- Joined
- Jan 28, 2013
- Messages
- 94,823
- Reaction score
- 28,342
- Location
- Williamsburg, Virginia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Interesting article.Drone strikes don't create revenge-seeking enemies. In the areas where they are used most, they are welcomed.
Drone blowback in Pakistan is a myth. Here’s why.
What do the people who actually live in targeted areas think about drone strikes? You might be surprised.
". . . Broadly speaking, the interview data do not support the blowback thesis. More specifically, the data contradict the presumed local radicalization effects of drones. In fact, 79 percent of the respondents endorsed drones. In sharp contrast to claims about the significant civilian death toll from drone strikes, 64 percent, including several living in villages close to strike locations, believed that drone strikes accurately targeted militants. While many interviewees did specifically point to pre-2012 “signature strikes,” which targeted groups of men based on behavior patterns rather than individual identity, as the cause of occasionally high fatalities, 56 percent believed drones seldom killed non-militants. And as the Crisis Group and Georgetown’s Christine Fair have noted, most locals prefer drones to the Pakistan military’s ground and aerial offensives that cause more extensive damage to civilian life and property. . . ."
So are we to conclude that people actually like to be under threat of death at any given moment at the hands of a drone operator ?
What utter guff
There are two clues in this article that should have been noted and the conclusions it draws questioned as a result
1. The Pakistani authorities " Secretly endorsed these strikes ( drone strikes ).................. one wonders if they had a choice IE did they agree after the event to hide their lack of control over US military operatives operating from within their sovereign territory ?
2. " Access to the respondents was made possible by the Pakistani military’s June 2014 offensive ".......................... hand picked ?.............. too scared to state their true feelings whilst in the midsts of the Pakistani military ?
Maybe they should talk to the people who have lost family members or family homes or both in these strikes. My guess would be that they wouldn't be buying bunches of flowers for the people responsible for blighting/destroying their lives
Drone strikes don't create revenge-seeking enemies. In the areas where they are used most, they are welcomed.
Drone blowback in Pakistan is a myth. Here’s why.
What do the people who actually live in targeted areas think about drone strikes? You might be surprised.
". . . Broadly speaking, the interview data do not support the blowback thesis. More specifically, the data contradict the presumed local radicalization effects of drones. In fact, 79 percent of the respondents endorsed drones. In sharp contrast to claims about the significant civilian death toll from drone strikes, 64 percent, including several living in villages close to strike locations, believed that drone strikes accurately targeted militants. While many interviewees did specifically point to pre-2012 “signature strikes,” which targeted groups of men based on behavior patterns rather than individual identity, as the cause of occasionally high fatalities, 56 percent believed drones seldom killed non-militants. And as the Crisis Group and Georgetown’s Christine Fair have noted, most locals prefer drones to the Pakistan military’s ground and aerial offensives that cause more extensive damage to civilian life and property. . . ."
Your "guess" is just that.
Based on the two points I gave ( that you couldn't/wouldn't respond to ) it's quite a logical conclusion. Much more logical than thinking the extrajudicial killing of people and anyone unlucky enough to be in the vicinity or mistakenly identified as " terrorists " wins you friends in the targeted population. That's the stuff of nonsense imo
You don't know enough to have an opinion worth consideration.
The bottom line fact is that the population of the targeted areas is the population that benefits most from the strikes. They know this. Ever been to Pakistan? Afghanistan? I have.
Get over yourself , Ive probably forgotten more than you know
In your dreams maybe.
How many did you kill in Afghanistan/Pakistan ? And did they thank you with their last breathe ?
Stuff and nonsense
The people of Pakistan appreciate the drone strikes.
According the article in the OP were they state that the people interviewed have been selected by the Pakistani military. The same military that has been fighting against other Pakistanis and Afghans and is assisted in that by , guess what ? US drone strikes.
The carnage there is a direct result of the Russian and then the US led invasions and occupations of Afghanistan. That shouldn't be left out of this conversation either. Nor the fact that the Pakistani dictatorship of Ul Haq was the main player in the rise of the Taliban at the same time he enjoyed Western support .
There's nothing worse than listening to someone absolving themselves from their own crimes by claiming that their victims " appreciate " it
Based on the two points I gave ( that you couldn't/wouldn't respond to ) it's quite a logical conclusion. Much more logical than thinking the extrajudicial killing of people and anyone unlucky enough to be in the vicinity or mistakenly identified as " terrorists " wins you friends in the targeted population. That's the stuff of nonsense imo
Indeed, it is pure nonsense and sophistry, likely disinformation from some Pentagon or CIA related NGO.
This is like claiming that the Vietnamese people actually wanted some more of what Lt. Calley brought. Absurd.
Indeed, it is pure nonsense and sophistry, likely disinformation from some Pentagon or CIA related NGO.
This is like claiming that the Vietnamese people actually wanted some more of what Lt. Calley brought. Absurd.
To me the whole concept is crazy and only crazies or propagandists would buy into
Would these same people support Pakistani drone strikes taking out Americans living in Texas ? Or Afghan drone strikes taking out Londoners ?
Claptrap the lot of it
There is no US "crime" in the Afghanistan-Pakistan theater. Moreover, it requires breathtaking myopia to equate the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan with the US response to 9/11.
yeah after all, one was an unwanted invasion and the killing of civilians and the other one was...oh...wait a minute
Your ignorance of the wider world is painful to read.
Too ignorant to merit reply.
Too ignorant to merit reply.
And your experience of the wider world seems only to have been seen through crosshairs..... nice
In other words you can't even formulate an argument. try thinking about how it feels to get invaded and bombs getting dropped on you.
Or too truthful for you to try to defend ?:roll:
Calling everyone here who disagrees with you " ignorant " is just plane lame. Defend your positions , assuming you can
There is no US "crime" in the Afghanistan-Pakistan theater. Moreover, it requires breathtaking myopia to equate the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan with the US response to 9/11.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?