Guest Post: America Loves Drone Strikes

Tyler Durden's picture




 

Submitted by John Aziz of Azizonomics blog,

This graph shows everything we need to know about the geopolitical reality of Predator Drones (coming soon to the skies of America to hunt down fugitives?).

The American public loves drone strikes:

BC2a006CAAEBSj2

The American public does not approve of the extrajudicial killing of American citizens. But for everyone else, it’s open season.

But everyone else — most particularly and significantly, the countries in the Muslim world — largely hates and resents drone strikes.

And it is the Muslim world that produces the radicalised extremists who commit acts like 9/11, 7/7, the Madrid bombings, and the Bali bombings.  With this outpouring of contempt for America’s drone strikes, many analysts are coming to believe that Obama’s drone policy is now effectively a recruitment tool for al-Qaeda, the Taliban and similar groups:

2_Hands

Indeed, evidence is beginning to coalesce to suggest exactly this. PressTV recently noted:

The expanding drone war in Yemen, which often kills civilians, does in fact cause blowback and help al-Qaeda recruitment – as attested to by numerous Yemen experts, investigative reporting on the ground, polling, testimony from Yemen activists, and the actual fact that recent bungled terrorist attacks aimed at the U.S. have cited such drone attacks as motivating factors.

 

After another September drone strike that killed 13 civilians, a local Yemeni activist told CNN, “I would not be surprised if a hundred tribesmen joined the lines of al-Qaeda as a result of the latest drone mistake. This part of Yemen takes revenge very seriously.”

 

“Our entire village is angry at the government and the Americans,” a Yemeni villager named Mohammed told the Post. “If the Americans are responsible, I would have no choice but to sympathize with al-Qaeda because al-Qaeda is fighting America.”

 

Many in the U.S. intelligence community also believe the drone war is contributing to the al-Qaeda presence in Yemen. Robert Grenier, who headed the CIA’s counter-terrorism center and was previously a CIA station chief in Pakistan, told The Guardian in June that he is “very concerned about the creation of a larger terrorist safe haven in Yemen.”

 

“We have gone a long way down the road of creating a situation where we are creating more enemies than we are removing from the battlefield,” he said regarding drones in Yemen.

Iona Craig reports that civilian casualties from drone strikes “have emboldened al-Qaeda” and cites the reaction to the 2009 U.S. cruise missile attack on the village of al-Majala in Yemen that killed more than 40 civilians (including 21 children):

That one bombing radicalized the entire area,” Abdul Gh ani al-Iryani, a Yemeni political analyst, said. “All the men and boys from those families and tribes will have joined [al-Qaeda] to fight.

And al-Qaeda’s presence and support in Yemen has grown, not shrunk since the start of the targeted killing program:

Meanwhile Yemen Central Security Force commander Brig. Gen. Yahya Saleh, nephew of ousted president Ali Abdullah Saleh, told Abdul-Ahad that al-Qaeda has more followers, money, guns and territory then they did a year and a half ago.

 

All at a time when Yemen is facing a “catastrophic” food crisis, with at least 267,000 children facing life-threatening levels of malnutrition. Hunger has doubled since 2009, and the number of displaced civilians is about 500,000 and rising.

 

As U.S. drones drop bombs on south Yemen villages and AQAP provides displaced civilians with “free electricity, food and water,” tribes in the area are becoming increasingly sympathetic to AQAP.

Let’s be intellectually honest. If a country engages in a military program that carries out strikes that kill hundreds of civilians - many of whom having no connection whatever with terrorism or radicalism - that country is going to become increasingly hated. People in the countries targeted - those who may have lost friends, or family members - are going to plot revenge, and take revenge. That’s just how war works. It infuriates. It radicalises. It instils hatred.

The reality of Obama’s drone program is to create new generations of America-hating radicalised individuals, who may well go on to be the next Osama bin Laden, the next Ayman al-Zawahiri, the next Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. The reality for Obama’s drone program is that it is sowing the seeds for the next 9/11 - just as American intervention in the middle east sowed the seeds for the last, as Osama bin Laden readily admitted.

