Tag Archive: Drone attacks in Pakistan


Who Exactly Is Doing The Dying From Obama’s Drone Strikes?




The United States has killed more than 3,000 people in Pakistan with drone strikes. Breaking down who died and when into a clear and useful way can be tricky. Pitch Interactive, which has worked with Popular Science in the past, and its latest on drone casualties provides a straightforward look at a relatively murky war. At least, as clear a portrait as one can get from a contested area with biased witnesses, reporters, and governments all trying to shape the debate.


By email, I asked Wesley Grubbs of Pitch Interactive about the data.

Popular Science: Victims are categorized as children, civilians, “high-profile,” and “other.” Did you consider breaking up the “other,” and if so, was that a problem of unclear information? Or was it something else, like wanting to avoid assuming a clear answer when the data isn’t so much unclear as politically contested?

Grubbs:The “Other” category is really a very grey zone. The Obama administration would call these people “military combatants” because they are of-age males. However, many people in this category are actually civilians. It’s just that many of the bodies are beyond recognition or there are conflicting reports on the ground about who they are. It’s never clear exactly who they are or what threat they pose. The high-profile targets, however, are the people who [we] know have direct affiliations with the Taliban or Al Qaeda. However, say a military combatant’s house was hit and his neighbor’s house was also hit in the strike, the neighbor would be automatically termed as a military combatant if he was male. Because of this, we did not want to call these people military combatant and there is not enough data to break these men out further.”




When it comes to national security, the frightening truth is that we have to trust our public officials.



  Which is exactly the crisis we the people face today . At exactly the period when we most need to be able to have faith in the authorities we find ourselves at a place that precludes granting the government that needed  trust . 





” Right now, the United States and the larger international community is caught in a difficult debate over the use of drones against enemy combatants. Domestically, there is an odd confluence of views. The Obama administration’s policy on drones has been congenial to the conservatives, who oppose him on domestic issues; but his liberal allies, like the American Civil Liberties Union, are dismayed by what they perceive as his administration’s overuse of drones in Pakistan from 2004 to 2012. Has the United States pushed its drone attacks too far or not far enough? Have too many potential targets escaped attack because of an undue fear of excessive “incidental” or collateral damage to the lives and property of innocent non-combatants? “

Obama’s ‘Soft Power’ Approach Has Visibly Changed


7th November: a strike at night in a village 40km from Sana’a. Alleged al Qaeda leader Adnam al Qathi and his bodyguards Rablee Lahib and Radwan al Hashidi were killed. A child and two others are also reported injured. Drones had been seen over the area for three days. #drone #drones #unmanned #yemen (at Beyt al-Ahmar, Yemen)



 ” Heading into his second term as President, Obama’s stance on a diplomatic “soft approach” seems to have shifted. Although he still advocates for diplomacy, sanctions, and other non military measures as ways of addressing terrorist threats, his use of drone strikes indicates a much harder approach to the war on terror. According to Slate.com, 284 drone strikes have been launched in Pakistan since Obama took office.

New America Foundation report estimates that those drone strikes have killed between 1618-2769 terrorists. It also estimates that between 153-192 civilians have been killed as a result of the drone strikes. Earlier this year, a Pew Research Poll showed that 62 percent of Americans approve of drone attacks in Pakistan. ”


  With the dems it’s all about high-visibility , low risk national security . Bill Clinton had his cruise missiles and now we have Mr Drone Strike himself . They always seem to opt for these zero risk to American lives ventures as their way of demonstrating their ” national security ” muscle irregardless of the imprecise nature of their methods . 

While the ” watch lap dogs ” of the media would crucify a republican administration over civilian/collateral deaths the party of the left is forever praised on their “judicious” use of American arms and troops . 

  Check out Dronestagram for all the latest news on ” death by joy stick ” strikes by the government . See also 

COVERT DRONE WAR at The Bureau of Investigative Journalism