Drone Blowback in Pakistan is a Myth [W:24, 57]

[Jack Hays]

How many Afghans in those planes ? How many Saudis ?

The Taliban offered to hand over the people the US thought were behind the attacks if the US could provide some proof . That seems like a reasonable response in international relations. To invade and occupy the country for over a decade cannot be justified imo

The Taliban "offer" was a fraud intended to forestall action. It was properly ignored.

 

[Tigerace117]

How many Afghans in those planes ? How many Saudis ?

The Taliban offered to hand over the people the US thought were behind the attacks if the US could provide some proof . That seems like a reasonable response in international relations. To invade and occupy the country for over a decade cannot be justified imo

Pastunwali would have prevented them from following through on that likely hollow claim.

Remember, the Taliban helps keep the Hazara down. The Pashtun won't stand in the way.

 

[Abbazorkzog]

It'll be real if they draw conclusions between this and the U.S.-India relationship.

 

[oneworld2]

The Taliban "offer" was a fraud intended to forestall action. It was properly ignored.

You can't just dismiss it as a fraud.

I could just as easily say the US accusations that Bin Laden was behind the attack seemed to be likewise a fraud.

If they thought Bin Laden was behind the attacks they must have had some proof of it. Don't forget this was a leadership that said Saddam Hussein had links to Al Qaeda etc

Either way to invade and occupy a country , causing thousands of deaths and mass flight in an already devastated place , cannot be justified by 9/11 imo. Don't forget to that the mission morphed into regime change which is illegal under international law and it led to the whole region exploding into violence , still ongoing

 

[oneworld2]

Pastunwali would have prevented them from following through on that likely hollow claim.

Remember, the Taliban helps keep the Hazara down. The Pashtun won't stand in the way.

That's as maybe and is only speculation anyway . Would it not have been better to have waited and called their bluff ?

Do you think people should require some proof of involvement in any action before they are handed over ?

 

[Jack Hays]

You can't just dismiss it as a fraud.

I could just as easily say the US accusations that Bin Laden was behind the attack seemed to be likewise a fraud.

If they thought Bin Laden was behind the attacks they must have had some proof of it. Don't forget this was a leadership that said Saddam Hussein had links to Al Qaeda etc

Either way to invade and occupy a country , causing thousands of deaths and mass flight in an already devastated place , cannot be justified by 9/11 imo. Don't forget to that the mission morphed into regime change which is illegal under international law and it led to the whole region exploding into violence , still ongoing

Nonsense. We knew OBL had done 9/11 and so did the Taliban. Their "offer" was merely a tactical device. Our "invasion" was a very light undertaking. What we did was bring intra-Afghan rivalries into play in a way productive for us and detrimental to the Taliban. Very deft.

 

[Tigerace117]

That's as maybe and is only speculation anyway . Would it not have been better to have waited and called their bluff ?

Do you think people should require some proof of involvement in any action before they are handed over ?

The fact that Osama had already planned attacks against the US; which the Taliban knew full well--- was very strong proof. Calling their bluff would only have given Osama time to escape--- and who knows if we'd ever have tracked him down. As it was it took ten years.

He also, you know, took credit for the attacks.

 

[oneworld2]

The USSR invaded Afghanistan to execute an imperial design. The US invaded Afghanistan in response to an attack on our citizens. In Pakistan any view of foreigners is conditioned by what they're doing to your enemies.

The USSR may well have invaded Afghanistan for imperial concerns/design but the same could be said of the US. Don't forget that PNAC list of countries for regime change preceded 9/11.

 

[Jack Hays]

The USSR may well have invaded Afghanistan for imperial concerns/design but the same could be said of the US. Don't forget that PNAC list of countries for regime change preceded 9/11.

More nonsense. Without 9/11 there would have been no action in Afghanistan.

 

[oneworld2]

The fact that Osama had already planned attacks against the US; which the Taliban knew full well--- was very strong proof. Calling their bluff would only have given Osama time to escape--- and who knows if we'd ever have tracked him down. As it was it took ten years.

He also, you know, took credit for the attacks.

It's not " strong proof " it's speculation.

Even when you caught the guy he never faced any trial which makes me think the evidence against him wasn't that good

 

[Jack Hays]

It's not " strong proof " it's speculation.

Even when you caught the guy he never faced any trial which makes me think the evidence against him wasn't that good

Do you believe the US landed astronauts on the moon?

 

[Tigerace117]

It's not " strong proof " it's speculation.

Even when you caught the guy he never faced any trial which makes me think the evidence against him wasn't that good

Are you seriously complaining that Osama Bin Laden--- a guy responsible for thousands of deaths; was killed?

Seriously?

And it was strong proof. He literally admitted it.

 

[oneworld2]

More nonsense. Without 9/11 there would have been no action in Afghanistan.