0
Your rating: None
 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Tue, 02/12/2013 - 02:33 | 3235960 Bay of Pigs
Bay of Pigs's picture

Almost zero cred dismissing 9/11.

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 00:44 | 3235791 williambanzai7
williambanzai7's picture

The M.I.E.seeds for the next 9-11 type event are already sown.

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 01:31 | 3235882 a growing concern
a growing concern's picture

Come on.  You're just jealous of that awesome 270-degree full-speed descending corksrew turn.  Pulled off by a guy from a cave. With a few dozen hours of flight experience.

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 01:52 | 3235915 Totentänzerlied
Totentänzerlied's picture

"radicalized Muslims who hate us for all the bad things the US does overseas."

That part is entirely true, and in some ways justified.

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 22:35 | 3239051 Seer
Seer's picture

Folks need to go back to the early 1900s and see what the US was doing to Muslims THEN.  (check out the Spanish-American war in the Philippines; check out what a US President was saying about folks there- it would make Freddie and Trav proud!)  To sum up: this shit has been going on a LOT longer that nearly everyone understands.

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 02:53 | 3235969 DavidPierre
DavidPierre's picture

Put ConAziz in bed with SmokeyQuinn and all the other 9/11MORONS who the TDs post on ZH.

9/11: A Conspiracy Theory

http://www.corbettreport.com/911-a-conspiracy-theory/

9-11 Is the Litmus Test

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21pPpYw_axQ


They will sooner or later wake up to the in-your-face facts and that WW III started on September 11, 2001 with their NEW Pearl Harbor!

 

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 22:38 | 3239068 Seer
Seer's picture

I think people aren't getting your point... (I gave you an up-arrow, but only after hitting one of the links to see which side of the fence you were referring to)

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 09:44 | 3236288 chindit13
chindit13's picture

There is only one possible area where opinions may differ regarding 911, and that is only whether the two towers could have their integrity compromised by the collision and subsequent fire resulting from the impact of the two commercial airliners, and in the case of WTC7, whether the peculiar structure of that building could be compromised by the debris from the collapse of the North Tower and the subsequent unattended fire fed by office fixtures and furniture, plus the fuel from emergency generators and the Con Edison substation.

The 1500 odd members of ae911 believe the collapse of the three buildings was unlikely or impossible as a result of the plane impact and fire. A vastly greater number of professional architects, engineers and material scientists, numbering in the tens of thousands, and including those who designed and engineered the structures, believe it was completely possible and even exactly how one might guess such buildings would react to the plane impact and fires. Not even a first year physics student would question whether or not fires burned high enough to diminish the structural integrity and load carrying ability of the three buildings. One can easily look up the graph of steel strength as a function of time and temperature, calculate the supported load, and determine the only possible outcome. A second year student can calculate the rate of expected collapse based on floor weight and momentum, and find the calculations are well within the observed rate of fall. Even a blacksmith, if you can still find one, can tell you that steel can be manipulated at temperatures far less than its melting point.

The remainder of the so-called “proof”, such as missiles, NORAD standing down, incompetent pilots, miracle passports (among hundreds of thousands of other non-burned artifacts from building inhabitants and airplane passengers), the BBC report, good-bye phone calls, quote mined recording snippets, nanothermite residue, “freefall” speed, etc., are so bogus that they do not warrant any additional investigation whatsoever. These latter are the favorites of gullible moonbats and whackjobs who know nothing but have an insatiable need to believe the worst.

As for motivation by “insiders”, wars could have been waged regardless of public sentiment, just like the first Gulf War under Bush I. Additionally, the degree of competence required to pull off a controlled demolition which would have required somewhere on the order of 200,000 man hours to prepare is well beyond the capabilities of even the most accomplished of the elite, unless some think them superhuman.

In the end, people will agree to disagree, with the majority of those with working knowledge siding with the official story of missed opportunities, incompetence, turf battles and a total lack of preparation. If there is any “cover-up”, it is covering up the incompetence and missed signals on the part of those in positions of authority.

Just as those who accept the official version must question their biases, so must those who champion one of the “false flag” versions. For those who will accuse me of being some “psy-op” or paid shill, fuck off. Your paranoia is showing.

