Campaign for the Accountability of American Bases

Tomgram: William Astore, Predatory Dreams

TomDispatch.com – By William Astore – March 24, 2013

Just who is doing the killing? That was the question that came up when the U.S. and sometime ally Pakistan got into a war of words over who was responsible for air strikes that killed up to nine people — including two purported al-Qaeda senior commanders — in Pakistan’s restive tribal belt early last month. While the strikes were reported as typical American assassinations by drone, three American officials assured the New York Times that they were likely “carried out by the Pakistani military and falsely attributed to the CIA to avoid criticism from the Pakistani public.”

The Pakistanis denied that the strikes were theirs and the story created a minor stir without ever being resolved in the media. Nonetheless, when it comes to Washington’s drone wars, this little tiff, with its associated deaths, fits a longstanding pattern of lies, half-truths, and shadowy, hard-to-attribute killings. In the early days of the CIA’s drone war in Pakistan, when that country was run by military strongman Pervez Musharraf, for example, the general provided cover, claiming his armed forces were actually responsible for the CIA’s robotic air war. “We thought it would be less damaging if we said we did it rather than the U.S.,” one of his aides subsequently told London’s Sunday Times. Only later did the Pakistanis admit the truth.

On the Arabian peninsula, the same pattern emerged. After a 2009 U.S. air strike killed 12 civilians, the Yemeni government took responsibility for the carnage. “We’ll continue saying the bombs are ours, not yours,” then-President Ali Abdullah Saleh told then-U.S. Central Command chief General David Petraeus, according to a classified document leaked by the anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks. …

Read on: www.tomdispatch.com/post/175665/tomgram%3A_william_astore%2C_predatory_dreams/

---

Drone base in Niger gives U.S. a strategic foothold in West Africa

The Washington Post: National Security – By Craig Whitlock – March 22, 2013

NIAMEY, Niger — The newest outpost in the U.S. government’s empire of drone bases sits behind a razor-wire-topped wall outside this West African capital, blasted by 110-degree heat and the occasional sandstorm blowing from the Sahara.

The U.S. Air Force began flying a handful of unarmed Predator drones from here last month. The gray, mosquito-shaped aircraft emerge sporadically from a borrowed hangar and soar north in search of al-Qaeda fighters and guerrillas from other groups hiding in the region’s untamed deserts and hills.

The harsh terrain of North and West Africa is rapidly emerging as yet another front in the United States’ long-running war against terrorist networks, a conflict that has fueled a revolution in drone warfare.

Since taking office in 2009, President Obama has relied heavily on drones for operations, both declared and covert, in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, Libya and Somalia. U.S. drones also fly from allied bases in Turkey, Italy, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and the Philippines. …

: www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/drone-base-in-niger-gives-us-a-strategic-foothold-in-west-africa/2013/03/21/700ee8d0-9170-11e2-9c4d-798c073d7ec8_story.html

---

Drones killing innocent Pakistanis, U.N. official says

CNN – By Ben Brumfield and Mark Morgenstein – March 15, 2013

Farmers are on their way to tend their crops when a missile slams into their midst, thrusting shrapnel in all directions.

A CIA drone, flying so high that the farmers can’t see it, has killed most of them. None of them were militants.

Such attacks by U.S. drones are common, the United Nations’ special rapporteur on counterterrorism and human rights said Friday in a statement on strikes in Pakistan’s tribal region of North Waziristan.

The rapporteur, Ben Emmerson, told CNN the actions are of dubious international legality, despite the United States’ assertions.

“I’m not aware of any state in the world that currently shares the United States’ expansive legal perspective that it is engaged in a global war — that is to say a non-international armed conflict with al Qaeda and any group associated with al Qaeda, wherever they are to be found, that would therefore lawfully entitle the United States to take action involving targeted killing wherever an individual is found,” Emmerson said. …

Read on: http://edition.cnn.com/2013/03/15/world/asia/u-n-drone-objections/index.html

---

Bush Detained Alleged Terrorists Without Due Process – Obama Is Killing Them With Drones

TruthOut – By Stephen Rohde – March 13, 2013

President Obama’s nomination of John Brennan to head the CIA succeeded despite questions about the administration’s lethal drone program. There are growing bipartisan Congressional demands for Obama to publicly release all the legal memos justifying targeted killings of suspected terrorists, including Americans and noncitizens.

During a recent hearing on drones, Bob Goodlatte (R-Virginia), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, insisted that the “American people deserve to know and understand the legal basis under which the Obama administration believes it can kill US citizens, and under what circumstances.” The committee’s ranking member, Democrat John Conyers of Michigan, urged that it is not clear that “Congress intended to sanction lethal force against a loosely defined enemy in an indefinite conflict with no borders or discernible end date.”

Obama’s legal justification for targeted drone killings of Americans and noncitizens is one of the most important national security questions facing our country. …

Read on: www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/15086-bush-detained-terrorists-without

---

Covert Drone Warfare, By the Numbers

TruthOut – By John Light (Moyers & Company) – March 13, 2013

Unmanned drones have been used to kill thousands of suspected militants — and civilians — and not just in open war zones like Afghanistan, Libya and Iraq…

Click here for graphs of these drone-related deaths: www.truth-out.org/news/item/15091-covert-drone-warfare-by-the-numbers

---

What Rand Paul & Ted Cruz Exposed About the Drone Strikes

Huffington Post – By Robert Naiman – March 7, 2013

If you’re concerned about the lack of transparency and accountability of the policy of drone strikes in Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia, you have to concede that Senators Rand Paul and Ted Cruz have done us a great service: Cruz with his questioning of Attorney General Holder in the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Paul with his widely-reported filibuster on the Senate floor.

Unfortunately, some Democrats don’t want to acknowledge this contribution. That’s a shame.

It’s a fact of life in Washington that people who are good on some issues that you care about are bad on other ones. You can see this all the time without leaving your own party. Just this past week, Ron Wyden, key champion on transparency and accountability of the drone strike policy, badly hurt opponents of war with Iran by becoming an original co-sponsor of the AIPAC/Lindsey Graham “backdoor to war” resolution that tries to “pre-approve” participation in an Israeli attack on Iran, saying that if Israel attacks Iran, the U.S. should support Israel militarily and diplomatically.

