• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Drone strikes counterproductive, says secret CIA report

Hard Truth said:
Whether they are unproductive depends on what the goals are. If the goal is maintaining an endless supply of enemies in order to justify endless war, huge defense and intelligence expenditures, keeping defense and intelligence contractors wealthy and continuing the constant erosion of our civil liberties, drones and related tactics are a big success. Not to be cynical or anything.
Click to expand...

Yes, the Mission Was Accomplished.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Absolutely not. Dont you know America needs to be in a endless war?
Click to expand...

I certainly don't know that. If I look back on my life I would say Americans were happiest during the period between the Korean and Vietnam wars - a time of peace.
 
When did the CIA get common sense? I wonder if this is them waging a PR campaign or something...
 
Papa bull said:
I was actually congratulating you two on your non-partisan criticism of Obama. It's another one of those mistakes that Obama is making that he doesn't seem interested in fixing and I'm glad that it's not just conservatives that see it and criticize him for it.

But I probably should also mention that nothing in the article actually supports the assertion that drone strikes ARE counterproductive. It merely CONTENDS that they MIGHT be and I think it's a weak contention. In order to make the case, there would have to be proof that droning creates more high ranking terrorists than it kills - or that the numbers of terrorist recruits gained JUST because high ranking terrorists get whacked are so high that the benefit to the terrorist groups is so great that it offsets the losses of high ranking officials whacked. Of course the article didn't come close to proving that. But I still applaud you and Hard Truth for your criticism of Obama's drone campaign. I'd have thought you two were too partisan to ever criticize "The Messiah" but I'm glad to see I'm wrong. :)
Click to expand...

The left where the first critics of the drone campaign, but what evs...

Actually the reason it raises terrorist is from killing innocents, not terrorists. When we drone strike peoples grandmas and children it makes people in the region flock to terrorists groups.
 
CanadaJohn said:
Drones were developed as a tool of war and first used in the field under President Bush, but only in the theater of war. President Obama and his administration decided to use the drone program for state sponsored assassinations outside of war zones and in sovereign countries with or without those countries' approval. To deny that is partisanship and pointless.
Click to expand...
Bush struck Pakistan among other country's outside the theatre of war.
 
b_dubz said:
The left where the first critics of the drone campaign, but what evs...
Click to expand...

The left has been remarkably silent about Obama's drone campaign. Even in this thread, the lefties only seem to want to talk about Bush. Now go figure, huh?

Actually the reason it raises terrorist is from killing innocents, not terrorists. When we drone strike peoples grandmas and children it makes people in the region flock to terrorists groups.
Click to expand...

Well, maybe you should be drumming up more outrage against Obama, then.
 
BmanMcfly said:
It would also help if the left didn't become a group of hypocrites... hating on bush for everything he was doing, and then using bush's actions as justification for more of the same when Obama came on the scene.

(Not saying the right are not equally hypocrites for different reasons)
Click to expand...
Ummmm how did the left do this? They condemn bush unjust for war, and condemn Obama for the same unjust war.
 
Amadeus said:
Drone bombing Muslims gives people the impression that he's fighting the War on Terror (still popular among centrists and the right-wing) without sacrificing troops. Seems like a sad political calculation more than anything...
Click to expand...
The war on terror was a sad political calculation as was the war on "communism" or drugs...
 
Papa bull said:
Seems the only defense Obamaphiles have is "but but but Bush". Between that and "you're racist" they have all bases covered.
Click to expand...
Most people condemn allot of what Obama does, we just don't for common sense policy like expanding healthcare.

If it weren't for radical conservatives it would be single payer and cheaper still for everybody.
 
fmw said:
I certainly don't know that. If I look back on my life I would say Americans were happiest during the period between the Korean and Vietnam wars - a time of peace.
Click to expand...
What? The two years between 53 and 55?

And seeing as Jim crow laws still existed then, I find that a highly dubious comment...
 
Papa bull said:
The left has been remarkably silent about Obama's drone campaign. Even in this thread, the lefties only seem to want to talk about Bush. Now go figure, huh?



Well, maybe you should be drumming up more outrage against Obama, then.
Click to expand...
In media the left STARTED complaining about the drones, not the right.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Read more @: Drone strikes counterproductive, says secret CIA report

Wait! Say it aint so? Drone strikes actually are counterproductive and lead to more terrorists and terrorist attacks? [/FONT][/COLOR]
Click to expand...



The CIA study observes that the US-led coalition in Afghanistan made "a sustained effort since 2001 to target Taliban leaders", but "Afghan government corruption and lack of unity, insufficient strength of Afghan and NATO security forces, and the country's endemic lawlessness have constrained the effectiveness of these counter-insurgency elements".

"Senior Taliban leaders' use of sanctuary in Pakistan has also complicated the HVT effort," the CIA says. "Moreover, the Taliban has a high overall ability to replace lost leaders, a centralised but flexible command and control overlaid with egalitarian Pashtun structures, and good succession planning and bench strength, especially at the middle levels."
Click to expand...


Fifteen years of continuous warfare, hundreds of thousands of lives claimed and they are NOW beginning to think maybe they have not been very effective?

I wonder too, if the deliberate failure to share this kind of intelligence with allies, "NoForm", has help and abetted the "lack of unity" and/or whether the lives of allied troops have not been jeopardized by not sharing it.

You keep secrets from your enemy, not your friends. I will never again support Canadian support for a US military operation.
 
b_dubz said:
What? The two years between 53 and 55?

And seeing as Jim crow laws still existed then, I find that a highly dubious comment...
Click to expand...

No, the decade between 53 and 63. Obviously you have no personal experience with that time period so I'll be on my way.
 
fmw said:
No, the decade between 53 and 63. Obviously you have no personal experience with that time period so I'll be on my way.
Click to expand...
You said the time in between Korea and nam. Korea ended in 53 and nam started in 55.