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 11:34 | 3236467 psychobilly
psychobilly's picture

"A vastly greater number of professional architects, engineers and material scientists, numbering in the tens of thousands, and including those who designed and engineered the structures, believe it was completely possible and even exactly how one might guess such buildings would react to the plane impact and fires."

Link to tens of thousands?

You are a liar, plain and simple.  Only a tiny handful of engineers are willing to publicly defend the government's 9/11 story; all of whom have serious conflicts of interest.

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 12:02 | 3236531 psychobilly
psychobilly's picture

"Not even a first year physics student would question whether or not fires burned high enough to diminish the structural integrity and load carrying ability of the three buildings. One can easily look up the graph of steel strength as a function of time and temperature, calculate the supported load, and determine the only possible outcome."

Nope.  

NIST's physical paint and microstructure tests of the steel samples they collected from WTC impact and fire regions showed fire-induced temperatures of no hotter than 250 C.  There is no weakening of steel at 250 C, fireproofing or no.  Steel temps of ~250 C are also what would be expected from short-lived, diffuse office fires fueled by kerosene (i.e., jet fuel) and office contents.  NIST’s own simulated office fire tests provide further evidence that this (low steel temperatures) would have been the case.

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 13:20 | 3236947 chindit13
chindit13's picture

Re WTC7, the NIST report provides an explanation that includes induced thermal expansion, particularly of Column 79, as a result of temperatures of approximately 400 degrees C (752 C), which resulted in a push of the girder spanning Columns 79 to 44 and leading to the collapse of the 13th floor, buckling of Column 79 between Floors 5-14, leading to the observed kink in the east penthouse as the upper sections of Column 79 shifted.  Coupled with structural damage that occured when debris from the north tower fell, the integrity of the structure was fatally compromised.

In addition, the office fires were not "short-lived", unless you consider several hours without working sprinkling systems or attention by fire brigades short-lived.  The fires started after the building was struck by debris from the tumbling north tower.  The collapse occurred at 17:20.

No matter.  Even if you dispute the NIST findings, you need to explain why "insiders" would need to bring down WTC7 almost seven hous after the north tower collapsed.  Wasn't 220 floors enough?  Why the overkill?  "Secret documents" perhaps?  Only copies on the face of the Earth?  For most people, though clearly not everyone, even a conspiracy has to make some sense.

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 13:39 | 3237045 psychobilly
psychobilly's picture

"WTC7, the NIST report provides an explanation that includes induced thermal expansion, particularly of Column 79, as a result of temperatures of approximately 400 degrees C (752 C), which resulted in a push of the girder spanning Columns 79 to 44 and leading to the collapse of the 13th floor, buckling of Column 79 between Floors 5-14, leading to the observed kink in the east penthouse as the upper sections of Column 79 shifted. Coupled with strctural damage that occured when debris from the north tower fell, the integrity of the structure was fatally compromised."

NIST of course offers no evidence for this.  Regardless, my comments regarding steel temperatures reached were in reference to the towers, not WTC7.

"In addition, the ofice fires were not 'short-lived', unless you consider several hours without working sprinkling systems or attention by fire brigades short-lived. The fires started after the building was struck by debris from the tumbling north tower."

I was referring to the towers.  That's the NIST report I was referring to.  The one where NIST collected all sorts of physical evidence (e.g., perimeter and core columns from impact and fire areas) and conducted numerous tests (e.g., performance of floor truss sections, performance of fireproofing), then buried the results under thousands of pages, ignoring the physical evidence and the conclusions of their physical tests, and concocted a black box computer model that nobody is allowed to examine that spits out the conclusion the administration was expecting.  It was a process driven by political expediancy, not science.  This is government we're dealing with after all.

NIST's explanation for WTC7 was even more ludicrous.  See:

http://www.ae911truth.org/news/57-news-releases-by-others/426-freefall-and-building-7-on-911.html

We know that the falling section of Building 7 did not crush the lower section of the building because the top section of Building 7 fell at freefall. It didn't just fall at something close to freefall. It fell for about 2.5 seconds at a rate that was indistinguishable from freefall. If the falling section of the building had crushed the lower section, the lower section would have pushed back with an equal but opposite force. But that would have slowed the fall. Since the fall was not slowed in the slightest, we can conclude that the force of interaction was zero... in both directions.