When a political figure is in the opposing party, that almost certainly means that they’re bad on a lot of issues that you care about. But if you dismiss them when they’re good on something else, then you’re dismissing all the people who care about that issue, including the people in your own party who care about that issue.

Rand Paul and Ted Cruz showed how challenging the administration’s lack of transparency on targeting Americans with drone strikes inexorably leads to challenging the administration’s lack of transparency on targeting non-Americans with drone strikes. …

Read on: www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/what-rand-paul-ted-cruz-e_b_2828517.html

---

Troops use humor to disparage new medal

Stars and Stripes – By Jennifer Hlad – February 15, 2013

The Distinguished Warfare Medal, which could go to servicemembers who never set foot in a combat zone, but launch drone strikes or cyberattacks that kill or disable an enemy.

The Distinguished Warfare Medal was established to acknowledge the most modern technology, but servicemembers and veterans are responding to the award’s creation in a decidedly old-school way: Mocking it mercilessly.

Along with an avalanche of Whiskey Tango Foxtrots and a tsunami of outrage, troops are circulating a photo of a gold-plated X-Box controller and the skull-emblazoned “Call of Duty” medal as “prototypes” of the new award, which honors servicemembers like drone pilots and computer hackers who impact combat operations from afar. The medal is being called the Chairborne Medal, the Distant Warfare Medal and the Purple Buttocks, among other names. …

So while the first servicemember to earn the medal will need to be an exceptional drone pilot or cyber whiz, he or she may also need a thick skin to wear it in public.

Read in full: www.stripes.com/blogs/stripes-central/stripes-central-1.8040/troops-use-humor-to-disparage-new-medal-1.208114

One of the comments at the end of the article:
“You WANT the joystick? You can’t handle the joystick!”

---

Talk Nation Radio: Nick Turse: Kill Everything That Moves

Nick Turse discusses his new book, Kill Everything That Moves, and new evidence of the crimes that constituted the war on Vietnam.

Total run time: 29:00

Host: David Swanson.
Producer: David Swanson.
Music by Duke Ellington.

From: http://davidswanson.org/talknationradio

---

US military may take over part of CIA drone war

thenews.com – February 27, 2013

President Barack Obama’s administration is looking at easing the secrecy around the drone war against Al-Qaeda by shifting control for some air strikes from the CIA to the US military, officials say.

But the move would likely not apply to drone attacks in Pakistan, where most of the bombing raids take place. And even if the policy change is carried out, Obama has no intention of abandoning a tactic that his advisers say has decimated the Al-Qaeda network.

Faced with growing calls in Congress for more oversight around the drone war, the administration is weighing the change partly to allay concerns from lawmakers and to put the air campaign on a more permanent legal footing, analysts said.

“There is serious consideration being given to moving some of these activities to” military control, a US official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told AFP. The administration believes the strikes are legal and effective but the change is “about transparency and the perceived legitimacy of the operations,” the official said.

If the military were to take charge of some drone raids, that would subject the operations to more public scrutiny as the armed forces must operate under stricter legal guidelines and answer inquiries at public hearings in Congress. Until now, the “targeted killings” with armed drones in Pakistan, Yemen or Somalia have been carried out under the CIA’s authority as officially designated “covert” attacks, which allow officials to deny their existence.

But the drone strikes have become an open secret, and lawmakers and rights advocates have demanded the administration discuss the open-ended campaign publicly. …

Read on: www.thenews.com.pk/article-89935-US-military-may-take-over-part-of-CIA-drone-war,-but-for-Pak-no-change

---

House Judiciary Cmte. Looks for Drone-Kill Memos

C-SPAN – February 27, 2103

The House Judiciary Committee looks at target killings of American citizens by unmanned drones. The hearing, chaired by Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA), examines the Obama administration’s drone policy and guarantees of due process on the battlefield for U.S. citizens.

The Judiciary Committee has requested access to Justice Department documents justifying targeted killings which were released to House and Senate Intelligence Committees.

In background information on the hearing, Chairman Goodlatte said, “oversight of the Department of Justice is a key function of the House Committee on the Judiciary, as is the protection of the constitutional rights of U.S. citizens.”

From: www.c-span.org/Events/House-Judiciary-Cmte-Looks-for-Drone-Kill-Memos/10737438392/

---

What’s in the Secret Drone Memos

National Journal – By Michael Hirsh and Kristin Roberts – February 22, 2013

Sources say Obama won’t release them because of classified agreements with foreign governments.

Despite President Obama’s pledge in his State of the Union address to make the drone program “even more transparent to the American people and to the world,” his administration continues to resist efforts by Congress, even from fellow Democrats, to obtain the full range of classified legal memos justifying “targeted killing.”

A key reason for that reticence, according to two sources who have read the memos or are aware of their contents, is that the documents contain secret protocols with foreign governments, including Pakistan and Yemen, as well as “case-specific” details of strikes.

A legal expert outside the government who is intimately familiar with the contents of the memos said the government-to-government accords on the conduct of drone strikes are an important element not contained in the Justice Department “white paper” revealed recently by NBC News. He said it is largely in order to protect this information that the targeted-killing memos drafted by Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel are not being released, and that even the Senate and House Intelligence committees have been allowed to examine only four of the nine OLC memos. …

Read on: www.nationaljournal.com/nationalsecurity/what-s-in-the-secret-drone-memos-20130222

---

Gibbs: I Was Told Not To Acknowledge Drone Program

TPM – By David Taintor – February 25, 2013

Robert Gibbs said on Sunday that when he become White House press secretary, he was explicitly told not to acknowledge the existence of the Obama administration’s drone program …

Read more and Watch the interview here: http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/gibbs-i-was-told-not-to-acknowledge-drone

---

Senate should hold public hearings on drone strikes

The News gazette: Guest Commentary – February 24, 2013

The Senate Intelligence Committee is supposed to do oversight of the Central Intelligence Agency. Since the CIA is conducting drone strikes in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia, and since this is a controversial policy, the Senate Intelligence Committee should be doing oversight of that.

But, as the Los Angeles Times recently noted, the Senate Intelligence Committee has never held a public hearing on CIA drone strikes. Indeed, for the year prior to the recent confirmation hearing of John Brennan to head the CIA, it never held a public hearing at all.