Obviously you know nothing of history.

Love how your ignoring the fact that a large segment of america was unequal, and thus quite unhappy during that time...
 
b_dubz said:
Bush struck Pakistan among other country's outside the theatre of war.
Click to expand...

As noted above, the areas of Pakistan targeted were with the consent of Pakistan and were to target Taliban and Al Qaeda who were fleeing Afghanistan. It was part of the war effort and thus within the theatre of war.
 
CanadaJohn said:
As noted above, the areas of Pakistan targeted were with the consent of Pakistan and were to target Taliban and Al Qaeda who were fleeing Afghanistan. It was part of the war effort and thus within the theatre of war.
Click to expand...
What about the bush strikes in Yemen that killed us citizens?

They got permission from Pakistani intelligence, not government. Big diff. Furthermore they have not released the specifications of the deal, so we have no idea if it was violated.
 
b_dubz said:
What about the bush strikes in Yemen that killed us citizens?

They got permission from Pakistani intelligence, not government. Big diff. Furthermore they have not released the specifications of the deal, so we have no idea if it was violated.
Click to expand...

One attack, in 2002, with the approval and cooperation of the Yemeni government, to take out the mastermind of the attack on the USS Cole that killed 17 Americans. And nothing after that until 2009 under Obama.

The Pakistanis only started to object after civilians were killed and the Bush administration pulled back on the attacks when Pakistan started to object.
 
b_dubz said:
You said the time in between Korea and nam. Korea ended in 53 and nam started in 55.

Obviously you know nothing of history.

Love how your ignoring the fact that a large segment of america was unequal, and thus quite unhappy during that time...
Click to expand...

I was talking about the US involvement in Vietnam. In 1955 Americans had never heard of the place. Obviously you know nothing about history.
 
I've been saying for some time now that pretty much nobody is happy when you drop bombs in their country, regardless of your stated reason for doing so.
 
CanadaJohn said:
One attack, in 2002, with the approval and cooperation of the Yemeni government, to take out the mastermind of the attack on the USS Cole that killed 17 Americans. And nothing after that until 2009 under Obama.

The Pakistanis only started to object after civilians were killed and the Bush administration pulled back on the attacks when Pakistan started to object.
Click to expand...

You mean the Pakistanis only started to vehemently object. They objected before, and where not heard. Furthermore that does not excuse striking a deal with a intelligence agency instead of the government. That's akin to the CIA making a deal to bomb Americans at home with no government approval.

Also he actually ramped up the targeted attack programs in Pakistan leading up until Obamas election, regardless of civilian casualties. That's simply untrue that he did not.

Bush also briefly put troops on the ground in somalia and Pakistan, and these accounts do not include anything still classified or that we did not find out through news sources/other governments.

In somalia bush used ac130 gunships, cruise missiles from boats,t and attack helicopters to kill a unknown amount of people including civilians. They also hired war lords to capture and sell people back to them, which actually strengthen AQ in that region.

According to the un the attack in Yemen was extrajudicial and illegal. we ignored them of course, and they did nothing. A year later rumsfeld issued the secret al quadea network executive order, which basically claimed the world as a battle zone for anti al quadea forces. This is obviously bs and a huge stretch of the imagination on their part. The world was a war zone in the eyes of the bush administration. So I guess your right, but its obvious baloney...

Again none of this includes anything still classified, and allot of this we know from foreign governments or was pieced together by news agency's. It would be silly not to assume their are more strikes that went undocumented and unreleased.
 
fmw said:
I was talking about the US involvement in Vietnam. In 1955 Americans had never heard of the place. Obviously you know nothing about history.
Click to expand...
Hilarious.

Beginning in 1950, American military advisors arrived in what was then French Indochina.[38][A 3] U.S. involvement escalated in the early 1960s, with troop levels tripling in 1961 and again in 1962.
Click to expand...

We had troops their in 1950... I thought it was 55, when the military conflict formally started (technically we haven't declared war since ww2)

And who does not know about history?
 
b_dubz said:
In media the left STARTED complaining about the drones, not the right.
Click to expand...

Bullcrap. The left STARTED complaining about Bush and kept complaining until Obama took office, at which point, there were no more complaints about anything the president was doing, including drone strokes, Gitmo, Iraq, new wars, etc. etc. Hypocrisy just reeks from every pore of the left.
 
Papa bull said:
Bullcrap. The left STARTED complaining about Bush and kept complaining until Obama took office, at which point, there were no more complaints about anything the president was doing, including drone strokes, Gitmo, Iraq, new wars, etc. etc. Hypocrisy just reeks from every pore of the left.
Click to expand...
Your just ignorant to the facts. The left continued complaining about all those things and more. (Like many broken campaign promises, single payer, pardoning those unfairly punished in the drug war, and many many other things...)

Maybe they didn't do this on TV, but everyone on tv in the "left" is really a centrist or even right leaning now a days. In print they never stopped complaining... Really both the left and right on TV are corporatist shills. It just so happens the corporations like the right more because of war, taxes, and deregulation, although the left has done all these things as well, just not quite as much...
 
b_dubz said:
Your just ignorant to the facts. The left continued complaining about all those things and more. (Like many broken campaign promises, single payer, pardoning those unfairly punished in the drug war, and many many other things...)

Maybe they didn't do this on TV, but everyone on tv in the "left" is really a centrist or even right leaning now a days. In print they never stopped complaining... Really both the left and right on TV are corporatist shills. It just so happens the corporations like the right more because of war, taxes, and deregulation, although the left has done all these things as well, just not quite as much...
Click to expand...

If the left has been complaining about Obama, they've done it in the hushed whispers behind closed doors in soundproof rooms where no one else could hear them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom