US drone strikes may break international law

[BAC]

Just another reason to tell NATO to pound sand and to find a new place to call home...

NATO is not the UN.


-B

[LockenLoad]

I am pretty sure then that the use of Suicide Bombers and IEDs violate the same laws.....UN investigator, please go to Pakistan and Afghanistan and make some arrests of the other side, then talk to us.

Yea what he said, everybody hates us any way we should just carpet bomb the whole region, pull out all of our troops, hell they don't want us there, since WW2, there has always been someone cock blocking us ( politicians the U.N ect.), just like Vietnam they say we lost, but I bet if Nixon had let the B-52's roll another month they would have surrendered. Lets not forget they killed 3 thousand of us in one day f#k em let the B-52's roll.

[parishioner]

Since August 2008, around 70 strikes by unmanned aircraft have killed close to 600 people in northwestern Pakistan.

Can someone explain to me what the hell the above statement is supposed to mean? 600 people? Are they civilians or terrorist scum?

I'm beginning to see the use of the word "people" more and more in media reports regarding deaths in a war zone. I guess this is to portray how the U.S. is just killing "people" with out regard. They need to be more specific with their wording instead of these vague terms but I guess that wouldn't align with their agenda.

[chadbag]

Right, sniping (using hellfires or whatever) at enemy combatants is "summary execution?"

[MAUSER202]

[QUOTE=eguns-com;483821]Right, sniping (using hellfires or whatever) at enemy combatants is "summary execution?"[/QUOT

If it is, Guess what...I'm O.K. with it!

[d90king]

NATO is not the UN.


-B

I thought they worked hand in hand in most cases... I also thought that UN resolutions are what got NATO involved...

[Alpha Sierra]

Who gives a f*ck about the UN if it kills Taliban... !

Took the words right out of my mouth.

F the UN.

[SKULL1]

is this the same UN who failed to stop the genocide in Rwanda?

[JHC]

[QUOTE= By all means, let's a real War and start carpet bombing to make everything legit.

[/QUOTE]

Strategic bombing is no laughing matter . . . but that's funny as shit!

Some analysis. The debate defining a non-combatant who hangs out in an Tali/ALQ safehouse is sort of uninteresting to me.

http://www.longwarjournal.org/threat...d_civilian.php

Peter Bergen and Katherine Tiedemann have published an analysis for the New America Foundation about US drone strikes in Pakistan. Citing previous analyses of drone strike statistics, including the recent report in The Long War Journal, Bergen and Tiedemann conclude that based on their research, between 31 and 33 percent of all casualties from drone strikes inside Pakistan have been civilians.

Bergen and Tiedemann did a fairly good job with their analysis. They debunked some of the rather outlandish estimates of civilian deaths -- including that of Andrew Exum and David Kilcullen, who implausibly claimed in a New York Times op-ed that 98 percent of the casualties from drone strikes have been civilians. Our 10 percent civilian casualty figure was, as we noted, a low-end estimate. A 30 percent civilian casualty rate is certainly plausible.

Obviously, the problem of distinguishing between civilian and militant casualties in this situation is problematic. Essentially, Bergen and Tiedemann's methodology was the inverse of ours: They counted the number of casualties specifically described in press reports as "militants" and subtracted that number from the total killed to get the number of civilian deaths. On the other hand, we counted the number of casualties specifically described as civilians, and subtracted that from the total to get the number of militants killed.

When taken together, I think our two reports provide a fairly good triangulation on what is most likely the actual number. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the "real" number of civilian deaths was somewhere in the middle (around 18-20 percent).



Read more: http://www.longwarjournal.org/threat...#ixzz0VHHiz2TH

[Avenger29]

is this the same UN who failed to stop the genocide in Rwanda?

Yes, and it's the same UN whose "peacekeepers" who, from what I hear, often join in the raping and pillaging...