Following Brennan’s confirmation hearing, Politico reported that Sen. Dianne Feinstein, chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said she was unaware of reports that U.S. officials assumed any male of fighting age killed in a strike was a combatant — a method likely to undercount the number of civilian deaths.

That’s alarming, because the New York Times reported this in May, based on interviews with administration officials, in a major expose on the drone strike policy. One administration official outside the CIA called the CIA practice “guilt by association” that has led to “deceptive” estimates of civilian casualties. “It bothers me when they say there were seven guys, so they must all be militants,” the official said. “They count the corpses and they’re not really sure who they are.”

The question of whether the CIA has “counted corpses” in this way is crucial to the question of whether statements by government officials about low civilian casualties should be believed. …

Read on: www.news-gazette.com/opinions/editorials/2013-02-24/guest-commentary-senate-should-hold-public-hearings-drone-strikes.htm

---

Witnesses at a Drone Hearing

WarIsACrime.org – David Swanson _February 23, 2013

You are hereBlogs / davidswanson’s blog / Witnesses at a Drone Hearing
Witnesses at a Drone Hearing

By davidswanson – Posted on 23 February 2013

This coming Wednesday the House Judiciary Committee plans to hold a hearing on “Drones and the War On Terror: When Can the U.S. Target Alleged American Terrorists Overseas?”

This is odd for a number of reasons.

1. Congressional committees usually don’t do anything at all on such matters.

2. The vast majority of the men, women, and children being killed have not been targeted.

3. The vast majority of the men, women, and children being killed or targeted have not been Americans.

4. The president’s nominee to direct the CIA refuses to deny that the president claims the power to kill Americans when they are not overseas, not to mention non-Americans within the United States and anyone at all overseas.

5. The three Americans we know the president has targeted and killed by drone strike in no way match up with the justifications for theoretical strikes found in the “white paper.”

6. The president is targeting and killing people with a variety of technologies, not just drones.

7. The only remotely legal or moral answer to the question asked by the hearing is “never.”

All such concerns will, of course, be brushed aside. Congress ought to question the administration on its program of drone killing, regardless of what title the hearing is given, right? But this is where things get really odd. The witness list doesn’t include the president or a single person who works for him, no one from the CIA, no one from the White House, no one from the Pentagon, nobody from the Office of Legal Counsel. As far as we know, and it seems extremely likely to be the case, the committee has not subpoenaed any documents. If it invited any government witnesses, it has not subpoenaed them or made any plans to figuratively or literally hold them in contempt. Instead, all the witnesses are outside “experts” who won’t know any more about what’s going on than the rest of us.
…

Read on: http://warisacrime.org/content/witnesses-drone-hearing

---

U.S. drone strikes up sharply in Afghanistan

Los Angeles Times – By Shashank Bengali and David S. Cloud – February 21, 2013

Their use rose 72% last year compared with 2011, and the trend is likely to continue as troops withdraw. But while the aircraft reduce risks to U.S. forces, mistakes are deadly for civilians.

One morning recently, a teenager named Bacha Zarina was collecting firewood on her family’s small farm in eastern Afghanistan. About 30 yards away, as family members recall, two Taliban commanders stood outside a house.

A missile screamed down from the sky, killing the two men instantly. Two chunks of shrapnel flew at Bacha Zarina and lodged in her left side.

Her family raced her to the nearest hospital, a half-hour’s drive away, but she died en route, an accidental victim of the rapidly escalating U.S.-led campaign of drone strikes in Afghanistan. She was 14 or 15 years old.

The U.S. military launched 506 strikes from unmanned aircraft in Afghanistan last year, according to Pentagon data, a 72% increase from 2011 and a sign that American commanders may begin to rely more heavily on remote-controlled air power to kill Taliban insurgents as they reduce the number of troops on the ground.

Though drone strikes represented a fraction of all U.S. air attacks in Afghanistan last year, their use is on the rise even as American troops have pulled back from ground and air operations and pushed Afghan soldiers and police into the lead. In 2011, drone strikes accounted for 5% of U.S. air attacks in Afghanistan; in 2012, the figure rose to 12%. …

Read on: www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-afghanistan-drones-20130222,0,7805737.story

---

John Brennan Doesn’t Rule Out Targeting Americans for Assassination in United States

TruthOut.org – By Mark Karlin – February 20, 2013

According to the Wall Street Journal (in a February 15 article), Obama’s nominee to head the CIA, John Brennan, ambiguously left open the possibility that US citizens could be targeted for assassination in the United States:

John Brennan, President Barack Obama’s nominee to be director of the Central Intelligence Agency, didn’t rule out the use of unmanned drones in the U.S. when quizzed about the matter.

Mr. Brennan’s written answer came in response to questions from the Senate intelligence committee following his confirmation hearing last week. The Senate intelligence committee released a declassified version of Mr. Brennan’s responses in a 30-page document Friday.

Mr. Brennan, the White House’s counterterrorism chief, was asked, “Could the Administration carry out drone strikes inside the United States?” His reply was: “This Administration has not carried out drone strikes inside the United States and has no intention of doing so.”

A few days back, Democracy Now analyzed excerpts from the Brennan Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on his nomination, including this one:

SEN. RON WYDEN: Let me ask you several other questions with respect to the president’s authority to kill Americans. I’ve asked you how much evidence the president needs to decide that a particular American can be lawfully killed and whether the administration believes that the president can use this authority inside the United States. In my judgment, both the Congress and the public need to understand the answers to these kind of fundamental questions. What do you think needs to be done to ensure that members of the public understand more about when the government thinks it’s allowed to kill them, particularly with respect to those two issues, the question of evidence and the authority to use this power within the United States?

JOHN BRENNAN: I have been a strong proponent of trying to be as open as possible with these programs, as far as our explaining what we’re doing. What we need to do is optimize transparency on these issues, but at the same time optimize secrecy and the protection of our national security. I don’t think that it’s one or the other. It’s trying to optimize both of them. And so, what we need to do is make sure we explain to the American people what are the thresholds for action, what are the procedures, the practices, the processes, the approvals, the reviews. The Office of Legal Counsel advice establishes the legal boundaries within which we can operate. It doesn’t mean that we operate at those out of boundaries. And, in fact, I think the American people will be quite pleased to know that we’ve been very disciplined, very judicious, and we only use these authorities and these capabilities as a last resort.