You don't know that. There was action , invasion and occupation , of Iraq off the back of it. Libya. Syria. And possibly Iran at a future date

The War on Terror , which is the outcome , can and has been used to justify just about every action since

 

[oneworld2]

Are you seriously complaining that Osama Bin Laden--- a guy responsible for thousands of deaths; was killed?

Seriously?

And it was strong proof. He literally admitted it.

I think everyone , no matter how ugly , should have a trial for any alleged crimes. In his case you would think it wouldn't have been a hard job to convict him. Right ?

Don't forget he was okay with the US when he was killing Russians. As Hussein was when he was killing Iranians

 

[Jack Hays]

You don't know that. There was action , invasion and occupation , of Iraq off the back of it. Libya. Syria. And possibly Iran at a future date

The War on Terror , which is the outcome , can and has been used to justify just about every action since

That is false from front to back. Afghanistan was the response to 9/11. Iraq was a war of choice the GWB administration had decided to wage even before 9/11. Libya was the choice of another administration (Obama) and Syria was actually a failure to engage. Regarding the GWOT, please see Bernard Lewis, The Roots of Muslim Rage, published in 1990.

 

[humbolt]

Are you seriously complaining that Osama Bin Laden--- a guy responsible for thousands of deaths; was killed?

Seriously?

And it was strong proof.

He literally admitted it.

In a video, no less.

 

[Militant_Vegan_]

Are you seriously complaining that Osama Bin Laden--- a guy responsible for thousands of deaths; was killed?

Seriously?

And it was strong proof. He literally admitted it.

right. and saddam hussein said he'd defeat the US.

"He said so"

derp

 

[Jack Hays]

right. and saddam hussein said he'd defeat the US.

"He said so"

derp

So what?

 

[Militant_Vegan_]

So what?

oh, so if someone admits something in a video, then "so what".

 

[Jack Hays]

oh, so if someone admits something in a video, then "so what".

Saddam was a head of state posturing before a war. OBL was a terrorist claiming an action after the fact. No equivalence.

 

[Tigerace117]

I think everyone , no matter how ugly , should have a trial for any alleged crimes. In his case you would think it wouldn't have been a hard job to convict him. Right ?

Don't forget he was okay with the US when he was killing Russians. As Hussein was when he was killing Iranians

No, it wouldn't have, but it wasn't worth US servicemen losing their lives in an attempt to keep him alive.

 

[Tigerace117]

right. and saddam hussein said he'd defeat the US.

"He said so"

derp

Not at all the same thing, as you should know.

 

[Thoreau72]

T-72, this analogy doesn't work. For one, the drone operators aren't intentionally killing civilians, while Lt.Calley's unit was.

While we're on the topic, the Vietnamese people probably weren't too found of their kids being forcibly conscripted to go off and die in huge numbers in a war of aggression against the South.

Well, two round-eyes talking about it 50 years later can only speculate as to how the Vietnamese people felt at the time or feel now.

But I was there and did associate with a few of the young women who used to clean our quarters, and at the time they did resent the round-eyes who had invaded their country.

I'm certain that if some gang of foreigners had invaded my country I would have felt the same. That is pretty much a universal reaction, and you likely agree.

I do understand your point regarding drone operators intentions compared to Calley's, but my point was not about the intentions of the trigger man, but rather the feelings of the recipients and their friends and family.

 

[oneworld2]

No, it wouldn't have, but it wasn't worth US servicemen losing their lives in an attempt to keep him alive.

Come on , you know full well when they caught up with bin laden they could have brought him into custody in the US , charged him for whatever crimes they had proof for and punished him according to the laws.

The way they offed him was illegal imo , Not only that, I think the decision to not give this sort of people a trial just smacks of damage limitation for those who apprehend them with regards to any potential information that would surface as a result of a trial.

As I said the US were happy to bank roll him when he was killing Russians. What might a trial have revealed about those days and/or subsequent events ?

 

[Tigerace117]

Well, two round-eyes talking about it 50 years later can only speculate as to how the Vietnamese people felt at the time or feel now.

But I was there and did associate with a few of the young women who used to clean our quarters, and at the time they did resent the round-eyes who had invaded their country.

I'm certain that if some gang of foreigners had invaded my country I would have felt the same. That is pretty much a universal reaction, and you likely agree.

I do understand your point regarding drone operators intentions compared to Calley's, but my point was not about the intentions of the trigger man, but rather the feelings of the recipients and their friends and family.

The number of people who fled South Vietnam following the collapse--- the "boat people"--- was high enough that one can make a fairly decent guess.

Some people might have resented our prescence, but a large part of that may well have been the fact that they were stuck with ****ty jobs. I have yet to hear about anybody who enjoys cleaning.

A conventional airstrike doesn't leave you any less dead than a drone strike; indeed, a lot of the whining about how "immoral" drones are is coming from people who stand to lose a ****-ton of money.

https://www.nsfwcorp.com/dispatch/cheap-drones/

https://www.nsfwcorp.com/dispatch/drone-of-morality/