trying to make us the bad guys.
All for drones. No secrets here.
Stealthy and deadly.. its good to be unfair in war.
All war is deception. – Sun Tzu.
I wish they had drones in Vietnam. Would have been much more comfortable (and "less taxing") sitting in an air conditioned room someplace than up in an airplane.
"To win is imperative...To win easily is a blessing"
Like I said... if you think drones are over used, send your sons and daughters. Put down your latte' and trade in your corner office for a weapon and seat on an inbound blackhawk. Otherwise, just say thanks and revel in the fact that another 'bad-guy' was taken out of the game before he could bring his BS holy-war to your shopping mall. Let us do our job. We don't tell you how to contiue getting fatter.
For those that think that drones are overused, I offer this: instead, send your sons and daughters into the fight. Better yet, trade in your latte and corner office for a weapon and a cold seat on an inbound blackhawk. Drones are a big part of the reason why this conflict of ten years has only netted less than 6,000 U.S. casualties as opposed to the over 50,000 estimated casualties in the 6month Libyan conflict. Drones are much more surgical than carpet bombings and the on board optics and telemetry packages allow for real-time target identification BEFORE the strike. Remember (if you can) who we are going after. More to the point, remember what side YOU are on. And if you find the time, try learning a bit about the enemies goals and mindset. You will find that they are resolute, and will not stop until either their objective is met, or they are dead. For them, it is a victory either way. Overused? Absurd!! Stepping up drone use could put a potential end to piracy off the coast of Somalia and Indonesia. We do NOT have the manpower to go after all of them on their ground. And, unless you want the fighting here in your neighborhood, then we need to continue to take the fight to them. Which is done, usually, with the full consent of the nations they are operated in. Usually. Occasionally, you have another Pakistan that likes to ponitificate, and shake their head while hiding their protecting hand behind their back. Pull your head out of your reality TV haze and GROW UP America! Toughen up! Your grandparents would be ashamed of the lazy, spineless people you have become, and I for one get tired of defending you.
TRAVIS – You said it perfectly!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Right on!
Well Said!
Once again, excellent response, Travis!
When I say Existential threat it comes from both a physical threat of a nuclear/biological device being exploded over American cities, and
Secondly, and even more importantly from the DEMOGRAPHIC TIME BOMB that is already unfolding in Europe, India and being increasingly ORCHESTRATED by Islamic supporters like CNN's own FAREED ZAKARIA and several others. These people are tirelessly misleading Americans into letting their guard down all the GARB OF RELIGIOS FREEDOMS, as also urging Americans into incraesing MUSLIM IMMIGRATION with BOGUS/inflated claims of Muslim Muslim contributions to America CONTRARY to what PEW research has found.
Here's a response I wrote recently.
My former countryman Mr. FAREED ZAKARIA has been tirelessly advocating greater Muslim Immigration into America and also embracing Muslim Turkey in the European Union with the aim of greater Islamization of Europe and eventually America.
Here’s one of his most DIS-HONEST articles to-date on his appeal for greater Muslim immigration into America, warning Americans that they will lose out on Muslim contributions!
http:// globalpublicsquare. blogs.cnn. com/2011/06/28/america-risks-losing-its-immigration-advantage/
Here are some facts based on the GREATEST study of American progress by RELIGIOUS groups conducted by PEW Research.
Contrary to Mr. Zakaria’s claims that Muslims are on top in America, only 16% of Muslims (the most affluent Muslim community in the west is at the bottom of the heap) earn over $100,000 while it is 46% for Jews, 43% for Hindus, 22% of Buddhists, 18% for Christians.
Likewise, even in terms of education while Mr. Zakaria says Muslims are doctors, lawyers, scientists etc. (which absolutely is true) they are again at the bottom with only 10% holding post-graduate degrees against 48% of Hindus, 35% of Jews, and 26% of Buddhists.
http:// religions. pewforum. org/pdf/report-religious-landscape-study-full.pdf#page=61
Even in the UK given even similar socio-economic background Muslim Indians are 3 times more likely to be unemployed as Hindu Indians & Whites.
http://www. statistics. gov. uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=979
The List goes on & on & on……………
You are absolutely right on. Fareed Zakaria is the Islamic trojan horse in America.
So...he's got a lot of little suicide bombers in his stomach? If only...I'd love to drop the kill switch while they were still in there.
I understand the need to try to show that not all muslims are what... everyone thinks they are. But the only way for Islam to 'clear' it's name is for them to stand up and get VERY vocal against their own militants and fundamentalists. The world is getting tired of trying to tell the difference, and if they won't 'defend' and protect their own image by policing their own, then why should we? I have better things to do then to make THEIR appology or defend them.
Who is "we" you are referring to? And who asked you to go through this catharsis on behalf of the muslims?
Muslims are being murdered in India, Kashmir, Iraq, Palestine, Afghanistan, Pakistan, among many other countries and you are asking them to apologize? For what? Are you doing the biding for SHIV SENA (Hindu extremist group based out of India) also?