If ever there was the epitome of obfuscating bureaucratic blather, Brennan achieved it in pointedly not ruling out the killing of US citizens on US soil.

read more: www.truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/item/17817-john-brennan-doesn

---

Who Will Mind the Drones?

The New York Times: The Opinion Pages – By Neal K. Katyal – February 20, 2013

IN the wake of revelations about the Obama administration’s drone program, politicians from both parties have taken up the idea of creating a “drone court” within the federal judiciary, which would review executive decisions to target and kill individuals.

But the drone court idea is a mistake. It is hard to think of something less suitable for a federal judge to rule on than the fast-moving and protean nature of targeting decisions.

Fortunately, a better solution exists: a “national security court” housed within the executive branch itself. Experts, not generalists, would rule; pressing concerns about classified information would be minimized; and speedy decisions would be easier to reach. …

Read on: www.nytimes.com/2013/02/21/opinion/an-executive-branch-drone-court.html

---

White House Tactic for C.I.A. Bid Holds Back Drone Memos

The New York Times – By Scott Shane and Mark Mazzetti – February 20, 2013

The White House is refusing to share fully with Congress the legal opinions that justify targeted killings, while maneuvering to make sure its stance does not do anything to endanger the confirmation of John O. Brennan as C.I.A. director.

Rather than agreeing to some Democratic senators’ demands for full access to the classified legal memos on the targeted killing program, Obama administration officials are negotiating with Republicans to provide more information on the lethal attack last year on the American diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, according to three Congressional staff members.

The strategy is intended to produce a bipartisan majority vote for Mr. Brennan in the Senate Intelligence Committee without giving its members seven additional legal opinions on targeted killing sought by senators and while protecting what the White House views as the confidentiality of the Justice Department’s legal advice to the president. It would allow Mr. Brennan’s nomination to go to the Senate floor even if one or two Democrats vote no to protest the refusal to share more legal memos.

At issue is the critical question of how Congress conducts oversight of a shadow war against people suspected of being terrorists. The administration routinely reports on its lethal drone strikes to both the Senate and the House Intelligence and Armed Services Committees, but it has long rebuffed Congressional attempts to see the legal opinions that authorize the strikes — let alone requests to make them public. …

Read on: www.nytimes.com/2013/02/21/us/politics/strategy-seeks-to-ensure-bid-of-brennan-for-cia.html

---

Senator Lists the Death Toll From U.S. Drones at 4,700 People

WIRED – By Spencer Ackerman – February 21, 2013

The government says you can’t know how many people U.S. drone strikes have killed, because that’s a state secret. But one of the most hawkish members of the U.S. Senate just said the strikes have killed 4,700 people. And his math raises questions.

That’s what Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) approvingly told an Easley, South Carolina, Rotary Club on Tuesday afternoon. It’s the first public death toll provided by a U.S. government official for the signature method of killing in the U.S.’ sprawling, global counterterrorism campaign.

“We’ve killed 4,700,” Graham said, according to an Easley website. “Sometimes you hit innocent people, and I hate that, but we’re at war, and we’ve taken out some very senior members of al-Qaida.” Graham did not evidently offer an estimate of how many innocent people the drones have killed. …

The CIA declined to comment about whether Graham revealed classified information. Counting the death toll from drones is a notoriously imprecise, murky business. …

Read on: www.wired.com/dangerroom/2013/02/graham-drones/

---

A second opinion on drone strikes

Los Angeles Times – editorial – February 18, 2013

Government-sanctioned killing of U.S. citizens abroad is troubling, but judicial review would help.

The idea that the federal courts should play some role in deciding whether the government may kill U.S. citizens abroad allied with Al Qaeda has suddenly gained traction in Washington. During confirmation hearings for John Brennan, President Obama’s nominee to head the Central Intelligence Agency, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), the chair of the Intelligence Committee, said she would be considering legislation to establish a court to “review the conduct” of U.S. drone strikes. Brennan himself, asked by Sen. Angus King (I-Maine) whether a court should scrutinize a decision to target a U.S. citizen for death, said the idea was “certainly worthy of discussion.”

Virtually all of the thousands of people killed by drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen (some of them innocent bystanders) have been foreigners, so they wouldn’t benefit from any such legislation. As far as we know, only one U.S. citizen has been deliberately killed by his own government: Anwar Awlaki, who was targeted in a drone attack in Yemen in 2011 that also killed Al Qaeda propagandist Samir Khan, another U.S. citizen. According to the government, the New Mexico-born Awlaki had taken on an “operational” role with Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and posed a threat to Americans.

Yet while Awlaki is the first American abroad to be assassinated by his own country, he may not be the last. The Obama administration has asserted that it has the right to target and execute Americans far from any battlefield, without charging them with a crime or offering them the opportunity to argue in their own defense. …

Read on: www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-drones-court-targeted-assassinations-20130218,0,7039542.story

---

Opinion On Drones Depends On Who’s Being Killed: Poll

Huffington Post – Emily Swanson – February 15, 2013

According to the new national survey, Americans believe that only high-level suspects who may be involved in planning attacks should be targeted — and not if there’s a risk that innocent people may also be killed.

According to the new Huffpost/YouGov poll, 56 percent of Americans say that the drone program should be used to target and kill high-level terrorists, while only 13 percent say that anyone suspected of being associated with a terrorist group should be targeted. Another 13 percent said that nobody should be killed using the drones program. A majority of Americans across most demographic and partisan groups agreed that the program should be used for high-level targets.

Read on and/or add your own vote: www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/15/drones-opinion_n_2689813.html

---

Militant Threats Test Role of a Pentagon Command in Africa

The New york Times – By Eric Schmitt – February 11, 2013

… The Pentagon is preparing to establish a drone base in Niger so that it can increase surveillance missions on the local Qaeda affiliate, Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, and associated groups. Starting this year, the Africa Command will also send small teams from a 4,000-member brigade in Kansas to conduct nearly 100 exercises and training programs in 35 African countries. …

From: www.nytimes.com/2013/02/12/world/africa/militant-threats-test-pentagons-role-in-africa.html?pagewanted=all

---

Leaked White Paper the “Tip of the Iceberg”: An Interview With Marjorie Cohn About Targeted Killings

TruthOut – By Dennis Bernstein – February 15, 2013

Radio host Dennis Bernstein recently interviewed legal scholar and editor Marjorie Cohn on the Pacifica radio network’s weekday show, Flashpoints.