 

<snip>

 

NIST claims that the collapse of their one key column led to a progressive collapse of the entire interior of the building leaving only a hollow shell. The collapse of the building, seen in numerous videos, is described by NIST as the collapse of the "facade," the hollow shell. They have no evidence for this scenario, however, and a great deal of evidence contradicts it. After the collapse of the east penthouse there is no visible distortion of the walls and only a few windows are broken at this time. Had the failure of interior columns propagated throughout the interior of the building, as asserted by NIST, it would surely have propagated to the much closer exterior walls and distorted or collapsed them. (Major crumpling of the exterior walls, by the way, is exactly what is shown in the animations produced by NIST's computer simulation of the collapse.) But the actual videos of the building show that the exterior remained rigid during this early period. At the onset of collapse you can see in the videos that the building suddenly goes limp, like a dying person giving up the ghost. The limpness of the freefalling structure highlights by contrast the earlier rigidity.

 

Furthermore, there are huge pyroclastic flows of dust, resembling a volcanic eruption, that poured into the streets following the final collapse of the building. If what we saw was only the collapse of the facade, why was the pyroclastic flow not triggered earlier when NIST claims the collapse of the much more voluminous interior occurred? And why did the west penthouse remain to fall with the visible exterior of the building? Its supporting structure clearly remained to the very end and was "taken out" along with the rest of the building support all at once. NIST is scrambling to find a plausible scenario that will allow it to escape the consequences of what is plainly visible. (If you have not seen the collapse of Building 7, find it on YouTube and watch for yourself. For most people simply watching it collapse is all it takes. Most people are not stupid. Most people can recognize the difference between a demolition and a natural building collapse with nothing more being said. If you have never seen the collapse of Building 7 you might also stop and ask yourself why the mainstream media did not repeatedly show you this most bizarre event as it did the Twin Towers.)

 

After the east penthouse collapsed, several seconds elapsed, then the west penthouse began to collapse, at nearly the same time the roofline of the building developed a kink near the center, then all support across the entire width of the building was suddenly removed, a vertical swath of windows under the west penthouse were simultaneously blown out, the building suddenly went limp, and (within a fraction of a second) it transitioned from full support to freefall.

 

I am not using the term "freefall" loosely here. I used a video analysis tool to carefully measure the velocity profile of the falling building using CBS video footage from a fixed camera aimed almost squarely at the north wall. A video detailing this measurement is available at YouTube/user/ae911truth. I calibrated my measurements with the heights of two points in the building provided in the NIST Building 7 report released in August 2008, so I know the picture scale is good. My measurements indicate that with sudden onset the building underwent approximately 2.5 seconds of literal freefall. This is equivalent to approximately 8 stories of fall in which the falling section of the building encountered zero resistance. For an additional 8 stories it encountered minimal resistance, during which it continued to accelerate, but at a rate less than freefall. Only beyond those 16 stories of drop did the falling section of the building interact significantly with the underlying structure and decelerate.

 

Freefall is an embarrassment to the official story, because freefall is impossible for a naturally collapsing building. In a natural collapse there would be an interaction between the falling and the stationary sections of the building. This interaction would cause crushing of both sections and slowing of the falling section. I have done measurements on several known demolitions, using similar software tools, and found that they typically fall with accelerations considerably less than freefall. Building 7 was not only demolished, it was demolished with tremendous overkill.

 

