US Drone Strikes May Break International Law: UN

reply to post by Common Sense says...

No offense, but posts like yours really blow my mind. Who are these "terrorists" that we're supposedly being protected against? As a member of ATS with access to mountains of information, how much research have you done into 9/11? I mean really done? Ever hear of "Operation Northwoods?" Look it up. Are you old enough to remember the massive deception of the "attack" in the Gulf of Tonkin? It's all in the NSA archives. Know anything about FDR's foreknowledge of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor? How about Waco, the USS Liberty or TWA 800? What about those Iraqi "weapons of mass destruction?"

You describe yourself as a "loyal citizen." Does this mean you don't question anything the government says or does? Do you really think the government is above lying or deceiving the public? (both Republican AND Democrat.) Ever hear the phrase, "dissent is the highest form of patriotism?"

It simply amazes me when people refuse to think for themselves.

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
reply to post by Common Sense says...

 

No offense, but posts like yours really blow my mind. Who are these "terrorists" that we're supposedly being protected against? As a member of ATS with access to mountains of information, how much research have you done into 9/11? I mean really done? Ever hear of "Operation Northwoods?" Look it up. Are you old enough to remember the massive deception of the "attack" in the Gulf of Tonkin? It's all in the NSA archives. Know anything about FDR's foreknowledge of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor? How about Waco, the USS Liberty or TWA 800? What about those Iraqi "weapons of mass destruction?"

You describe yourself as a "loyal citizen." Does this mean you don't question anything the government says or does? Do you really think the government is above lying or deceiving the public? (both Republican AND Democrat.) Ever hear the phrase, "dissent is the highest form of patriotism?"

It simply amazes me when people refuse to think for themselves.

Hey man.....don't get your panties in a wad. By expressing my opinion I am thinking for myself, right? Feel free to disagree with my post, that is what makes America a wonderful place to live.
I feel very confident in my knowledge of American history so thanks anyway for the "brief lesson". Just because I disagree with you I am some teenager with no knowledge of American history and I just follow what the Government tells me? No, I don't think so.

I am a middle aged man with a college degree and yes, I have taken many history classes in my day. Have a great day!

Ok-so it breaks international law? So what. Nobody is going to do anything about it. If the US is the worlds police then who police's the police? The UN?????

Whatever.

Let me see if I have this straight. An airstrike by drones firing Hellfire missiles is against international law, but an airstrike by say an F-16 firing Maverick missiles isn't? Get real. The Predators are too effective, so the Taliban whines to the UN. In my opinion we should stop all airstrikes against the Taliban. We should target the UN instead. I'm sure that New York can find something to do with that piece of real estate after it is reduced to a smoking crater.

Let me ask this question. How many people have died because the UN has played both sides of a dispute against each other for political gains and money? How many UN programs actually work because the funding for them doesn't end up in the pockets of the UN representatives. I used to be a big supporter of UNICEF, until I found out where the money really goes.

reply to post by AllSeeingI


This is why US may lose. They don't lose the actual war. But they lose the media war.

Thank you OP for this thread. It is very thought provoking indeed.

I don't know if I am more horrified over the taking of innocent lives via these impersonal drones or the callous disregard for human life shown by some of the posters here who think its a great thing.

It is very typical unfortunately that many Americans believe that the values they hold so dearly apply only to themselves and people in the rest of the world be damned.

It is obvious that the people being targeted are only "suspects" and yet it is OK to kill them outright. The people in Guantanamo were only "suspects" but torturing them was OK. The civilians getting killed were not even suspects but it is OK to kill them just because they are there.

Human rights are universal; not just American. People everywhere deserve the same. Its absolutely wonderful how the powerful (that's Americans and Brits at the moment) can feel so omnipotent and above reproach.

And you wonder why people hate you? I applaud those of you who remain conscientious against the odds and the rants of your neighbours. I wish you great success in trying to wake these people up to their ignorance.

As far as I am concerned the UN can kiss our ass. Let them try to stop us or arrest one of our leaders for war crimes. They are going to write a check their butts cannot cash. I say we pull out of the UN before we lose our freedoms to those global warming, no meat eating lunatics.

Originally posted by AllSeeingI

Originally posted by RoofMonkey
Then ponder this for comparison...

Dresden

Are you trying to justify killing by citing more killing?!

I think both situations are an abomination to humankind.

If a man enters my house and kills my family, I will do my best to kill that man,

There. Killing is justified by "more" killing.

Doesn't mean that the same lesson applies to this war - but killing can sometimes be the only answer - or a life of hell for yourself.

I can not even think of a word to describe the U.S situation in the world. I guess freedom fighter is the best I can do...

Originally posted by Common Sense says...
I feel very confident in my knowledge of American history so thanks anyway for the "brief lesson". Just because I disagree with you I am some teenager with no knowledge of American history and I just follow what the Government tells me? No, I don't think so.

I am a middle aged man with a college degree and yes, I have taken many history classes in my day. Have a great day!

You failed to answer a single one of my questions except to state that you've taken American history classes and therefore feel confident of your knowledge.

Did those history classes teach you that FDR had absolute foreknowledge weeks, even months in advance -- time, date and location -- of the attack on Pearl Harbor? Did they teach you that Gulf of Tonkin never happened? Did they teach you JFK was murdered by the CIA, as E. Howard Hunt confessed to his son on his death bed last year? (and that Jim Marrs wrote about in "Crossfire" decades earlier.) Did they teach you about Operation Northwoods that was approved in 1962 by every member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff? Did they teach you that "al-Qaeda" and the Taliban were created by the CIA and that "al-Qaeda" is slang for "the anus" or "toilet" in Arabic? Is that what you'd name your fearsome global terror network?