Marjorie Cohn is a professor of human rights at Thomas Jefferson School and former president of the National Lawyers Guild. Her most recent book is The United States and Torture: Interrogation, Incarceration, and Abuse. See www.marjoriecohn.com.

Dennis Bernstein: We continue our discussion of the revelations around a memo coming out of the Justice Department that the administration plans to keep up these assassinations and expand the program. Joining us to take a legal look at this is Marjorie Cohn, a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law and former president of the National Lawyers Guild. She is also the editor of The United States and Torture: Interrogation, Incarceration, and Abuse. Welcome back to Flashpoints, Marjorie. You say the “white paper” runs afoul of international and US law. Please explain.

Marjorie Cohn: The white paper allows the government to kill a US citizen, who is not on the battlefield, if some high government official, who is supposedly informed about the situation, thinks that the target is a senior al-Qaeda leader who poses an imminent threat of a violent attack against the United States. So how do they define “imminence?” Well, it doesn’t require any clear evidence that a specific attack on US persons and interests will take place in the immediate future. So it completely dilutes this whole idea of imminent threat. Under well-established principles of international law and the UN Charter, one country can use military force against another only in self-defense. But under the Caroline case, which is the gold standard here, the “necessity for self-defense must be instant, overwhelming, leaving no choice of means and no moment for deliberation.” That means we are going to be attacked right away and we can use force. But the very nebulous test that the white paper lays out even allows the targeted killing of somebody who is considered to be a “continuing” threat, whatever that means.The most disturbing part of it says that US citizens can be killed even when there is no “clear evidence that a specific attack on US persons and interests will take place in the immediate future.” So we have a global battlefield, where if there is someone, anywhere, who might be associated with al-Qaeda, according to a high government official, then Obama can authorize (it’s not even clear Obama himself has to authorize these targeted killings, these drone attacks) on Terror Tuesday (thanks to The New York Times expose several months ago) who he is going to kill after consulting with John Brennan. John Brennan, of course, is his counter-terrorism guru who is up for confirmation to be CIA Director. Very incestuous. John Brennan has said that targeted killings constitute lawful self-defense.

One of the most disturbing things here is the amassing of executive power with no review by the courts, no checks and balances. So the courts will have no opportunity to interpret what “imminence” means, or what “continuing” threat means. The white paper cites John Yoo’s claim that courts have no role to play in what the president does in this so-called War on Terror where the whole world is a battlefield. I say so-called War on Terror because terrorism is a tactic. It’s not an enemy. You don’t declare war on a tactic. And the white paper refers to Yoo’s view that judicial review constitutes “judicial encroachment” on the judgments by the president and his national security advisors as to when and how to use force. The white paper cites Hamdi vs. Rumsfeld which says the president has the authority to hold US citizens caught on the battlefield in Afghanistan as enemy combatants. But in Hamdi, the Supreme Court stated that a US citizen who is being detained as an enemy combatant is entitled to due process. Due process means an arrest and a fair trial. It doesn’t mean just taking him out with a drone. Also, there’s another interesting passage in this white paper. It says “judicial enforcement [a court reviewing these kill orders of the executive] of such orders would require the court to supervise inherently predictive judgments by the president and his national security advisors as to when and how to use force against a member of an enemy force against which Congress has authorized the use of force.” Inherently predictive. Does that mean that the court can’t review decisions made with a crystal ball because it’s too mushy? I don’t know. Certainly courts are competent to make emergency decisions under FISA, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The FISA Court meets in secret and authorizes wiretaps requested by the executive branch. Courts can do this. Courts can act in emergencies to review and check and balance what the executive is doing. That’s what our constitution is all about.

Read the full interview here: http://truth-out.org/news/item/14563-leaked-white-paper-the-tip-of-the-icebe

---

The Sticky Questions Surrounding Drones And Kill Lists

npr – February 11, 2013

New York Times reporter Scott Shane and colleague Jo Becker reported last year that the Obama administration has a list of terrorists targeted for drone attacks, and that the president personally approves such strikes.

The administration has been trying to keep details of its drone program under wraps, arguing that to make it public could threaten national security. Shane has reported numerous such stories.

Last week, he wrote that the U.S. has a military base in Saudi Arabia from which they launch drone strikes. Several news organizations, including the Times, had known for months about the drone base, but had been sitting on the information at the urging of the Obama administration.

But the location of bases, says Shane, was not the most interesting part of the story.

“The most interesting part of this story,” he tells Fresh Air’s Terry Gross, “is how are we using a new military technology in countries where we’re not at war to kill suspected terrorists? How’s that going? What are the long-term consequences? Is this the way we’ll be dealing with multiple problems perhaps even beyond terrorism in the future? Those are the questions that interest me.” …

Read on and listen to New York Times reporter Scott Shane talk about the drone related stories he has helped to break:
www.npr.org/2013/02/12/171719082/the-sticky-questions-surrounding-drones-and-kill-lists

---

Letter from a Drone Protester’s Jail

War Is A Crime.org – By David Swanson – February 15, 2013

From Brian Terrell. Here’s audio of how he talked about his jail sentence before it began:

From: http://warisacrime.org/content/letter-drone-protesters-jail

---

On Drones, Peter Welch Says Obama’s State Of The Union Promise Is Just First Step

Huffington Post – By Michael McAuliff – February 14, 2013

President Barack Obama’s oblique references in his State of the Union address to America’s targeted killings and drone strikes was a welcome sign, but must be followed up with steps that open the nation’s clandestine attacks to scrutiny, a leading progressive Democrat argued.

“A policy on drones is overdue. We’ve got to maintain checks and balances,” Rep. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) told The Huffington Post immediately after Obama’s Tuesday night speech. “We have to have transparency — the president acknowledged that. But we’re several years into the use of drones, so this is something we’ve got to get on yesterday, not tomorrow.”

According to one estimate from the New American Foundation, nearly 300 drone strikes since 2009 have killed more than 1,000 people, including some Americans.