Freefall was so embarrassing to NIST that in the August 2008 draft release for public comment of their final report, the fact of freefall was denied and crudely covered up with the assertion that the collapse took 40% longer than "freefall time." They asserted that the actual collapse, down to the level of the 29th floor, took 5.4 seconds whereas freefall would have taken only 3.9 seconds. They arrived at their figures with only two data points: the time when the roofline reached the level of the 29th floor and an artificially early start time several seconds prior to the beginning of the obvious, sudden onset of freefall. They started their clock at a time between the collapses of the east and west penthouses when the building was not moving. They claimed they saw a change in a "single pixel" triggering what they asserted was the onset of collapse, but anyone who has worked with the actual videos will recognize that the edge artifacts in the image of the building make this an unrealistic standard. Furthermore, even if there was a tiny motion of the building at that point, it continued to stand essentially motionless for several more seconds before the dramatic onset of freefall collapse. The fact of a cover up in NIST's measurement is underlined in that the formula they point to as the basis for their calculation of "freefall time" is valid only under conditions of constant acceleration. They applied that equation to a situation that was far from uniform acceleration. Instead, the building remained essentially at rest for several seconds, then plunged into freefall, then slowed to a lesser acceleration. Their analysis demonstrates either gross incompetence or a crude attempt at a cover up. The scientists at NIST are clearly not incompetent, so the only reasonable conclusion is to interpret this as part of a cover up. (It is important to stand back occasionally and recognize the context of these events. This was not just a cover-up of an embarrassing fact. It was a cover-up of facts in the murder of nearly 3000 people and part of a justification for a war in which well over a million people have since been killed.)

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 14:06 | 3237162 chindit13
chindit13's picture

If you are going to stand by your "inside job" belief, then go ahead and decide if it was Cheney or Mossad or MI6 or CIA/NSA or Rockefeller/Rothschild or Bilderberger/Bohemian Grove and go try to take them out.  It seems sort of pointless to have all that anger and resentment, and be so absolutely certain of the guilt, and not do a damn thing about it.  That sounds kind of impotent.  I suppose, though, that those who have elevated the accused conspirators to such a level that the culprits could orchestrate everything from hijacked planes hitting precise floors to demolition charges to doing the entire operation with a strict kill quota (rather than having the two towers do a far more spectacular fall toward the Hudson and East Rivers respectively), well, they would seem to be people of whom folks should be afraid.  Other people know nobody on this planet is that skilled, and that the entire sad episode resulted from incompetence, bad luck, lack of imagination, lack of planning, and turf battles.

Good luck in you crusade.

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 14:58 | 3237263 psychobilly
psychobilly's picture

"If you are going to stand by your 'inside job' belief, then go ahead and decide if it was Cheney or Mossad or MI6 or CIA/NSA or Rockefeller/Rothschild or Bilderberger/Bohemian Grove and go try to take them out"

Your inability to respond to my posts in a rational manner is noted.    

"I suppose, though, that those who have elevated the accused conspirators to such a level that the culprits could orchestrate everything from hijacked planes hitting precise floors...Other people know nobody on this planet is that skilled..."

Nobody on the planet?  Skilled enough for a GPS guidance system?  The WAAS signal became available in 2000.  Precision is measured in inches.  Not to mention that demolitions are computer-controlled these days and the floors could have been blown in any order.  Check your premise.

"well, they would seem to be people of whom folks should be afraid..."

Governments killed some 270 million of their own citizens in the 20th century, not inlcuding wars.  Fear of government only makes sense, given the parasitic and psychopathic type of personalities that tend to be attracted to government "service."

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 14:46 | 3236749 psychobilly
psychobilly's picture

"including those who designed and engineered the structures..."

Here is what the chief structural engineer for WTC had to say, chindit:

"Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the fuel (from the airplane) would dump into the building. There would be a horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed, ... The building structure would still be there."

~John Skilling

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 22:45 | 3239111 Seer
Seer's picture

Apparently chindit missed the big fireballs coming from the buildings.  The overwhelming majority of the fuel was burnt in these fireballs.

Someone still needs to speak to the issue of the beams being neatly severed.

And, really, NIST put forth the "Pancake Theory?"  All their "effort" and they put up a pile of shit?  A lame explaination that would go over for those folks who don't have a clue about gravity...

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 22:41 | 3239086 Seer
Seer's picture

"At a certain point, people begin to conflate the values of a nation's citizens with those of its government."

Manhattan Project.

Still have to speak to the issues of the buildings collapsing (for extended periods of time) at free-fall speed.

Lots of work was logged in at WTC prior to 9/11.

I'll agree to disagree with those who don't have a clue about physics.

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 00:22 | 3235728 Pascal1967
Pascal1967's picture

To those who don't like drones ... fuck 'em!

