US Drone Assassinations Are Only Making Things Worse
Drone Assassinations Are Only Making Things Worse
by Jacob G. Hornberger
Jane Mayer, author of the great book The Dark Side: The Inside Story of How the War on Terror Turned Into a War on American Ideals, was interviewed yesterday on NPR on the CIA’s drone attacks in Pakistan. She discussed the morality and legality of those attacks as well as their adverse consequences.
Last summer CIA Director Leon Pinetta announced cancellation of an assassination program that the CIA was going to implement.
Yet, how are these drone attacks in Pakistan any different from an assassination? Suppose, for example, a CIA assassin sneaks into Pakistan, spots a suspected terrorist sunbathing on the top of a house, and blows up the home, killing the suspect and everyone in his family.
That’s the type of assassination that Pinetta presumably put a stop to.
Assume, however, that a CIA official in Northern Virginia uses his computer to direct a drone over the house, spots the suspected terrorist, and drops a bomb on the house, killing the suspect and everyone else in the house.
Apparently, that’s considered okay.
What’s the difference?
The CIA justifies these attacks on the old Bush rationale that terrorism is an act of war, not a criminal offense, and that the war on terrorism is a real war, just like World War II or Vietnam.
Yet, that’s just plain false, which is repeatedly confirmed by criminal prosecutions for the federal crime of terrorism that are regularly carried out in federal district court. Examples include the federal prosecutions of Jose Padilla, Zacharias Moussaoui, and Ali al-Marri. Would federal judges be presiding over such trials if terrorism wasn’t a federal criminal offense as defined by the U.S. Code? Of course not. They would have been dismissing the criminal indictments at the inception of the proceedings.
Thus, the notion that terrorism is an act of war is bogus, as is the notion that a “war on terrorism” is a real war.
Let’s not forget also that there is no constitutionally required congressional declaration of war against Pakistan and, yet, amazingly and virtually without objection, the U.S. government is now killing people in that country with impunity.
Even worse, the drone attacks are killing family members, friends, and relatives of the suspects who are targeted for death. As New York Times columnist David Rohde, who was held captive in Afghanistan and Pakistan by the Taliban has been pointing out in a series on articles about his captivity, the drone attacks are producing enormously high levels of anger and rage against the United States.
Continue reading: http://www.fff.org/blog/jghblog2009-10-22.asp
Interesting tidbit
First, forgive me if I get the facts slightly wrong. It will be substantially correct, however. Perhaps some other DPer will have the real facts and will post them.
The drones are flown, much like a video game, with someone at the console back at the base. The 'pilot' can see where the drone is headed and can alter its course, fire weapons and wreak havoc.
The drone 'top gun' is a 19 year old soldier, who has racked up astonishing numbers. He did this because he spent much of his wayward youth playing video games and got to be really good.
What is interesting is that the 'real' pilots, who fly missions to take out the places that this kid has obliterated, are angry and jealous. They had years of training, flight school, and so on, and this video-kid has eclipsed them all.
I like this. Even though I hate what they do.