In his speech, Obama insisted such killings are part of a balanced, legal response to global terrorism. …

Read on: www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/13/drones-peter-welch-obama_n_2678789.html

---

The Hubris of the Drones

Truthout – By Bill Moyers and Michael Winship, Moyers & Company – Febraury 13 , 2013

Last week, The New York Times published a chilling account of how indiscriminate killing in war remains bad policy even today. This time, it’s done not by young GIs in the field but by anonymous puppeteers guiding drones that hover and attack by remote control against targets thousands of miles away, often killing the innocent and driving their enraged and grieving families and friends straight into the arms of the very terrorists we’re trying to eradicate.

The Times told of a Muslim cleric in Yemen named Salem Ahmed bin Ali Jaber, standing in a village mosque denouncing al Qaeda. It was a brave thing to do — a respected tribal figure, arguing against terrorism. But two days later, when he and a police officer cousin agreed to meet with three al Qaeda members to continue the argument, all five men — friend and foe — were incinerated by an American drone attack. The killings infuriated the village and prompted rumors of an upwelling of support in the town for al Qaeda, because, the Times reported, “such a move is seen as the only way to retaliate against the United States.” …

Read on: www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/14525-the-hubris-of-the-drones

---

In a Major Privacy Victory, Seattle Mayor Orders Police to Dismantle Its Drone Program After Protests

Common Dreams – by Trevor Timm – Frebruary 9, 2013

In an amazing victory for privacy advocates and drone activists, yesterday, Seattle’s mayor ordered the city’s police agency to cease trying use surveillance drones and dismantle its drone program. The police will return the two drones they previously purchased with a Department of Homeland Security grant to the manufacturer. …

Read on: www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/02/09

---

Secret Wars and No Accountability: 5 Reasons Why 2013 Is Already Year of the Drone

AlterNet – By Alex Kane – February 10, 2013

Obama’s promise to end a decade of war is far from honest.

For a war-weary American public, President Barack Obama’s inaugural address last month sounded perfect. “ A decade of war is now ending,” the president said. “We, the people, still believe that enduring security and lasting peace do not require perpetual war.”

But on that day, a much different–and more honest–message blared through ABC News and out of a U.S.-piloted unmanned aircraft: the drone war being waged in secret and without accountability was here to stay. It’s become clear that, a month and a half into 2013, this year will see the continued use of drone strikes around the world. You can already call 2013 another year of the drone, if not the year of the drone.

ABC News aired an interview that day with outgoing Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta. Asked by journalist Martha Raddatz whether the 2014 pullout of U.S. troops from Afghanistan would mean an increased reliance on drones, Panetta said: “ I think that’s reality. We’ve done that in Pakistan. We’re doing it in Yemen and elsewhere. And I think the reality is it’s going to be a continuing tool of national defense in the future.” …

Read on: www.alternet.org/world/secret-wars-and-no-accountability-5-reasons-why-2013-already-year-drone

---

‘Trust me’ is not enough on drone warfare

Washington Post – By Dana Milbank – February 8, 2013

Dana Milbank of the Washington Post said, “The only people truly eager to press Brennan on the drone program were Code Pink demonstrators, whose heckling forced Feinstein, after multiple interruptions, to suspend the hearing and order all public spectators removed from the room. That overreaction left 140 seats empty and a created undesirable irony: A hearing that should have been about transparency instead ended in the exclusion of the public.” Amen!!!

Is the position of God subject to the confirmation process?

Does the Lord Almighty require the advice and consent of the Senate?

These are no longer abstract questions.

John Brennan may not be divine, but he plays God often as President Obama’s counterterrorism chief — and he will do so even more frequently once he moves to Langley as CIA director when (not if) senators confirm him.

Brennan is the architect of the drone warfare program, an extraordinary assertion of the executive’s powers. In this new, hidden warfare, unelected officials, without the blessing of a court, or anything else, order killings of suspected terrorists — even American citizens, perhaps on U.S. soil.

It’s an expansion of presidential authority crying out for congressional oversight, and this week was the Senate’s big chance to explore in public the policy of targeted killing using unmanned aircraft. But the only drones in evidence Thursday afternoon at Brennan’s confirmation hearing were the lawmakers on the dais. With few exceptions, they weren’t prying, and Brennan wasn’t volunteering.

Would Brennan provide the Senate intelligence committee with a list of countries in which the CIA has performed targeted killings? “If I were to be confirmed as director of CIA, I would get back to you,” was all Brennan would commit to, “and it would be my intention to do everything possible to meet this committee’s legitimate interests and requests.”

Would Brennan talk about the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki, one of the most prominent targets of drone warfare?

“I’m not going to talk about any particular operation or responsibility on the part of the U.S. government for anything whatever,” Brennan replied.

“See, that’s the problem,” the committee chairman, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), responded; she noted that she has asked the administration “for increased transparency on the use of targeted force for over a year.” Feinstein complained that she can’t even discuss the civilian casualties associated with drone strikes, saying she has been told: “It’s a covert program. For the public, it doesn’t exist.”

Brennan’s response: Trust me. He assured the committee that, although administration lawyers have granted him and his colleagues enormous latitude to kill, “we only use these authorities and these capabilities as a last resort.” …

Read on: http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-02-08/opinions/36983343_1_drone-warfare-drone-strikes-al-awlaki

---

Cover-Up of Civilian Drone Deaths Revealed by New Evidence

truthout – By Gareth Porter – August 17, 2012

Detailed information from the families of those killed in drone strikes in Pakistan and from local sources on strikes that have targeted mourners and rescue workers provides credible new evidence that the majority of the deaths in the drone war in Pakistan have been civilian noncombatants – not “militants,” as the Obama administration has claimed.

The new evidence also shows that the statistical tally of casualties from drone attacks in Pakistan published on the web site of the New America Foundation (NAF) has been systematically understating the deaths of large numbers of civilians by using a methodology that methodically counts them as “militants.”

The sharply revised picture of drone casualties conveyed by the two new primary sources is further bolstered by the recent revelation that the Obama administration adopted a new practice in 2009 of automatically considering any military-age male killed in a drone strike as a “militant” unless intelligence proves otherwise.