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 00:22 | 3235730 Joe_in_Indiana
Joe_in_Indiana's picture

Who took these polls may I ask-need context.

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 00:33 | 3235763 sangell
sangell's picture

The Muhammed Public Opinion Institute which also found widespread support for deliberately targetting civilians if they were done to please Allah.

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 10:14 | 3236370 Renfield
Renfield's picture

'Twas Pew Research. I think they take polls for the Democrat party. Their name is in a corner of the graph.

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 00:30 | 3235738 Banksters
Banksters's picture

. It infuriates. It radicalises. It instils hatred.

 

Exactly.   If a loved one got torched by a foreign country there is a good chance I'd do something, to get revenge. That is precisely what the govt wants.  Endless terror = endless loss of freedoms- never to return I might add.

 


Tue, 02/12/2013 - 00:38 | 3235774 sangell
sangell's picture

Like Germany and Japan waged endless terrorist attacks on the US and UK after our manned bombers incinerated their cities. Funny, I don't remember that at all because it never happened. Perhaps that's the missing ingredient. Targeted attacks invite reprisal because the cost is low. Indiscriminate area bombardments dissuade retaliation because the cost is so high.

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 01:32 | 3235885 Diogenes
Diogenes's picture

First drone strikes = German V2 bombs on London in WW2. Supposed to "soften up" the British public and make them beg for the end of war. How did that work?

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 01:42 | 3235904 Curiously_Crazy
Curiously_Crazy's picture

The thing is - and I wish I still had the links for it - the British were the ones that initiated night raids on civillian populations. Hitler thought it incomprehensible and that the poms would stop. They didn't. So Germany did the same thing back after many attempts to stop the poms using such a tactic. I do see your analogy though in a weird reverse sort of way.

Cheers

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 06:57 | 3236103 andrewp111
andrewp111's picture

The British attacked German cities as a strategic diversion, so the German bombing of British airfields and radar stations would be reduced to survivable levels. It worked. 

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 07:20 | 3236113 Curiously_Crazy
Curiously_Crazy's picture

Of course it worked. They bombed the shit out of civilians at night. The Germans were attacking the british airfields and stations during the *day* and the pom pilots with the aircraft they had couldn't cope against superior planes and the losses were great. So they used the dirty tactic of bombing the shit out of the German civilians at night.This was unheard of, until then.

Disclaimer: My old man is a pom and my grandfather was in the RAF during the time in question. So I am by no means biased towards 'the other side' just saying what I've heard. Take it for what it's worth. I did (ie with a grain of salt) but after looking into it realised there is more to what the school books say. Remember, history is written by the winners

Wed, 02/13/2013 - 03:54 | 3239692 fajensen
fajensen's picture

This was unheard of, until then.

Not quite. The Germans were enthusiatic about using zeppeliners to bomb London during WW1, the british wanted do do the same, but did not have airships. That idea was stopped when tracers were invented (the aircraft did not have the range and capacity of zeppeliners, so decent bombers did not exist). In WW2 the warring countries had exponentially better technology so they could bomb and strafe civilians more efficiently.

http://www.firstworldwar.com/airwar/bombers_zeppelins.htm

 

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 02:01 | 3235927 Totentänzerlied
Totentänzerlied's picture

Their countries were already at war with the US. The key ingredient is the perception of powerlessness. Their soldiers were fighting US soldiers, alleviating their instinctive drive to retalliate via sublimation - redirecting that energy to righteous indignation, patriotism, nationalism, resolve.

"Targeted attacks invite reprisal because the cost is low. Indiscriminate area bombardments dissuade retaliation because the cost is so high."

Very interesting hypothesis.

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 00:48 | 3235799 john39
john39's picture

Don't be so sure that the people orchestrating all the hate are even American. They have no country... No real people... Evil binds them together, and they parasite off humanity.

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 00:28 | 3235745 reader2010
reader2010's picture

 

But, George Bush famously told the barbarians back in 1992 that the American Way of Life is not negotiable. Divide and Conquer, BitchEz!

 

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 22:48 | 3239129 Seer
Seer's picture

Wasn't it Dick Cheney who said this (more recently than 1992)?  Or, I suppose all the neo-cons read from the same playbook...