So you think just because it works for the agenda of religious zealots like you, America should antogonize the entire muslim world which makes up nearly 25% of the world? Only a person completely blinded by religious hate and bias or overpowered by absolute arrogance could propose that!
Think Too Hard:
You really need to do that friend!
Antagonize the entire Muslim world....are we not doing that already?
a) By merely opposing (NOT stopping) the GROUND ZERO CARDOBA VICTORY Mosque (NOW camouflaged as Park51 INTER-FAITH CENTER!)!
b) By banning the facial veil (irrespective of your religion, there are some Christians and Hindus also who wear the veil but they are not protesting!)!
c) By opposing 5 prayer breaks a day!
d) By banning the minarets blaring Islamic calls for prayer at a deafening pitch 5 times a day, annoying non-Muslims!
e) By opposing a 55,000 Sq.ft. Mosque funded by Saudi money to cater to a MERE 200 Muslim families in Murfreesboro, TN!
f) By FBI eavesdropping on Mosques knowing fully well by FBI's own calculation 80% of American Mosques preach some form of religious hatred!
g) By enhanced checks at a/ps based on well established increased likelihood of threats from certain religious groups!
h) Rooting out the terrorist Taliban/Al-Qaeda in Af-Pak
g) Taking out terrorist master minds (OBL) and others through drones or PRECISION attacks when TERRORIST HARBORER PAKISTAN is not willing to do that on tehir own (rather hiding them!)
h) For reclaiming MOST SACRED place of worship destroyed by Muslims and building Mosques over them (e.g. The Temple Mount in Jerusalem, or the Babri Masjid in India both holiest sites for Christians/Jews and Hindus respectively, akin to the Kaaba for Muslims!)
The list goes on & on & on.....
So in short we (the INFIDELS) have NEVER been able to be on the good side of Muslims for 14 centuries, and WILL NEVER BE, UNLESS Muslims look inward to cleanse their religion of hatred…. thanks to people like Mr. FAREED ZAKARIA we don’t see that possibility given that he is only aggravating the divide by hoodwinking already tolerant magnanimous Americans through systematic lies/half truths,/cherry-picked facts all the while deliberately disregarding ominous signs!
There is a very quick solution though. Two small tactical weapons. One for Mecca, and one for Medea. Every Muslim the the world would be a Jew before sunrise the next morning. Allah, would never allow such a travesty, it is inconceivable to Muslims that this could happen. They would be left with no choice to to acknowledge that their Jewish cousins were right (regardless of whether or not they actually are).
While my stance is leaving that whole hemisphere of the world alone, I'm almost 100% certain that is how it would go down.
You must be one hard zionist who is using the scare tactic and propaganda. Christianity and judaism are as violent as Islam the only difference is if a violent act is done by a Muslim we make sure to say it was done by a Muslim and blame it on Islam no matter what the reason is.While violent acts and terrorism done by Christians and Jews never get mentionned, if it does we make sure not to mention the religion of the person, group who commited it. The terrorist acr in Mexico, Norway, Denmark, Palestine...
Muslims are here to stay. They are American citizens, immigrants, students, Business people..and I can say with ease that they are more loyal to this country than most of the Zionists and right wing Christians including you.
Sam, you're a moron.
The reason people focus on Islam (and rightly so) is because for everyone 1 Christian terrorist, there are HUNDREDS of islamic terrorists conducting suicide bombings / shooting attacks / etc.
There is a big, big difference in 2011 between Christianity /Judaism / Buddhism / Hinduism / Atheism and the cult of islam.
@Amit-Atlanta- USA....
You should be proud that your Indian history has been shaped by muslims who gave it all the culture, arts, architecture, literature, science, technology, businesses, infrastructure etc. You will recall that India was ruled by muslims for most of its history. Is this the way you payback your forefathers?.....is this the respect you have for your muslim legacy? I suggest you read again your history and revisit your muslim roots and surely you will embrace it. God Speed.
Travis:
The so-called self styled Muslim moderates ( Mr. Zakaria may NOT be one of them!) typically condemn the terrorists who hijack Islam into committing acts of terror, and IN THE SAME BREATH dilute the condemnation with a long list of grievances starting with
a)America's wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, so-called Palestine, Kashmir, Chechnya and every other flashpoint on the globe even REMOTELY involving Muslims,
PLUS, a mirade of reasons going all the way back 14 centuries incl.
b) Real & perceived discrimination,
c) Ground Zero/Murfeesboro Controversies,
d) Burqa ban in France,
e) Minaret ban in Switzerland,
f) The Prophet Mohammed cartoons,
g) The burning of the Koran by an obscure mad pastor
h) Singing the Pledge of Allegiance
i) Saying School prayers with the words "In the Name of God"
................the list goes on & on & on.
Check out this fantastic account from a highly educated so-called moderate Pakistani cricketer/politician married to a celebrity Christian British wife on why he is opposed to America. Just see if there can be any common ground!
http://www. youtube.com/watch?v=bXmVb8cuk58
Thank you for this Amit, now I just need a picture of Zakaira snuggling a goat while gorging himself on a BBQ pork sandwich and I can die a happy man.
Not sure what your point is. Seems like SHIV SENA (Hindu extremist) views. Please don't insult Buddhist, Christian, Jewish or Muslim religions to such hateful references. I hope you would channel your energies to productive work such as community service in an Islamic Center or Jewish synagogue so that you can have a better understanding of world cultures and religions.
It is absolutely wrong and criminal to use drones legally and morally. I am sure the production and operation of these drones is privatized by the military, and somebody is making a lot of money with this and is therefore promoting it and doing all the propaganda necessary to support it.
Wrong is your opinion, and I respect (though disagree) with it. But criminal? Really? I'd love to hear which international law or statute is being violated, can you enlighten me? What's your proposal to deal with the problem in lieu of droned strikes? Tell you what, just pick someone to place in harms way in lieu of an unmanned drone. I know you won't do it yourself. And, by privatized to you mean that a civilian company was contracted to manufacture the drones to SELL to the military/government? If so, then yes, you are correct. In fact, ALL military equipment is civilian manufactured genius. The military isn't manufacturing it's own tanks and ships. Next time you put $5 towards Starbucks – instead invest in an education you MIGHT someday use.
If it is not illegal, would you approve of China or Russia using drones over our Country? There lies your answer. By the way I don't drink coffee. Caffeine is bad for health, maybe I am more educated than you are.
Legality is not based on my personal approval (unfortunately), but I'll try to answer your question, Think to Little. Since neither China nor Russia are NOT NATO members and it's pretty unlikely that there would ever be any NATO action against the U.S. anyway, then I generally would probably be against it since it's an act of war. See, you are comparing apples and volkswagens my ignorant friend. Actions over Libya are in direct support of NATO operations to prevent a trained, uniformed military from annihilating civilians (not to mention his removal is best for the greater good). Actions over other nations are conducted with their permission. In fact, permission is a big part of what really hindered our ability to nail UBL. But, as we stated we will go after nations that harbor terrorists. I belive the quote was, "We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them." There is a side in this battle – Pakistan was on the wrong one.
Thanks for the hot tip on coffee by the way. U can be sure that it failed to completely revolutionize the way I start my mornings. What else you got for me?
AMERICAN military isn't manufacturing its own tanks and ships, is the big cause of worry. And the bigger cause of worry is that many of the military operations have been privatized too. We have let greed thru privatization take over the military functions of the most powerful country in the world.
This shows your ignorance and arrogance. You think only we and NATO exists in the world and we have the power and right to decide what is legal and what is illegal for rest of the world. Just because our president says something or NATO agrees to something does not make legal for the rest of the world. There are 190 more countries in this world, in addition to us and NATO my ignorant friend. The use of drones is illegal and criminal per the central principle of the law on resort to force is Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, a general rule on the prohibition of the use of force in international relations.
Think too Hard, that only applies during international relations. There was little, if any, diplomacy involved with Libya other than international appeal for Ghadaffi to step down and restore peace. Once the UN determined that peace and stability was lost, then under Chapter VII Art. 42, the UN CAN use force "by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary" (please note the quotation marks) and by all member nations to restore peace. Notice the air part and repeat after me... "drones". Incidentally this article was the same pretext that legalized the Korean "conflict". What else you got for me?
Susan: The military can't produce it's own, it owns no factories. Would you like it to? It would still cost tax dollars – possibly more. I think the Russians tried militarized production and that didn't quite work out so well for the communist regime. Never has the U.S. military been in the manufacturing business. All are civilian companies (Boeing, Lockheed, Grumman, Bell, etc.) . As for the civilian PMC (Private Military Companies), they are handling a lot of the 'light-work' that a short-handed military that's micro managed and second guessed by the very ungrateful public they protect simply doesn't have the manpower to take care of.
"It is absolutely wrong and criminal to use drones legally and morally" ???? Does this mean it would be right and legal to use drones illegally and immorally? How can that statement possible make sense?
No, what's wrong is how we use them and who we use them on. Its no wonder we have problems with "terrorists" when for the past 35 or so years we have been doing nothing but making their lives a miserable living hell. They wanted independence from the Russians, so we "helped" them and set up totalliarian rulers causing bloodshed and building resentment towards us. Then when they start to do things we don't like we go in again and bomb/invade them some more.
Its the national equivelant to hiring a 26 year old UFC champion to bully kindergarteners into giving them their lunch money because we can't be bothered to or are too afraid to do it ourselves.
If our President, Congress, Pentagon, and CFR want to stop "terrorists" let them gear up and go over there themselves. Most of the American people are done with it and want nothing more to do with it.