The detailed data from the two unrelated sources covering a total 24 drone strikes from 2008 through 2011 show that civilian casualties accounted for 74 percent of the death toll, whereas the NAF tally for the same 24 strikes showed civilian casualties accounted for only 30 percent of the total. …

Read on: http://truth-out.org/news/item/10907-cover-up-of-civilian-drone-deaths-revealed-by-new-evidence

---

CNN Explains: U.S. drones

CNN – By Josh Levs – February 8, 2013

The secret U.S. drone campaign against al Qaeda and its allies has transformed the nature of modern warfare, becoming a key weapon in the U.S. arsenal against suspected terrorists. Advocates see drones as an effective tool in the fight against extremists. Opponents worry about civilian casualties and loose oversight.

This article contains more videos about drones and covers some key facts about the U.S. drone program including:

• How the U.S. uses drones against al Qaeda
• How many drone strikes has the U.S. carried out
• Who has been killed by drone strikes
• Which other countries use drones
• How else drones are used

Read in full: http://edition.cnn.com/2013/02/07/politics/drones-cnn-explains/index.html

---

Drone Wars UK aims to be a source of information on the growing use of armed drones. The campaign is based in the UK and focus on the use of British drones but also include information about armed drones in general. We recommend this website. It is an excellent resource.

Drone Wars UK (dronewarsuk.wordpress.com)

---

FAA Releases New Drone List—Is Your Town on the Map?

Electronic Frontier Foundation – By Jennifer Lynch – February 7, 2013

Click the map for an enlarged version (from Google)

The Federal Aviation Administration has finally released a new drone authorization list. This list, released in response to EFF’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit, includes law enforcement agencies and universities across the country, and—for the first time—an Indian tribal agency. In all, the list includes more than 20 new entities over the FAA’s original list, bringing to 81 the total number of public entities that have applied for FAA drone authorizations through October 2012. …

Click here for the full list of 81 locations

From EFF – Read more: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/02/faa-releases-new-list-drone-authorizations-your-local-law-enforcement-agency-map

---

Obama Orders Release of Drone Memos to Lawmakers

New York Times – By Michael D. Shear and Scott Shane – February 6, 2013

The White House on Wednesday directed the Justice Department to release to the two Congressional Intelligence Committees classified documents discussing the legal justification for killing, by drone strikes and other means, American citizens abroad who are considered terrorists.

The White House announcement appears to refer to a long, detailed 2010 memo from the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel justifying the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki, an American-born cleric who had joined Al Qaeda in Yemen. He was killed in a C.I.A. drone strike in September 2011. Members of Congress have long demanded access to the legal memorandum.

The decision to release the legal memo to the Intelligence Committees came under pressure, two days after a bipartisan group of 11 senators joined a growing chorus asking for more information about the legal justification for targeted killings, especially of Americans.

The announcement also came on the eve of the confirmation hearing scheduled for Thursday afternoon for John O. Brennan, President Obama’s choice to be director of the C.I.A., who has been the chief architect of the drone program as Mr. Obama’s counterterrorism adviser.

Critics accused Mr. Obama of hypocrisy for keeping the legal opinions on targeted killing secret …

Read on: www.nytimes.com/2013/02/07/us/politics/obama-orders-release-of-drone-memos-to-lawmakers.html

---

U.S. Cancels Regular Drone Strikes on Saturdays

The New Yorker – By Andy Borowitz – February 7, 2013

Citing budgetary concerns, the United States announced today that it would discontinue regular Saturday drone strikes on U.S. citizens, beginning in 2014.

In announcing the decision, the White House spokesman Jay Carney acknowledged that the cutback in drone service was “bound to be controversial.” “In the United States, we’ve always prided ourselves on our ability to target our citizens with drone strikes, Monday through Saturday, regardless of the weather,” he said. “We know that losing Saturday drone service is going to take some getting used to.”

But the move to cut back drone service drew sharp criticism from a longtime defender of the program, the former Vice-President Dick Cheney. “Like most Americans, I thought I’d never see the day when drones just up and take Saturdays off,” he said. “This would never be happening if I were still President.”

As if to silence critics, Mr. Carney assured reporters that drones could “still get the job done” Monday through Friday, and reminded U.S. citizens to update the government on any change of address so the drones would know where to reach them.

From “The Borowitz Report”: www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/2013/02/us-cancels-regular-drone-strikes-on-saturdays.html

---

CIA using Saudi base for drone assassinations in Yemen

The Guardian – By Ian Black – February 6, 2013

The CIA is secretly using an airbase in Saudi Arabia to conduct its controversial drone assassination campaign in neighbouring Yemen, according to reports in the US media.

Neither the Saudi government nor the country’s media have responded to the reports revealing that the drones that killed the US-born cleric Anwar al-Awlaki and his son in September 2011 and Said al-Shehri, a senior al-Qaida commander who died from his injuries last month, were launched from the unnamed base.

Iranian state media highlighted the story, which is also likely to be seized upon by jihadi groups. Saudi Arabia has previously publicly denied co-operating with the US to target al-Qaida in Yemen. Evidence of Saudi involvement risks complicating its relationship with the government in Sana’a and with Yemeni tribal leaders who control large parts of the country.

Disclosure of the Saudi co-operation comes the day before the architect of the drone programme, John Brennan, appears before the US Senate for a confirmation hearing to become the CIA director.

The drone issue is sensitive in Saudi Arabia because of the unpopularity of US military bases, which were thought to have been largely removed after the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

Saudi Arabia is home to the Muslim holy cities of Mecca and Medina and the continued presence of US troops after the 1991 Gulf war was one of the stated motivations behind al-Qaida’s 9/11 terrorist attacks and the Khobar Towers bombing five years earlier. …

Read on: www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/feb/06/cia-using-saudi-base-drone-yemen

---

Israeli Drone Strikes in Gaza in November 2012 Attack: Two-Thirds Killed Were Civilians

OpEdNews – By Ann Wright – February 6, 2013

More Palestinians Killed by Drones Alone in eight DAYS than Israelis Killed by rockets in eight YEARS

Two-thirds of Palestinians killed by Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) drones in the November, 2012 attack on Gaza were civilians.

This statistic means that for the residents of Gaza, the ground-breaking investigation by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Counter-Terrorism and Human Rights into the civilian impact and human rights implications of the use of drones and other forms of targeted killing is very important.

Data taken from reports of two human rights groups in Gaza documented that, of the 162 Palestinians killed during the eight-day attack, drone strikes killed 36 and injured 100. 24 of the 36 killed in Gaza by Israeli drones were civilians. Drone strikes (72) were 5 percent of the total Israeli military strikes (1,350) but accounted for 23 percent of the deaths in Gaza, a very high percentage of deaths from the number of drone strikes when compared with deaths from strikes of jet warplanes, artillery and naval bombardment.