You claim to be knowledgeable, but your post suggests something entirely different. You'll never discover real truth in history classes or the corporate mass media.

reply to post by AllSeeingI



Hmm but its ok for the Terrorists to wear stolen Uniforms etc.?

Terrorism is "war" but cheating.

While I agree we do need to take the higher road here, lets not have any illusions about what the other side is doing and in light of that balance our decisions.

Yawn, so now killing the enemy without giving him a chance to kill you is now somehow against international law?? WTF.

Doesn't the UN have something better to do......like prosecute it's own peacekeepers for rape????

I hope this leads to a reolution to stop this. Then again, the us can just veto the decision anyways, so there is really no way to stop it.

I find it funny that some of the same people who don't want world governance and say they actively defend U.S. sovereign are upset that we violated "international law." Frankly U.S. drones kill less people than carpet bombings and alternative forms of surgical strikes. So who gives a damn what the U.N. thinks? The U.S. is more ethical than the U.N. and much smarter than the U.N....these are people (the U.N.) who hand out food and money in third world countries and wonder why they get robbed and people die as a result. Go start giving out 20s on a U.S. or U.K. street corner and you're going to get robbed, many members of the U.N. actively slaughter their own people, rape women and children, etc... What has the U.N. done for Darfur? What did the U.N. do for Iraq after the first Gulf War? Where was the U.N. when Afghanistan was becoming a hornets nest of people who were abusing women, killing opponents, and paying homage to real terrorists? I'm sick of people criticizing all of America's actions as though there aren't nations that do much much much worse things in the world (hell including Israel.) The U.N. can suck a big one.

[edit on 28-10-2009 by yellowcard]

Originally posted by JIMC5499
Let me see if I have this straight. An airstrike by drones firing Hellfire missiles is against international law, but an airstrike by say an F-16 firing Maverick missiles isn't? Get real.

No.

An airstrike by an F-16 firing Maverick missiles, where someone is suspected, or may actually have done something without giving that person chance to surrender and stand trial for their crime - the same as is happening with the Predators and Reapers - probably IS against international law, because it could be classed as indiscriminate killing of the civilian populace (unless anyone is naive enough to think a hellfire, maverick or laser guided smart bomb only ever kills the particular person its aimed at) - muder, or state sponsored execution.

This is the really hands down dirty side of this whole mess. The bit that people don't want to confront or even try to understand - Using a drone to kill people is - in actuality - no better than planting an IED or being a suicide bomber. Its indiscriminate. It doesn't take into account civilians and innocents nearby who may be in harms way. It offers no recourse for negotiation, or the possibility of resolution by other means.

It doesn't give people a chance to surrender.

There is no evidence presented for a conviction punishable by death to an independant party.

No trial whatsoever.

Button, missile, boom, smouldering hole.

Decision made to kill by a third party - possibly in another country - processed through a command structure and the act carried out remotely by a robotic proxy.

Now people will throw up all kinds of crap , and the haters will crawl out with stuff like "they deserve it - they're all guilty" and, people who are more hopeful will say "there will be intelligence about the people who are killed" and the sycophant flag wavers will throw up their arms in mock astonishment and say "but we're on the right and just side of this "war" so let me put it this way - would you want the cops to start indiscriminately blowing holes in your neighbourhood to get rid of suspected murderers and violent criminals?

I realise some people probably would. Doesn't make it right.

It should make people think. I realise it probably won't.

If we had enough troops over there that McChrystal says we need, then maybe we wouldn't have to use the drones. Why endanger our men when they are undermanned? This is much safer and saves lives of our countrymen. (And yes, I mean "men" in general terms that include the women too.)

A drone can hit one "designated" house whereas other missions with pilots will take out streets. Drones are much better in my opinion.

Our Generals and other armed forces personnel would never sit in their homes knowingly putting their families in danger. That's just common sense and fighting a war on an honor basis. Hitting one house vs the whole street is more honorable than that.

Why hasn't the UN said or done anything about Palestinians factions bombing purely civillian areas in Israel? All I seem to hear from them is about Israel attacking back on them. Hamas and other factions constantly attack innocent civilians where no known military personnel are. Why isn't that considered a war crime? Oh yes, the Goldstone Report. Yeah, well, I did read where Hamas said they couldn't aim any better than what they were doing 'cause their missiles are just too clumsy and old.

The UN has other places where their time could be better spent.

[edit on 10/29/2009 by willow1d] Yikes!!! Just brain dead sometimes!!

[edit on 10/29/2009 by willow1d]

So this makes Obama a war criminal then.

Interesting how it used to be "Attacks sanctioned by the president", and now it's just "Attacks made by the US".

The liberal media just can't stop defending him, either by word or deed.

The way you people attack the UN kinds of makes me worried, they are the United Nation meaning representative from every country including the US, UK and all others as to the inside job can't say much, if any wrong is taking place in the UN then their should be a reform, when countrys are at war in senseles conflit i like to think myself as part of a pace seeking United Nations.

As to the drone attacks by US it does not make much of a difference, being that people will still get kill but no pilot risk their life during war but believe every action should be accounted for either way.

Originally posted by Retseh
So this makes Obama a war criminal then.

Well, if you want to go in that direction don't forget Bush Snr, Clinton and Bush Jnr, because this hasn't just been happening since January 2009

Bush Snr and Clinton fired off the occasional cruise missile at camps where they believed "hostiles" to be located.