The fact is its a perpetual war. You can say logically, "Hey, OBL is dead and al'Quaida is all but gone" and they will say "But there are still more of them out there". The fact is that as long as arabs are born with pen!ses there will continue to be people that hate us (and rightfully so) and willing to die to destroy us. and most of "us" (being the people) don't really want anything to do with them.
Now...tell me WHY ARE WE THERE!?
What's this "we" stuff? Why aren't YOU there? Your 'points' if you can call them that are not supported by anything remotely resmebling facts. Leave the middle east? No cost? No casualties? How do you figure that. If my memory serves me correctly, the WTC wasn't in the middle east and resulted in thousands of casualties. We leave the middle east, we lose resources and any talk about no blood for oil is just ignorance. Resources are an absolute need and so is the need to protect them. Disagree? Feel free to pay $6 gallon for gas. See how many people kill for food when that resource gets restricted. Oil is the life blood of the world, unfortunately. Commerce, food distribution, medical care... all rely to some extent on the unimpeded flow of oil.
Why are were there? Good question. I guess so we don't have to deal with the battles here. So, unlike Israel, we don't have to worry about a bus load of our school kids getting blown-up. Example: Think of a forrest fire. Where do you fight the fire, do wait until it's on your lawn, or do you set a fire break to isolate your home and fight the flames as far away as possible? Rhetorical question, never mind. Don't let your frustration replace an education. And when all else fails, feel free to pick up an "outdated" weapon (AK-47 is older BTW), and take a stand. Take SOME action, rather than running your mouth.
If we don't use drones to fight the enemy, what the hell good are they for? If we followed your stupid rhetoric, we'd still be flinging bows and arrows while everyone else has guns, missiles, etc. We have to retain military superiority – pure and simple. Any large body of people needs governance. That's why cities have police, etc. The world needs a policing body. Who would YOU want to do it? Who would you hand the protection of yourself, your rights, your fmaily, over to? Would it be someone of inferior military capability? I doubt it.
Personally, I think tactical nukes are the best option. A little messy, but much more effective. No one around to whine afterwards, either.
Neutron bomb is cleaner and leaves buildings intact. But they need to fly everyone in Washington out there for a point blank "demonstration".
Being in the vicinity of a person of interest shouldn't be a death sentence.
We're creating more terrorists than we're killing.
It seems as if we're becoming what we're fighting: International terrorists.
If you lay with dogs, you get fleas. Terrorists should have no friends left if they want to stay vertical. Would you hang with somone that was a walking target? I wouldn't.
Of course you would! You already are!
Not all the people nearby know a wanted terrorist is near them! There's a lot of innocent lives taken by drones. If it was your mother, you'd want revenge. These are good weapons, but they must be targeted carefully. The whole concept of dispassionate assassination from an unknown distance and source should worry us about the future. What we can build, others can copy and improve.
Judging from your postings I can easily qualify you as a terrorist. You spread hate and full of BS. I guarantee you are not in Atlanta but Tel Aviv! Zionist
Bingo Emilio, you hit the nail so perfectly square on the f-ing head that there should be an instant replay of it on HGTV!
If I had a prize you would win it.
Maybe it shouldn't be, but you'd be an idiot not realize the risk. Would you go with a friend to a crack house? Would you invite his friends over to your place? Of course not, you open yourself up to drug violence, police action, etc. You get too caught up in the rosey world of what should be. It isn't. Wake up. You shouldn't have to worry about your car getting stolen either right? Leave the keys in the ignition and the door unlocked in a poor area of town and see what happens. Then you can say, "But this SHOULDN'T happen". It's like whining that life's not fair.
Debate? I thought a debate was supposed to present both sides of an issue. When Obama, during the 2008 campaign, said we should be remote-bombing sites in Pakistan, Hillary Clinton AND G W Bush said that was a good example of how "naive" Obama was about world affairs. But, to G W Bush's credit (and I don't give him credit for much!), he began to do so before his last term ended. Why did Bush NOT do so initially and why did he change his mind? Leaving that out of the alleged "debate" here is like leaving out any discussion of the type of flour in a debate on the best bread!
GW was reluctant because intelligence needed to verify targets was unreliable. While intelligence is becoming more reliable, most civilian casualties we due to faulty intelligence.
I don't know. Do fundamentalist terrorists overuse suicide bombing and IED's?
Because of the tactics they use we call them terrorists. Because of tactics that our government is using, what do you think they should call us?
Q: What should they call us?
A: Who cares? Just kill them.
Over 90% in favor of drones. That surprises me, as the other 10% is overrepresented in the comments.
Don't misunderstand: I'm in favor of drones as opposed to boots on the ground. But they need to be better, more precise. Above all, the intelligence needs to be precise before we order a strike! We shouldn't just kill everybody just because we've got the bullets!!
