The US government just murdered 15 people in Yemen. Who will be held accountable?

[Comrade Grumpy]

Seriously.

Fifteen innocent people are dead, killed by an errant US drone strike.

What are the consequences for the people responsible?

[Pretzel_Warrior]

1. If it's an errant drone strike

How can you call it murder? If a soldier fighting Taliban in 2002 as they looked for bin Laden accidentally killed one of his own or accidentally shot a civilian, I don't think that's murder.

A tragedy, for sure. But let's see what comes out after the very preliminary reports we're getting.

[Electric Monk]

20. In other words, in your world view it's ok as long as an American pulled the trigger?

Is it ok if someone with a bomb strapped to their chest accidentally blows up on a bus, because their intent was to go blow themselves up at a military check point? Same screwball logic. Terrorism is terrorism. Drones blowing up innocent wedding gatherings is terrorism.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

21. Your analogy is false. Mine was far more accurate

If there is no way to go after militants intent on terrorism (it is they who are blowing up civilians with bombs) other than to gather intelligence on their whereabouts and take them out, then that is the tough choice U.S. preesident and military make.

If it was Pakistanis or Yemenis trying to take out terrorists and they hit civilians instead I wouldn't characterize it as murder either. So it's not just because they are Americans.

[Electric Monk]

22. You're in denial. An American drone just blew up 15 innocent civilians. That's terrorism. nt

[Pretzel_Warrior]

24. If their intent was to blow up civilians, that would be terrorism

I see nuance and shades of gray aren't your strong suit.

[Electric Monk]

27. Tell that to the families of the dead innocent civilians. Explain the nuance to them. nt

[Pretzel_Warrior]

29. Most Pakistanis support drone strikes against terrorists

Because they are tired of market bombings. I suspect same for families of victims in Yemen.

Though NYT article shows many in THIS strike were, in fact, terrorists.

[Electric Monk]

39. Most Pakistanis support drone strikes? BS. Maybe some do, but not most.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drone_attacks_in_Pakistan#Pakistani_position

NBC: CIA didn't always know who it was killing in drone strikes, classified documents show blows away your "We meant to kill someone else, oops, so don't blame us" argument, too.

[NuclearDem]

86. Any military-age males caught in a drone strike are automatically labelled as militants.

That definition means absolutely nothing. It's the CIA covering its ass.

[mike_c]

78. their intent WAS to "blow up civilians...."

A civilian under international humanitarian law (also known as the laws of war) is a person who is not a member of his or her country's armed forces or other militia. Civilians are distinct from combatants. They are afforded a degree of legal protection from the effects of war and military occupation. In U.S. parlance, a civilian is also considered one not on active duty in the armed services or not on a police or firefighting force.

Most of the targets of U.S. drone assassinations are guilty of no more than opposing U.S. geopolitical objectives in their countries. They are not members of the armed forces or the police. They are most often described as "militants," but that label is applied equally to virtually everyone killed. Many of those "militants" are children, innocent wedding guests, or other civilians who have no capacity to threaten the U.S. or any of its interests.

You speak of "terrorists." To be a terrorist, one must carry out acts of terror against innocents, or at least credibly conspire to do so. Sitting around the stove with your neighbors and complaining about the Americans is not conspiring to terrorism. The U.S. government never releases much of the evidence it uses to convict and sentence people sitting around stoves in homes on the other side of the world, but I am hard pressed to accept that such evidence justifying extrajudicial assassination exists in any but a very few instances.

In fact, the U.S. drone assassination program kills almost exclusively "civilians," and fits the definition of terrorism far better than it fits any plausible definition of national defense. They target innocent civilians. In our names.

[BigL]

76. It's manslaughter.

Terrorism aims to instill fear, this was just accidental deaths, i.e. Manslaughter.
I don't condone it, excuse it, or believe that it is forgive-able. These people's families are forever damaged and nothing can change that. Just don't call it something it is not.

[secondwind]

59. I agree with you.

[bowens43]

28. errant or not it's murder.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

30. Go study law a bit more

[whatchamacallit]

36. Yay another safe and entitled American calls the play!

[snort]

48. +1

[Donald Ian Rankin]

74. The ad hominem is usually a resort of those without a proper argument, I'm afraid.

Murder is deliberate killing. Accidental killing is not, legally, morally or semantically, murder, although it may be gross negligence.

[Bradical79]

71. Negligent homicide? -nt

[thesquanderer]

57. more likely manslaughter rather than murder

because the intent was not to kill those people.

[Niceguy1]

63. neither

An accidental killing of a civilian isn't a war crime. Intent matters

[thesquanderer]

65. Can there even be a "war crime" if you're not at war? (n/t)

[Niceguy1]

66. I doubt it

And if we are there at the invitation of the host govt then it can be justified.

[MyNameGoesHere]

40. If it were a drone

and it was flying over Yemen, a country I am unaware we have declared war on, then murder sounds about right. Now if we were talking about some wayward artillery during a declared war like we had once upon a time in America, I could agree with you. But when an illegal action results in death, I have a hard time enabling anyone.

[Maedhros]

45. YES.

It's disgusting that people on DU, of all places, buy this bullshit Bush Era "the entire globe is a continual war zone" poppycock.

We cannot use war-zone rationalizations for people we kill when we drop bombs in a country with which we are not at war.

[warrant46]

82. Wow all of a sudden Bush Enablers

I remember in the past this indiscriminate killing by Bush would have resulted in a real "Weenie Roast"

Now we have apologists for murder wanting to throw a Rose Petal Parade for the Drone Trigger Pullers

Citing Amerikan Law, talking about intent and all of that trash

Well kids ---- some day a US tourist is going to get his /her brains blown out by a relative of one of these murder victims.

[Logical]

64. Many accidental shootings are ruled 2nd degree murder. WTF? nt

[Bradical79]

70. From what Ive read its all math

From what I have read drone strikes use a mathematical formula to determine the number of civilians it is acceptable to kill. It would be along the lines of the more "points" a target is worth, the more acceptable it would be to take the shot with civilians in the vicinity.

[sabrina 1]

75. Tell it to the families and loved ones of the victims. See what they have to say about it. That

we are even doing this, is reprehensible and has been condemned world wide. We don't belong in these countries, if the reason was to end terror, it FAILED because according to Diane Feinstein and her Republican cohort on the Intel Committee, we are in MORE DANGER NOW than ever. Of course she was trying to justify all the Spying that has been revealed, not realizing what she was actually saying.

But then most of us Dems never believed Bush/Cheney when they claimed we were killing all these people to 'keep us safe'.

And most of us Dems CONDEMNED Bush's drone program.

But that was then when Dems were anti-Bush-wars which I thought was based on principles, morals and the fact that we knew the great WOT was a LIE.

And we called Bush a murderer.

So, unless you were a Bush supporter back then I'm assuming you were opposed to his fake WOT and his Wars for Profit. And if that is the case, what changed??

I believed it was murder when Bush/Cheney were doing and I haven't changed my mind.

[Phlem]

2. I hear ya.

And out come the excuses.

-p

[Adrahil]

3. Hey... I hear YOU...

but the point is valid. Military action is messy and sometimes innocent people die. It's not murder if they were not the intended targets. There IS a difference.

[Luminous Animal]

10. When did we declare was on Yemen?

[Pretzel_Warrior]

25. We declared war on al queda worldwide. Wherever they may hide

Whether it be Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, or Syria. Now what I would like to see is the U.S. drone a couple of terror cells in Saudi Arabia to let that nation know the shit has got to stop.

[atreides1]

33. Will never happen

The Saudis are safe and they know it!

[whatchamacallit]

43. You and Mandela like peas in a pod

Lol

[NuclearDem]

88. The MIC thanks you for your loyal service, citizen.

[GeorgeGist]

35. I hear YOU.

Thanks for the sociopath's view.

[whatchamacallit]

41. I submit if we're enacting a policy that we know results in high numbers of civilian casualties

it *is* murder.

[KamaAina]

4. None.

The U.S. government is a hell of a lot richer than that kid in Texas. No way in hell can it be held responsible.

[Phlem]

5. Nice.

With all that money you'd think they'd work out a better aiming system. It must only be able to target buildings cause 15 people is one hell of a miss.

-p

[Phlem]

6. I wonder what it would sound like if a Republican were sitting in office

doing the same thing?

-p

[840high]

80. We would be screaming

our heads off.

[neverforget]

84. Or if Chinese or Russian drones were roaming over the US and took out a wedding party?

Eh, it was an accident! They weren't the intended targets and it's war so no biggie. Tough luck for those killed.



That seems to be the attitude about drone strikes. Disgusting.

[seveneyes]

7. Has anyone other than anonymous sources confirmed it yet?

[Agschmid]

69. He'll I haven't even seen a link to an article...

[struggle4progress]

8. Drone Strike in Yemen Hits Wedding Convoy, Killing 11

By ROBERT F. WORTH
Published: December 12, 2013

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia — Drone-fired missiles struck a convoy of cars returning from a wedding on Thursday afternoon in a remote area of Yemen, witnesses said, killing at least 11 people in what appeared to be the second American drone strike in the past week.

Most of the dead appeared to be people suspected of being militants linked to Al Qaeda, according to tribal leaders in the area, but there were also reports that several civilians had been killed.

The drone strikes followed a deadly multistage assault last week on Yemen’s Defense Ministry that left 52 people dead, and for which Al Qaeda’s Yemen-based affiliate claimed responsibility ...

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/13/world/middleeast/drone-strike-in-yemen-hits-wedding-convoy-killing-11.html?_r=0

[Pretzel_Warrior]

26. Oh, see? Terrorists being killed for doing terrorist acts

Just what I was saying above. I guess Yemenis better start shunning their al queda friends if they don't want to be the next civilian casualty.

[atreides1]

37. You did see the word "suspected"?

"Most of the dead appeared to be people suspected of being militants linked to Al Qaeda, according to tribal leaders in the area, but there were also reports that several civilians had been killed."

For all we know we just settled the differences between two tribes, unless they were carrying their Al Qaeda membership cards.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

38. Or they had forensic and other evidence tying this group

To recent bombings and deaths of dozens of people.

[NuclearDem]

90. Unbelievable.

That's just disgusting. Collective punishment on a civilian population for the acts of al-Qaeda?

You know who does that shit, threatening to blow up civilians as punishment for what a few people in their midst have done? Al-Qaeda. The entire justification for 9/11 was to punish Americans for the acts of their government during the Gulf War and the presence of troops in Saudi Arabia. Osama would be proud of you, PW.

Free Republic's thataway. They're more on board with your desire to use the US military to indiscriminately blow up brown Muslim people.

[neverforget]

95. Disgusting

[RC]

32. We are blowing up wedding parties again?

We have come full circle.
Does that mean we are almost done and can leave, or does that mean we are running out of targets and are starting over on the list of #2's?

I have another question. What the Hell are we doing over there in the first place making more terrorists to kill?

[rafeh1]

9. drone terror bombing is just terrorism

drone terror bombing is just terrorism I don't see any difference. In fact this builds a whole new cadre for people who want to attack americans. Maybe that is the goal keep provoking them so they hit US interests and media can complain about Islamic terrorism..

[Bragi]

11. Generally in these matters, the victims are responsible

They shouldn't be planning weddings in areas which may include "militants" being surveilled by drones. We keep telling them, but sometimes you have to teach them a lesson.

[Blue_Tires]

12. The victims, of course

they shouldn't have been in a region where a drone was about to strike...

(seriously, that's the military's usual "official" explanation...)

[Erose999]

13. Just because it was an accident doesn't excuse accountability. 15 innocent people are dead.

Whoever or whatever organization is responsible for this fuck up should be held accountable. Enough of these god damn drones.
Obama, Congress, the military brass, they can all pilot their fucking drones straight up their assholes. SIDEWAYS.

[politichew]

14. We hold people accountable in this country by voting.

Don't like a policy? Support and vote for candidates against that policy.

Didn't win? Better luck next time.

[bvar22]

52. ?

"Didn't win? Better luck next time."

[DeSwiss]

56. With that comment -- and only your 7th one I might add -- You have just WON.....

...The Steaming Bag Award!

- Congratulations! And good-bye, because it smells horrible.

/ig

[politichew]

58. I'm sorry that me promoting going to the ballot box upsets your sensitivities,

but this is a democracy and that's what I do.

[Egalitarian Thug]

15. Ralph Nader!

It's all his fault!

[Egalitarian Thug]

16. It's not murder when we do it. Jeez, what country do you think this is?

[LeftyMom]

17. Hell, people on this board excused the deliberate murder by missile of an AMERICAN CHILD.

Do you really expect them to give a fraction of a shit about 15 Yemenis?

[Comrade Grumpy]

18. Does anyone have an answer to my question? What happens to the people that did this?

Whether it's murder or "collateral damage," is there no accountability?

Who provided the intelligence?

Who targeted the vehicles?

Who pushed the button?

Does the military review and assess? Or was this a CIA job?

Do the people involved get disciplined? Or do they get medals?

I think we need to start naming names.

[Cali_Democrat]

23. There will be no accountability. n/t

[randome]

31. Who killed Pat Tillman? Does anyone care?

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[Blue_Tires]

60. You realize that not one person was held "officially" responsible for the Haditha massacre

or any number of a thousand military "accidents" leading to civilian deaths, right??

[Kaleva]

62. My guess is that you already know the answer to your question.

"I think we need to start naming names."

Nobody is stopping you from doing that but, IMHO, too few will care for anything to actually be done about it.

[seveneyes]

77. I don't think innocence has been confirmed yet

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/13/world/middleeast/drone-strike-in-yemen-hits-wedding-convoy-killing-11.html?_r=0

Most of the dead appeared to be people suspected of being militants linked to Al Qaeda, according to tribal leaders in the area, but there were also reports that several civilians had been killed.

The drone strikes followed a deadly multistage assault last week on Yemen’s Defense Ministry that left 52 people dead, and for which Al Qaeda’s Yemen-based affiliate claimed responsibility.
-------------

It's possible the "wedding convoy" was providing cover for the terrorists. The facts are not all in yet.

[idwiyo]

97. Nah, nothing to worry about. It was just an innocent mistake. Forget about it.

[LittleBlue]

34. They are collateral damage, not people

So you see, it's okay because we called it an accident. Just like the countless other accidents.

When something happens over and over with the same result, it is no longer an accident. That's negligence with no accountability, which is probably worse than murder. At least murder is prosecuted and someone is held accountable.

[Ichingcarpenter]

46. The My Lai massacre was an accident

as was this. Collateral damage, Assertive disarmament affair that happened in Yemen



"The frightening thing about the use of euphemisms is their power to efface the memory of actual cruelties. Behind the façade of a history falsified by language, the painful particulars of war are lost."

[Phlem]

54. The my lai massacre according to history.com

"Still, they acted with extraordinary brutality, raping and torturing villagers before killing them and dragging dozens of people, including young children and babies, into a ditch and executing them with automatic weapons."

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/my-lai-massacre-takes-place-in-vietnam

yup totally collateral damage.



-p

[karynnj]

89. It was not an accident

Read anything from the trial of Lt Calley. It was an atrocity that was likely condoned by people higher than Lt Calley - that was why some felt that he was scape goated (while still being very very guilty.)

[Ichingcarpenter]

93. neither was this murder

in yemen .

Did you read the quote on military euphemisms?

Errant strike my ass, just another military euphemism for murder.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

42. At least they stopped giving the murderers medals. Hopefully, they'll get around to trials.

[theaocp]

44. Well, it definitely WON'T be

those who are eventually killed in our own country because we have declared war on whomever we please wherever we feel like it. The problem is that apologists will cry when we're hit without any sense of irony to what we've been doing and/or enabling around the globe. It's damn sick.

[spanone]

47. our war machine answers to no one. i doubt they ever will.

[bvar22]

49. Now, now.. lest not jump to conclusions!

I'm sure they were aiming at someone who they thought might probably be a bad guy,
so this in not our fault at all.
The possible Bad Guys must have ducked at the last minute.

Bad things might have happened!
(Our politicians LOVE to use the Passive Voice)

Mistakes might have been made.
Bad things might have happened,
but that, in NO way, means than our government, our Party Leadership, and our President are responsible for any of them. These are things that Just Happen,
so stop with the blaming, or you are helping the Republicans.

Besides,
according to the Obama Administration and Sec of State John Kerry,
dropping a few bombs on specific targets in a foreign country
isn't anything for anyone to get upset about,
not an Act of WAR at all,
just an Act of Persuasion.

So don't everybody get all upset and start saying bad things!
All those people who got themselves killed were asking for it by living in a foreign country.


---bvar22
pinching for 3rd Way Manny

[DeSwiss]

50. They'll blame Nobody.

- You know that they always blame Nobody when sh*t like this goes down.....

K&R

[NoOneMan]

51. One of those people could have become the next Mandela in 20 years after the wedding

The world can't have that, eh?

[bluestate10]

67. Or the next bin laden. Since neither of us know the facts of the strike, I suggest holding off

on moral outrage.

[NoOneMan]

73. Yeah. Kill everyone then. Let God sort it out

Why think of the rights of the few in pursuit of safety for the masses. You can't run a country on that liberal hogwash


Oh yeah, and obviously I think this sentiment is bullshit

[BKH70041]

53. I Blame Bush

Why not.

[malaise]

55. No one

It's just brown people - not even Westerners

[Heather MC]

61. The US Government Suffers from Affluenza!

They are too rich and powerful to believe they have to suffer Consequences

[Agschmid]

68. Link?

[Incitatus]

72. No one, but you knew that already. nt

[Demo_Chris]

79. It's different now that a Democrat is in the White House. nt

[Coyotl]

81. The consequences will likely fall upon other innocent people.

Someone will take revenge and blow up an embassy or something else. And the people responsible for creating our enemies will pontificate away about how they hate us for our freedom.

[seveneyes]

85. the people responsible for creating our enemies

That would be the ones teaching the Islamist terrorists to hate people that don't follow their religious laws. Not the ones trying to stop them from carrying out their acts of terror.

[Coyotl]

87. Good first guess.

Guess again, exzept without the bigotry!

[johnnyreb]

83. Kick.

No matter how much I sweep, the dust keeps coming.

[solarhydrocan]

91. no statute of limitations on murder

which is what this is

[Desert805]

94. I know we're supposed to jump to conclusions

I know we're supposed to jump to conclusions, of course, but why has only one person mentioned that the "wedding party" could have been a cover story just as easily as it could have been a wedding party?

Need to move some men? Decorate some cars, and move with the wedding party.

Why, an elder will be taking his 8th child bride next week, so pack your things!

(As long as we're doing this fact free)

[idwiyo]

96. It's for their own good.