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 00:29 | 3235751 Curiously_Crazy
Curiously_Crazy's picture

So 62% approve. If the technology existed 20 years ago it would be much closer to 80%

Sorry to use a (modified) cliche but "thank fuck for small mercies".

The rest of the world has pretty much known the US's game for a *long* time. The people of the USA however never realised how much they were disliked as all they ever heard on the sheepavision was "USA IS #1" But at least now, ever so slowly the yank citizens themselves are finally waking up and realising how fucked up of a society they really do live in. For this I give those that do credit, because after several trips to various states some years back (Washington DC, Florida, Nevada, California, and Washington state) it became truly apparent as to how warped their entire media complex is. I'm well aware that every country shows propoganda in their media but USA takes the cake in so many ways on that front.

Cheers

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 00:36 | 3235772 MedTechEntrepreneur
MedTechEntrepreneur's picture

  im not crazy about the drone policy but it is hard to be sympathetic towards these villagers where the men cut the clits off the women, who engage in barbaric sharia law, murder or beat their wives to death in honor killings  

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 00:54 | 3235815 Curiously_Crazy
Curiously_Crazy's picture

It's also hard to be sympathetic with those who force circumcision on young boys, wipe people off their own lands, kill kids throwing rocks, and who believe that everyone who doesn't follow/born into their cult as cattle. Don't see many drones among those parts though.

Cheers

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 02:56 | 3235974 OldTrooper
OldTrooper's picture

The mid-east is a wonderful place, from one end to the other, isn't it?  My first tour there was 6 months in 1983 and I've yet to identify a single thing over there worth fighting, killing or dying for.  But then maybe everyone thinks their state is the end-all-be-all.  It's sad.  I just hope my 15 year-old son understands and steers clear.

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 04:00 | 3236014 Curiously_Crazy
Curiously_Crazy's picture

Thanks for the reply...  I've never been there myself, just seen all the usual videos like "real iranian people" etc but a mate of mine came back from a tour in Iraq in 2009 and still doesn't even want to talk about it even though it's been years. He's now on Antidepressants and Xanax and though given an honerable discharge can't find civillian work. This is someone who never even had to fire off a round (air traffic controller)

Am sure your kid will be fine; you've 'been there, done that' and he'll take your input  on board with more weight than any media outlet ever could.

Cheers

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 13:18 | 3237018 Boondocker
Boondocker's picture

amen.  i spent a few years of my childhood in the ME and went back as an adult.  oil is the only reason to get excited about the ME and we should do without it.

Wed, 02/13/2013 - 04:36 | 3239710 fajensen
fajensen's picture

There is always the Old Ones: Family, Race, Religion and Honour. Plenty of things. Every drone attack push the 'family'-,'race'- and 'honour'- buttons quite effective! As designed: GWOT needs a steady supply of terrorists to keep the "production line" humming!!

The catch is - When drones become commoditised, then the fun starts for real with Obama having set the precedence with his "El Presidente can kill whomever displeases his splendor, whereever and whenever". There is a lot of "El Presidentes" in the world, even the local biker gang have one. And, in 10 years time of technological evolution, even the local gangbangers will have enough meth-money to buy a couple of combat robots to "sort things out" in accordance with "international law". By then one can probably print the airframes directly from designs off the net, some under-employed techies provide the targeting hardware and the propulsion system, and ... off we go.

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 01:40 | 3235895 Joseph Jones
Joseph Jones's picture

Conversely, your wonderfully "civilized" western nation (USA), since Roe v. Wade, has systematially murdered only 50 million unborn.  In your sick perverted thinking you call this progress. You don't have to be sympathetic toward people to leave them alone and work out their own issues.  It wasn't that long ago that blacks were instantly hung for looking at a white woman the wrong way.  Oh, and Johnson's so-called "war on poverty" has worked out well, has it not?  75% of black children born out of wedlock.  3 of 5 black men in prison, many because of the war on drungs?  In TN cops have shot at each other fighting over who has authority to stop trucks carrying cash back after dropping off drugs for local distribution.  They allow the trucks in to spread their own neighborhoods with drugs.  Why?  Because when the stop the trucks on the way out with cash, guess who gets the cash?  The cops. 

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 01:47 | 3235901 Renfield
Renfield's picture

<<the men cut the clits off the women, who engage in barbaric sharia law, murder or beat their wives to death in honor killings>>

Could be wrong, but I have not heard that the drone strikes have anything whatsoever to do with these issues.

In fact, I seem to recall certain feminists & multi-culturalists discouraging the passing of "judgement" on such traditions that are enshrined in, um, "culture". Our enlightened post-modernist thinkers tend to have more to say on, oh, Madonna, and Lady Gaga, than on these practices. Mustn't be seen as Imperialist of course.

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 03:32 | 3235999 Vlad Tepid
Vlad Tepid's picture

I'm not sympathetic to them at all.  In fact, I hold them in such contempt that I will not expend a single thought or dime on their existence.  I guess you're very sympathetic to them, half of them, at least, since you have so much concern for their women.  I, on the other hand, do not give a fraction of a percent of a fuck about any of them.  With all your sympathy, can you please pay for my share of the taxes your war of sympathy goes to perpetuate?

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 00:39 | 3235775 goatmug
goatmug's picture

They hate us for our freedom...

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 00:46 | 3235788 ebworthen
ebworthen's picture

No one respects robot killing, not even us Americans.

Hard to win hearts and minds with robot killing machines.

All the good things our Men and Women do with boots on the ground to provide water, food, school supplies, and other infrastructure is blasphemed with these Terminator drones. 

Typical 21st century U.S.S.A. - send the real people off to die on the front lines without a full fighting force while you try to spackle the cracks with hegemonic technology - just like Wall Street and Washington waging war on the middle class with captured in the casino 401K's and IRA's while inducing inflation, devaluing the currency, paying shit % for savings, bailouts for the banksters, HFT algo robot trading run amok, and FED QE to the moon to ramp the meaningless markets.

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 00:45 | 3235793 sangell
sangell's picture

When I see a toyota pickup truck turned into a smoking pile of burnt metal in Yemen or a mudhouse in Waziristan reduced to rubble by a maverick missile I only regret the expense of killing savages with such an expensive weapon. They really aren't worth than kind of trouble. Better to just impose a seige on their territory and reduce their populations to their cultural level which is circa 7th century. Emargo modern technology, medicines and travel and just supply them with all the Korans they want.

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 00:49 | 3235796 IamtheREALmario
IamtheREALmario's picture

"Let's be intellectually honest": If the drone strikes are a recruitment tool for Al CIAda then the US governmental agenies conducting the drone strikes KNOW without a shadow of a doubt that the drone strikes help to strengthen the "so called" enemy by giving them anger and a just cause to fight back against America.

If the use Government agencies know the effect of drone strikes is to recruit more for Al CIAda and that many innocent people are killed (face it, guys posting internet blogs do not have a monopoly on brains and certainly have less complete information than the government agencies) then it MUST BE the intention of the agencies and not simply a random consequence to strengthen Al CIAda through the use of drones to kill innocent people. Without enemies, agencies such as the CIA serve no justifiable purpose. Therefore, as a matter of survival, the US agencies must fabricate or create enemies to justify their existence... pretty sad and psychotic is you ask me!

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 01:02 | 3235834 steelrules
steelrules's picture

"Anger is more useful than despair"

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 07:56 | 3236137 Curiously_Crazy
Curiously_Crazy's picture

Shit mate ya better change your avatar if that's the case ;)

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 02:27 | 3235957 Renfield
Renfield's picture

<<Without enemies, agencies such as the CIA serve no justifiable purpose>>

But dude, just imagine what the reduction of the Military Industrial Complex would do to GDP. It's not like there's much manufacturing or infrastructure work to replace it.

Good citizen-comrades are realistic about these things.

Tue, 02/12/2013 - 03:37 | 3236002 Vlad Tepid
Vlad Tepid's picture

GDP'd probable skyrocket if we weren't burdened with that damn MIC.  Instead of a 2,000 dollar toilet seat, there'd be toilet seats for ALL!

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!