First off, no we don't use the enough but let me get into that for all you ignorant people. Secondly, does no one google or wiki military drones or do they just read the blog and then look at the poster child for drones (Predator). Anyways, drones aren't just used by the air force, in fact there are several variants for each service, with only 2-3 overall that event have the capability of attacking. Now, 2-3 variants out of 20+, i mean you can get the picture of why i am educating the many uneducated posts on the blog (which there are many). In fact the MAIN purpose of these drones are surveillance and recon, which reduces the amount of actual people we have to send in there to take pictures. As well as giving our boots on the ground that are down range a better sense of situational awareness by iding ambushes, areas they will need to travel through, and any other neat thing you might need to know to stay alive out there. So do your research and stop watching so many movies like eagle eye. These drones are a support force multiplier and seldomly used for air strikes in compairson to how they are used worldwide through the MANY variants not just the poster child for drones. That is all ignorant posters(this includes the blogger as well). <3
Oh ya not to mention the is a debate that none of ya'll read materials on prior to posting making you look like complete idiots to the people who have extensive knowledge on the subject. XD y'all made my day.
I have no doubt this editorial will inspire informed and coherent debate about the subject at hand.
Informed? Coherent? Maybe if anyone else who knew what they were talking about posted then yes i'd agree with you, however all these people have talk about is "Drone's bad, Drone's kill, Brainnnsss!!!" Which if you read my commment above, is not the case, in fact it is far from what drones do primarily around the globe. However, like a typical ignorant american who want they're voice to be heard even if they come off as being a complete idiot.
Clearly your sarcasm detection skills are on point.
I can see ANY reason NOT to use them: lower costs, no US casualties, fewer civilian casulties and did I mention no U.S. casulties?
Sorry, I meant I CAN'T see any reason............
Duke, if you are interested in saving a buck we could always try leaving the Middle East entirely.
NO Costs
NO US Casualties
NO Civilian Casualties
oh, and did I mention no cost?
If only we could use them on the GOP and their Racist Tea Party. Then again, it would be a whole lot cheaper if they'd just all get together and drink Cool-Aid and do America a damn good favor. Then this great country can continue moving forward under this administration's progressive and successful leadership.
I cannot believe the people posting here defending the use of those ungodly drones, hurling 500lb. bombs on defenseless people. What a sorrowful, heartless and amoral lot of people these are! I wonder just how one of them would feel if one of their family members were to be on the recieving end of one of those cursed planes!!!
Wow, someone has actually sank to the low level of stealing my name to post that. CNN has your email, so I'll be sure to file a complaint. What's "amoral" as you said, is using my name to post your ill-informed and ridiculous opinion. Own YOUR own thoughts, don't put try and put your words into my mouth. Shameful.
Seems like a case of split personailty to me! But it is a good thing ..in this case!
Once again ignorant people who are for and against drone usage, the HIGH MAJORITY of drone missions are surveillance and recon. There are only a 2-3 variants out of 20+ that are even able to drop bombs. Stop being stupid and read prior posts. All you think they do is drop bombs (or should i say air to ground MISSILES) when they are mostly being tasked for surveillance and recon. Stop being stereotypical ignorant americans and research before you post.
What you say is probably true. We do a lot of surveillance. The bombs and missiles are underused.
I wholeheartedly agree that Sarah Palin is totally overused as a drone!!
This month America’s deadliest in long Afghan war: 66 troops dead
Point? Because this is the lowest casualty conflict in history. They are already estimating over 50,000 casualties in Libya and that was in 6 months. More people probalby died this month in your closest major city from car accidents, or DUI's or just alcohol. Cry about that.
And what exactly are YOU doing about it A HOLE? Spending your time on CNN commenting instead of writing to your congressperson? You're a real rocket scientist.
Let's see....I don't know! Maybe let the military experts decide this issue would be best.
Hello CNN:
Here's your question: DOES AMERICA OVERUSE DRONES?
"NO, THEY ARE USED TOO MUCH"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What do you mean by that?
May I ask the 135 people who voted for that on what they thought they meant?
Read the poll question, stupid. NOT the headline.
SORRY....My Mistake!
If we have to be overseas taking out terrorists, let's use drones more instead of American soldiers. Keep them out of harm's way. The terrorists hide among the citizenry, that is a problem the countries need to deal with that harbor the terrorists. If there weren't terrorists their, we wouldn't need to use drones.
Use them more not less.
WWRRD: You said: The terrorists hide among the citizenry
While that may be true, what is also very true is the opposite!
Amit, if you've never served in combat, your opinion is as uninformed as it is naive and irrelevant. Stop your whining, or grab a weapon and stand a post ....[ insert the rest of Nicholson's speech in A Few Good Men here ]
Amid, that makes no sense at all.
Wastrel:
What I meant was the citizenry often hide the terrorists among them and prevent police & law enforcement from getting to them.
In India while police easily enter temples, churches, they never attempt to enter a mosque as doing that will invoke the wrath of the ENTIRE Muslim community........that is even when the police are well aware of arms & ammunitions stored there, and Muslims slipping into the mosques after committing crimes, including stabbings/shootings.
So then what does that tell you Amit? If you hide a fugitive guess what? You get charged with a crime yourself and go to jail. If a 'civilian' harbors a terrorist, guess what? He's no longer innocent now is he? He is a support unit. Part of a weapons system. Sympathy level=zero.
I'd rather see them being used more than to see manned planes shot down and insurgents capturing a pilot and torturing him and otherwise making him a propaganda tool
" If you find yourself in a fair fight, you didn't plan your mission properly." Col. David Hackworth, US Army.
Until the free electron laser is proven drones are the way to go. More drones.
"If you knew anything about tribal warfare, which you clearly don't sipping your latte in the San Francisco gay organic espresso shop while typing on your MacBook, you'd know not a single one of the so-called "civilians" was innocent."
Really, you mean innocent people have never been killed in war? Hey, at least all of us who sip lattes in the San Francisco gay organic espresso shop will be better educated, live longer and be happier than YOU. Of course you arrogant types LOVE America-you just hate half the people who LIVE here. I'm sorry if educated people offend you.
"I'm sorry if educated people offend you". Well, guess what, Chris – I not only have a college degree, but I am in fact certified to TEACH at two colleges. But I have to say, by your comment, that YOU are the arrogant one by assuming the one you criticize has no education.
Educated people offend me, happy now?
and noted that with persistent attacks on al Qaeda, "there will come a time when they simply can no longer replenish their ranks."
Its called s3x, and in that part of the world, it contributes to new militants faster than we can reload our outdated M16 and M4 assault rifles. No, I think we will run out of missiles to shoot at them before they run out of human bombs. But it doesn't really matter because we already have run out of money. And if you look at polls, more people would rather leave the Middle East entirely than remain there.
Now, how about you and all of your CFR NWO buddies do the rest of us a favor. Barr all the doors, and set your building on fire while you're all in it.
Stop trying to police the world, we have enough domestic enemies to worry about. Besides, the foreign ones are killing themselves in "revolution". Let Israel defend themselves how they see fit and the entire rest of the Middle East could be glass. And it 2011, they could do it a lot faster than they did in 1967. What took them 6 days then could be done in 6 minutes.
Your logic should be protected by a plastic helmet. you condemn the killing of civilians by drone, then advocate nuclear holocaust of the whole area? Pick a platform and stick to it man. Maintain some consistency!
More drones, more drones, more drones !
None of you people have any idea what you're talking about! Bunch of morons!!!!! (lol jk – I just had to do that)
HaHaHa...they ARE pretty damn awesome, aren't they...?!
We Need 1.5 billion drones
If they don't like being hit by drones, then maybe they should consider not being terrorists. And the nations they are in could do a MUCH better job arresting and executing the terrorists.
Drones do kill American soldiers. Look up Marine killed in Afgan Halmund prov. on 4/6/2011. He was the first but won't be the last, he was also my brother!
If your brother were truly killed you would also understand that American bullets kill more American soldiers than American drones. You don't bring a knife to a gunfight because you're afraid one of your own might accidentally shoot one of your own. You are a liar. Stay out of this chat room if you cannot speak the truth.
Your an idiot. This story is not about friendly fire from bullets, stay on topic ADD. I know it is hard for your simple mind to be able to complete a thought but please try the success of our country depends upon, oh what a sad thought. As far as me being a liar? lick my sweaty ones d-bag.
1. Yes, NOT all of our wars are justified.
2. Wars will be increasingly fought by machines, NOT men. . Best you get used to it ! ! !
They still are fought by men. It just happens the men (and women) in the seat are sitting MUCH further away than before, that's all!
There's an option missing from the poll:
O I'm not an expert on national security, and I can't formulate an opinion that's based purely on propaganda.
I suspect that this option should receive over 95% of the votes.
Guys, seriously... pull your head out of your.... cars kill more people a month than all the stray drone strikes, why aren't you pitching a fit about banning them? Cuz it's an accident? Most of the time it's not ,it's negligence – someone not paying attention, or driving too fast, texting etc. Ban THAT stuff, you'd save more lives? Now shut up and go back to watching Dancing with the Stars or Jersey Shore or whatever lame reality show you watch. You are NOT qualified by any sense of the word to render an intelligent informed opinion on military matters. If you wanted a say, you should have joined up. Be a panicky little civilian and shut your mouth if you don't have a clue what you're talking about. Bunch of pansy little terrorist sympathizers in here.
Imagine how loud these feral minded idiot morons would screech if we had to send more troops into these zones the unmanned drones are entering. The outrage would be unreal. No matter what we do to keep ourselves safe, some infantile D-Bag is going to complain and whine like the brain-dead traitors they are.
