Drone Warfare in the Obama Administration
Drones have been developed by the CIA for nearly 50 years, beginning in 1959 when the CIA began gathering information about the first nuclear facility being built by the Chinese, at Lop Nur. CIA pilots flying reconnaissance missions across China were getting shot down (Lop Nur is located 2,000 miles inside mainland China, almost to Mongolia) and drones could perform missions too dull, dirty, or dangerous for piloted aircraft. Dull included long flights where pilots could easily face fatigue; dirty meant situations where weapons of mass destruction might be involved; dangerous meant low-flying missions over denied territory where shoot-downs were almost certain.
Despite the drone’s long and significant role in the history of aerial espionage, the world at large would only come to learn about drones in 2002. On November 3, 2002, the CIA launched a Hellfire air-to-surface missile from a Predator drone flying over a road in the desert in Yemen. In doing so it reduced six al-Qaeda operatives and their car to a smoking pile of ash and brought drones out of the shadows and into the spotlight.
The debate was on. The “legality” of drone missions suddenly became a major hot-button issue, with one side saying drone strikes were a violation of international law and the other side saying that preemptive strikes against terrorists were necessary to prevent future mass-casualty attacks. President Obama’s use of drones underscores the fact that while the two sides will continue to debate, the U.S. will continue to take out terrorists with drones. Expect more to come. There are more than 5,300 drones flying over Afghanistan and Iraq today.
Pres. Obama is killing innocent civilians for poppies, His buddies are raking in billions over there. there has to be a better way
Evidence please! They may be your innocent civilians, but to the people they have murdered in the past, they were bloodthirsty terrorists.
You CANNOT reason with a religious fanatic determined to do murder. You either kill them or they kill you. There is no ‘better way’.
Nothing new about any of this. Religious fanatics have been around for thousands of years. The search for a ‘better way’ has been going on almost as long. The best solution found is to kill them and clean your weapons, since there will be another batch along eventually.
It’s all part of the human condition.
I never thought I would see the day where I would be encouraging Barack Obama to- Drone On!
typos – turn on your sarcasm detector
Since Obama has banned harsh interrogation methods we will soon run out of targets. Not because there aren’t any but we won’t have enough information to get them. At that time the drone attacks will stop.
Ditto Typos.
Eagle Eye why don’t you go over there and try to reason with them? If your still alive one year later then let’s see if you still stick to your, “there has to be a better way”.
The Obamanazis are practicing on the Muslim guerrillas in preparation for strikes on radio stations that carry Rush Limbaugh, and other talk radio hosts.
Uhh – why would you think Obama would be different than Bush on this matter? It was one of his most hawkish stances during the campaign. Weren’t you paying attention – or was it bad research for this article?
“I never thought I would see the day where I would be encouraging Barack Obama to- Drone On!”
President Obama deserves our congratulations on this matter. It’s only fair. Those of us representing the center-right also cannot afford to be perceived as “Obama haters.” We are obligated to give our new president credit when it’s due.
Obama talked all through the campaign about a draw down of troops in Iraq and a concurrent buildup in Afghanistan. Knowing that the most dangerous elements of the Taliban have been finding safe harbor in the northwest provinces of Pakistan, it makes little sense that Obama would discontinue the surveillance and occasional drone attacks in that area. These attacks are made necessary by Pakistan’s duplicity on the whole issue. Islamabad talks a big game when it comes to fighting terrorism, but it does virtually nothing in the areas which matter most. Now, it’s using the Mumbai attack and tension with India as an excuse for not putting more troops along the border with Afghanistan. Its security apparatus and military are riddled with Al Qaeda and Taliban operatives. If the Pakistani army ever did try to do anything substantial in the northwest, the bad guys would probably get a warning days in advance of any operation. The drones are ‘real-time’, highly magnified systems with almost 100% accuracy. Reports of large civilian casualties resulting from these attacks are either exaggerated or bogus. Most of the people being killed are probably Taliban or Al Qaeda leaders, or their willing hosts. In any case, if the free-world strictly adhered to a policy of 0% civilian casualties, then it would NEVER be able to go after any terrorist because these snakes routinely hide in otherwise peaceful communities.
I guess Hope and Changey realizes Bush knew what he was doing. It’s a shame he slammed Bush so much for “violating America’s principals” yet here he’s continuing his policies. What a hypocrite….although I do hope he continues killing terrorists. We’ll see.
Impeach Obama and prosecute him and his administration for their War Crimes. And to think that Biden and his buddies are getting rich off of this illegal war.
Arrest the Freedom Fighters, read them their rights, give them a lawyer, give them room and board and cell phones in America while they await trial.
Hope and Change, Obama/Biden 08.
“Uhh – why would you think Obama would be different than Bush on this matter? It was one of his most hawkish stances during the campaign. Weren’t you paying attention – or was it bad research for this article?”