The UN team will investigate drone strikes and their effects on civilians around the world, but primarily the United States and United Kingdom’s drone strikes in Afghanistan, the US drone strikes in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and the Philippines and Israeli drone strikes in Gaza. …

Read on: www.opednews.com/articles/Israeli-Drone-Strikes-in-G-by-Ann-Wright-130206-621.html

---

First City in U.S. Passes Resolution Against Drones

War Is A Crime .org – By David Swanson – February 5, 2013

Shortly after 11 p.m. on Monday, February 4th, the City Council of Charlottesville, Va., passed what is believed to be the first anti-drone resolution in the country. …

According to my notes, and verifiable soon on the City Council’s website, the resolution reads:

WHEREAS, the rapid implementation of drone technology throughout the United States poses a serious threat to the privacy and constitutional rights of the American people, including the residents of Charlottesville; and

WHEREAS, the federal government and the Commonwealth of Virginia have thus far failed to provide reasonable legal restrictions on the use of drones within the United States; and

WHEREAS, police departments throughout the country have begun implementing drone technology absent any guidance or guidelines from law makers;

NOW, THEREFORE, LET IT BE RESOLVED, that the City Council of Charlottesville, Virginia, endorses the proposal for a two year moratorium on drones in the state of Virginia; and calls on the United States Congress and the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia to adopt legislation prohibiting information obtained from the domestic use of drones from being introduced into a Federal or State court, and precluding the domestic use of drones equipped with anti-personnel devices, meaning any projectile, chemical, electrical, directed-energy (visible or invisible), or other device designed to harm, incapacitate, or otherwise negatively impact a human being; and pledges to abstain from similar uses with city-owned, leased, or borrowed drones.

The same City Council passed a resolution on January 17, 2012, calling for an end to drone wars, as well as ground wars, excessive military spending, and any possible attack on Iran. …

Read on: http://warisacrime.org/firstantidrone

---

US Plans Base for Drones Near Mali

AntiWar.com
by John Glaser
January 28, 2013

The US is expanding into Africa to counter Chinese access and supposedly for ‘counter-terrorism’

The US military is planning to establish a base for drones in northwest Africa on the Mali-Niger border, with the alleged justification of having greater surveillance of Islamist groups in the region.

US officials told the New York Times that the drone base would be used for unarmed drones only, but that is highly unlikely. Armed drones – a secret, unaccountable way to bomb unidentified groups of people in foreign countries – have become the central “counter-terrorism” tool at the Obama administration’s disposal.

The Pentagon is using the US-backed French military intervention in Mali as a way to justify the drone base.

“This is directly related to the Mali mission, but it could also give Africom a more enduring presence for I.S.R.,” one US military official told the Times, referring to intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance.

US military and intelligence involvement in Africa has increased markedly since the establishment of AFRICOM in 2007. Much of this has been justified by unnecessary military interventions that don’t address direct threats to the US, like the NATO-backed regime change operation in Libya and the deployment of US forces to Uganda. …

Read on: http://news.antiwar.com/2013/01/28/us-plans-base-for-drones-near-mali/

---

BBC TV Programme: Panorama – The Secret Drone War

America’s CIA is fighting a secret war in the badlands of Pakistan – targeting al Qaeda and other militants with hellfire missiles in drone strikes that the UN says are illegal. No one knows the true number who have died, but it is estimated that the death toll may be around 3,000 – some of them, it is claimed, innocent women and children.

Panorama goes to Waziristan, one of the most dangerous places in the world, to report on the drone war and to find out from its victims why they are seeking justice in the British courts.

Watch the programme here:
www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01pcyfc/Panorama_The_Secret_Drone_War/

Availbale until December 10, 2013 – may not be viewable outside the UK

---

UN launches probe into the legality of drone strikes

YouTube – Published January 24, 2013 – Al Jazeera’s Jonah Hull reports from London

The United Nations has launched an inquiry into the legality of using unmanned aerial drones.

The UN is particulary concerned about civilian deaths, and the inquiry could eventually lead to war crimes charges.

The inquiry is in response to requests from Pakistan, Russia and China.

---

Michael Kinsley: Yes, warfare by drone still counts as warfare

By Michael Kinsley, Bloomberg View – January 15, 2013

The most famous painting of the 20th century, Pablo Picasso’s “Guernica,” commemorates the bombing of the small Spanish town on April 26, 1937, by the German air force, in support of Gen. Francisco Franco’s fascists in the Spanish Civil War. Hard to believe, but this was history’s first extensive bombing of a civilian population.

In his book “Postwar,” the late historian Tony Judt pointed out that more civilians died in World War II, of various causes, than did soldiers. That was not true of World War I or most earlier conflicts.

Guernica was a German dress rehearsal for the London blitz, the destruction of Warsaw and so on. Soon to come on the Allies’ side were the destruction of Dresden, the firebombing of Tokyo and, of course, the nuclear attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Today when we think of war, bombing from the sky is one of the images that come to mind.

One consequence has been a blurring of the distinction between soldiers and noncombatants.

The war on terrorism’s contribution to this unfortunate history has been the drone: an unmanned plane that can aim at and hit a target with enormous precision. And, as with earlier developments, we’re getting used to it. The eye passes right over headlines inside the newspaper such as “Yemen: Drone Strike Kills 2.” Right now, we have more or less a monopoly on drones, which won’t last any longer than our monopoly on nukes did.

The advantages of using drones are obvious. No American lives are put at risk, and the precision minimizes collateral damage, including the deaths of innocents nearby.

The disadvantages follow from advantages. When a military option seems less painful, it is more likely to be resorted to. The ability to strike at the enemy with absolutely zero risk to your own people must be especially appealing to politicians such as President Barack Obama, for whom the decision to put Americans in harm’s way is surely the toughest one to make.

But drones also highlight a terrible anomaly of civil-libertarian societies: the contrast between how we treat killing — state-sponsored killing — in battle, and how we treat killing in civilian life. …

Read on: www.commercialappeal.com/news/2013/jan/15/michael-kinsley-yes-warfare-by-drone-still-as/

---