If drones keep American boots off enemy ground, then it is not overuse.
atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/LL23Df03 DOT html
Yeah, that bout Addresses the Topic in a way 'Most' don't 'See' ....nor 'Hear' about.
Thanx "PR based Jounalism' , now find me just (1) Real Journalist in the U.S.....Please.
Debate: Does America overuse drones?
Question: Does CNN ask loaded questions?
War should never become so impersonal that a guy in Montana can bomb by guessing some family in Whateverstan!
Why not?
Drones are the death ray of the Evil Empire. Most Americans like being the Evil Empire. So they like the death ray. I don't like being the Empire and I don't like the death ray.
Ah.. thanks for breaking it down with those analogies there. It makes more sense to me now...
We are a big evil empire. We have death rays. Got it.
You always have the option to leave the empire you so despise.
you people have alot of nerve to say that drones are overused! are u kiddin me? why dont u give the people using them creidit instead of bein like a ton of our retarded politcians that think the same! theyre out there catchin high value targets that are plannin attacks against our country and our people! u people make me sick to my stomach! but if we get attacked again or more soilders die u'll say we're not doin enough. u people are disgusting! GO DRONES! GO MIilitary!!! keep blowin them fools up!
I personally am a fan of isolating ourselves except for humanitarian aid and FAIR trade. If there is a big war, we jump in when the cause is right. Defeating Hitler comes to mind... I'm not saying we cut back military spending that much (400B is a bit), because it's wise to keep a strong military might and tactical advantage... And Drones are a part of that advantage. However, by waiting until there is an obvious problem and the stuff really hits the fan, we have every right and we have the world's empathy. Drones don't gain us any empathy, no matter how much they help us after the mess we got ourselves in (Thinking back to early Afghanistan during the Cold War) Regardless, we had the world's empathy. And then we pee it all away in a war like Iraq. Had we taken a more isolationist approach to our handling of wars, we could have stopped at Afghanistan, saved countless billions of dollars, strengthened our economy, built a future for our kids, and have the respect of fellow nations. Insteading of peeing it all away in a pre-emptive strike, for weapons that did not exist, to then change our story to one of "freeing the people". Now we have drones to keep the hole plugged so that we don't get sucked down by our F ups. The REASON for why it happened was to cover our government's butt at the time. There is nothing good about that. Drones are simply a tool to do the mop up of our F ups. There is nothing inherently wrong with them. It's the mistakes of our government that created this situation. And now they are trying to resolve it, trillions of dollars later. Drones are nice and cheap. Saves us cash in fighting the remainder of our F up. Hopefully the next time our government will take a more isolationist approach and we can use more of that drone power here at home... Although doesn't that have scary Big-Brother implications.. Enough of the worry mongering. I'll just leave it at this: Isolate ourselves militarily and focus on rebuilding America.
Most educated post yet. Good job.
If the enemy is willing to die for his cause....make sure he dies!
muslim terrorists love drones, I suggest we send them many more missiles.
If countries stopped harboring terrorists and put the full might of anti-terrorism forces into action then these type strikes could certainly be curtailed. But when sovereigns are involved in aiding and abetting terrorists there are few choices left.
Pakistan should be fighting the Al-Q invaders as doctors fight disease.
Remember how Bush was chastised every time a report of a drone strike came up?
It seems to be okay that this assshole Barry does it 10 more.
Bush was looking for Bin Laden in Iraq whereas Bin Laden was in Pakistan. Obama got Bin Laden and the #2 of Al Qaeda too whereas Bush did not. Results do matter. Competence does matter.
Oh, that's right, Barry DID get Obama. And to think the CIA and SEAls tried to take credit!
So it's unfair to chastise a loser like Bush, who was just a figurehead for Dick Cheney and was 'elected' by his dad's influence over the Supreme Court and CIA, but you call the man who's cleaning up Cheney's mess and finally getting payback for 9-11 names and that's cool? Hey, you're pretty much an assshole yourself.
Why drones? dirt cheap. A predator aircraft cost a 3 to 10 million dollars. A cheap human capable aircraft cost (f-16, f-18 etc) cost 50 to 100 million dollars. Support aircraft – a single drone can do a surgical strike. Normal aircraft mission will take at least 6 or more (tankers, radar, anti-radar countermeasures, wingman) depending on mission. Mission time- a human can fly for about 10 to 12 hours tops. A drone can stay up for days looking for targets. Both aircraft use the same weapons and same intel so that is a wash. If a drone strikes a non-military target because of bad intel or faulty equipment a normal aircraft will too. Disclaimer- the numbers are educated guesses but are accurate for comparison.
Drones have saved numerous innocent lives by killing so many vicious terrorists. The only complain we all have heard is "collateral damage" since some people nearby the terrorists were also killed. Well, if you harbor terrorists, you are a part of terrorism. Stop supporting terrorism by hiding terrorists and stay away from terrorists! Drones save lives of innocent people and should be used more.