The thing is Mike that a lot of people said they were voting for Obama or supported Obama (particularly those from outside the US) because he was ‘anti-war’, ‘not a warmonger’, would ‘talk rather than kill’ etc. I heard these sentiments expressed time and again on the radio or in conversations in the UK.
It’s not that the OP wasn’t paying attention, it’s that many people who supported Obama weren’t. They refuse to listen when you explain to them why Obama’s stated views on this kind of subject are different from the views they claim he has.
In the last month I’ve heard the same thing about Obama’s supposed views on Israel’s right to defend itself.
Obama cannot possibly live up to the expectations people have invested in him. He’s never expressed a view on half of the things people are claiming he believes. He will end up being even more hated in certain circles than George W. Bush. Disappointment and disillusionment create the strongest negative feelings because people feel betrayed.
I hope I’m wrong about that, I really do, but I don’t think I will be.
Josh C (13)
You got it right:
“The thing is Mike that a lot of people said they were voting for Obama or supported Obama (particularly those from outside the US) because he was ‘anti-war’, ‘not a warmonger’, would ‘talk rather than kill’ etc. I heard these sentiments expressed time and again on the radio or in conversations in the UK.”
IMO many people who supported Obama weren’t getting it. I like the word ‘sentiments’ which you expressed. That is what passes for realpolitik among certain parts of the population.
Drone planes with hellfire missiles, backdoor conversations with Hamas leaders, Iranian dissedents..lets go further…
Sentiment
Let the ‘world’ be on notice now. This is not the wussy-crap America you wanted. What were you thinking? Maybe people with a bit more melanin in their skin are going to be easy pushovers?
Maybe a Brit would think that way. Won’t happen in Detroit or New Orleans.
You think that Democracts (I am not one, (l)ibetarian myself), can’t kick? Maybe you dont know our history.
Yall just dont get it. Nor should you.
Spindok
“Drone warfare”Isn’t that the name for Obama’s plan to raise taxes on working americans and give non tax payers a welfare check in order to buy their votes ?
14.spindoc…..yet once again….the lib has to bring up race
my problem with BHO is that i can’t even begin to fathom what kind of liar he is. but i’m beginning to get an inclination that he is a world class liar. the taxes i heard mentioned a few months back were to be on fuel. something to the effect of 40 cents on the gallon. that isn’t going to fly on 5 $ a gallon gas, but on 2$ to 2.40 it might be palatable, so taxes to be paid by grandkids won’t hurt as much, neither will the great giveaway.
he has a large bus and his willingness to throw people under it has been demonstrated, and the hope that some of those will also be of the international type, a select few of the Saudi persuasion and one of the persian. Hope he apologizes to Amedinajad… before he throws his lunatic ass under the bus. Hey Obie can you get a predator to do a fly-by in Iran?
That $.40 tax is two orders of magnitude less than what is needed to pay for all this. It would raise less than $40 billion/year when we need trillions. It is a drop in the bucket.
Isn’t this really the job of McKiernan and his superior Petraues, running these operations. Although Gilani and Karzai are both protesting.
16. Anne141
Bringing up race is infrequent for libertarians. It is a philosophy which focuses sharply on individual rights and tends to reject group politics.
I bring it up here because I think that much of the world, outside of the US, misunderstood this individual, our new president. They tended to downplay his more aggresive stated policies; I think in large part, because of the mere circumstance of something which most Americans have gone beyond.
Obama stated many times that he is intending a more aggresive war in Afghanistan and Pakistan. He stated many times that is is not changing US policy toword Israel. He has committed to full weight of US military power whenever he feels it is appropriate.
Those international supporters who thought that his racial background automatically gained some sympathy for something he sees as against US interests are sorely mistaken.
Maybe some folks out in the hinterlands of Pakistan or London thought that our new president was of a different tribe than the rest. They were wrong. This is the USA and things are different here.
There is nothing wrong with ‘bringing up race’. Where I see a potential for danger is in those outside of the US who might take chances by challenging the new president because of that. He does not have military experience. He might overreact to prove his mettle.
At the same time he has wisely surrounded himself with advisors who have been in the trenches. C’mon you want to go up against Clinton or Emanuel one-on-one in a negotiation?
Since I have no real political party I get to criticize without accountability. I can also give support where I think the best interests of our nation are, irrespective of Democrat or Republican.
There might be a chance to turn things around in Pakistan/Afghanistan. Worse job than Iraq and that is already a mess.
Spindok
Yea! Turn the “freedom fighters” loose in Gitmo, and put Obama and Biden there for their war crimes!
Spindok….
I’m so sick of being expected to provide PC responses to everything from the MSM that I make a mistake with my own response, as in this case. Appreciate your further comments….
go ahead
kill 1 billion muslims and have fun coz you’d have nothing left to eat either
maybe then the rest of you can eat uranium sandwiches and plutonium burgers
enjoy