Are u kiddin me? Terrorist-lover hypocrisy knows no bounds. They are all lawless murderers and rapists, just because they can. They have zero lack of compassion with killing innocent people (men, WOMEN, and CHILDREN) via car bombings, kidnappings, torture, beheadings, etc. World would be a better place without any of those thugs. We have things like drones to protect us from the actions of those that insist on acting less like humans and a vicious rabid animal.
Now that been thinking about it, I wish I could have my picture kissing and making out with a predator drone haha. That's a bad boy!
Joe Haldeman's novel FOREVER PEACE depicted US troops fighting via huge robot avatars called 'soldierboys.' Since they were invulnerable and the operators were thousands of miles away, they tried not to kill anyone but destroyed their buildings and property instead. I think we ought to be more careful about who we kill, but I wouldn't stop or slow down much as long as we can take them out without losing any of our men or women.
How would an untrained, uninformed and unknowledgeable public ever begin to offer a meaningful distinction on this matter?
The place I see way too much reliance on drones is the way they are all running for the Republican nomination.
This isn't much of a debate.
Arguments in favor:
"[Drones] have fewer diplomatic costs in terms of assembling coalitions or securing basing rights, keep down the size of the military, create few civilian casualties, do not put U.S. soldiers at risk, and cost less than other military measures" (3rd to last parag.)
Arguments against:
In targeted states, people are sad because they don't have the opportunity to shoot at live Americans.
Drones, as stated in the article, have advantages and disadvantages. They can take out the leaders of terrorist organizations, temporarily hampering logistical operations of those groups. This advantage is most noted on the international stage, where logistical coordination is most needed relative to grass roots movement. Terrorist groups lose support of they act too locally (people don't like their neighbors being killed). This advantage is temporary as more affiliates can eventually take over logistical operations, but right now skyrocketing food prices are causing severe unrest across the Midddle East and Africa, making this a key turning point, so this temporary advantage could result in important long term progress.
However, as the article said, drones turn the local population against the US. Collatoral damage and mistakes happen sometimes, so civilian lives will be lost. As the author noted, the civilian loss can be greater with on the ground forces. However, on the ground forces can make connections with the locals and achieve some mutual trust, as seen in the secure and hold strategy that accompanied the surge in Iraq.
In short, drones, boots on the ground, and staying out all have significant advantages and disadvantages. I am not qualified and do not have the intel to determine what mix of the three that we should be employing.
Drones have Al Queda on the run and hiding in tunnels like rodents in a whack-a-mole game.
The more the better
As satellite images are still too fuzzy and too late, situational awareness can only be increased with reconnaissance drones. Whether they need to fire missiles, is yet another question. But in principle: A working farmer has nothing to fear. A gang of kalashnikov-waving bearded guys in a landrover has.
@Amit-Atlanta-USA
You seem to be upset with your former country mate, Fareed Zakaria
Are you jealous that you don't have an audience like him...
Sorry to say that you never will. Keep hating and self loathing and don't bother to respond, since I don't have time for hate spewers.
They don't need drones, they can perfectly make up there own secret weapon of mass-destruction laboratories.
Most of our drones are in Congress.
Q: Does America overuse drones?
A: No, they are used too much 5.36%
5.36% picked that. they are not overused, they are simply used too much.
And they said all those hours playing video games were a waste of time! Heck no, I am now the best drone pilot of my group!
Using robots (drones) in place of live troops ... is a bad idea? Not even worth debating the lunacy of that perspective.
It appears that India/Hindu trash are again on the prowl in this forum and polluting the spirit of a good debate by their racist and hatred filled comments. Shame on you! Is this the culture that you have been brought up with in the Indian society?
I have not noticed anyone from India on this forum. Not that I would be able to tell if they were. After all, isn't the internet anonymous?
When it came time to kill the king, the US made it nice and personal.
one of these days, were going to all get shot down by one of those seriously, think about it.
America is free to use drones but israel isnt? al qaeda can be droned but hamas cant? edogan can drone kurds but israel cant to hamas?
screwed up hypocrites and jew haters all around....anyhow, doesn't matter...we JEWS will destroy all comers who oppose us...even obama
America is free to use drones but israel isnt? al qaeda can be droned but hamas cant? erdogan can drone kurds but israel cant to hamas?
screwed up hypocrites and jew haters all around....anyhow, doesn't matter...we JEWS will destroy all comers who oppose us...even obama. Were no longer in the ghetto on crappy little poland....
Hey There. I discovered your blog using msn. That is an extremely neatly written article. I'll be sure to bookmark it and return to learn more of your helpful info. Thank you for the post. I will definitely return.
I simply could not go away your site before suggesting that I actually loved the usual info a person provide to your guests? Is going to be again continuously in order to investigate cross-check new posts
Hello! eegdkec interesting eegdkec site! I'm really like it! Very, very eegdkec good!
Hello! gbecddd interesting gbecddd site! I'm really like it! Very, very gbecddd good!