US drone strike kills 11 people (must be 'militants') in Pakistan

[Bonobo]

SUMMARY:

1. 11 people killed in one strike
2. 7,000 miles away from D.C.
3. Dead people = 'militants'
4. We are not at war or even in conflict with Pakistan.
5. We do not have Pakistan's permission to do this = Sovereignty issue
6. Pakistan has nuclear weapons. Destabilization.
7. Creating terrorists.
8. 7,000 miles away = they pose no immediate threat.


US drone strike in north-western Pakistan has killed 11 militants on Saturday, a Taliban commander and security officials said, as Pakistani security forces pressed ahead with an offensive in a Taliban stronghold near the Afghan border.

Two missiles slammed into a house in the village of Doga Madakhel of the Datta Khel area in the border region of North Waziristan, intelligence officials said. A Taliban commander told Reuters members of the Punjabi Taliban and Uzbek fighters were killed.

Drone strikes in Pakistan resumed in June after a hiatus of six months, during which the Pakistani government pursued peace talks with the Taliban. Pakistan announced an anti-Taliban offensive in North Waziristan within days of the resumption.

North Waziristan is home to local and foreign militants suspected of attacking American and Nato troops across the border in Afghanistan.

US drone strikes are a serious source of tension between Washington and Islamabad. The Pakistan government denounces the strikes as a violation of the country's sovereignty.

[JI7]

1. we do have pakistan's permission to do with, pakistan someitmes gives different statements in public

because of fear from terrorists.

why do you think they stopped during peace negotiations between the govt and taliban ?

[Bonobo]

4. "Sometimes gives different statements"

So when they give vague "okays" it means okay, but when the Prime Minister says "stop", it is ignored as political posturing?

That isn't right.

The US shouldn't allow themselves to be manipulated like that. Get a "yes" or don't proceed. Think CONSENT.

[JI7]

8. statements in private are not vague , the pm says many things because of fear of attacks

from the fundamentalists.

[Bonobo]

11. How do you know if they are private? nt

[JI7]

12. based on all the news i follow in the country

[Bonobo]

14. But it doesn't make sense.

You are suggesting that a private conversation made the consent to do drone strikes clear.

Now you are saying that you KNOW what was said in private conversations.

It just doesn't hold water.

[JI7]

15. i'm referring to news like post 2 , these things go on all the time

btw, pakistan also claims in public they didn't know bin laden was there.

[JI7]

2. Pakistan asks US to stop militants’ infiltration from Afghanistan

The US intervention was sought during a meeting between the US Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan James Dobbins and Adviser to the Prime Minister on National Security and Foreign Affairs Sartaj Aziz here at the Foreign Office.

Sartaj and Dobbins discussed the Pakistan-US relations and developments in Afghanistan. The adviser lauded Ambassador Dobbins’ efforts for promotion of durable relations between the two countries during his term as a special representative.

The two sides reiterated their resolve to deepen the bilateral relationship and strengthen mutual consultations on Afghanistan post 2014 with a view to advancing the shared objectives of peace, stability and economic development in the region and beyond.

Sartaj highlighted the instrumental role of the Pak-US Strategic Dialogue in fostering closer collaboration between the two countries in diverse fields, including trade, economy, energy, counterterrorism, education and science and technology.

http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-13-31755-Pakistan-asks-US-to-stop-militants-infiltration-from-Afghanistan

[JeffHead]

3. Of course they are all militants.....

These are smart bombs we're talking about. On a good note the remote pilot will probably get a medal for beating his high score. 11 militants in one shot, you gotta admit that's pretty impressive.

[EX500rider]

5. Pakistan has fighter planes....they could easily shoot down drones if they were actually...

...against the strikes. But they aren't.

[Bonobo]

6. Oh so they are FOR the drones. Let's ignore what the PM says about sovereignty! nt

[EX500rider]

22. Just typical 2 faced politician behavior...for local consumption..

They were "complaining" about the strikes back when they were taking off from Pakistani Air Force bases if that tells you anything.

[Cali_Democrat]

7. Just for context everyone...

Bonobo has stated that he supports the Israeli offensive in Gaza. He pretty much said that in a post the other day.

The OP is attempting to distinguish between the two situations and essentially justify Israeli actions in Gaza.

[JI7]

9. that totally ignores the issue of settlements, btw, one can be opposed to the drones

but it's not true that pakistan is against it.

anyone who knows politics in the area knows they will say many things in public because of fear from terrorist attacks.

but they are one of the top 5 countries to recieve US aid. and i posted a recent article where they ask the US for help .

[Bonobo]

10. You read all that into an OP about drone strikes? Here's some context for you.

1. I did not say I support the Gaza offensive. If I did so, please give a link or quote me directly.

2. "Attempting to distinguish". That makes no sense.

3. I am not attempting to justify Israel's actions in Gaza. I am asking Americans to be first and foremost responsible and responsive to what YOUR Gov't is doing. I am also noting that these killings are done 7,000 miles away against no imminent threat. You have a problem with me pointing that out.

CONTEXT ON CAL_DEMOCRAT

You would justify ANYTHING being done by our current admin. It is the only reason you responded as you did. The smell of your own hypocrisy on this issue is probably bothering you.

[Cali_Democrat]

19. Well since the Gaza offensive started, you created some interesting posts and replies

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025254720

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025269506

Reading your posts in these threads, I think it's obvious you support Israeli actions.

[Bonobo]

20. In other words, you can not provide evidence that I support the Gaza offensive.

But a nuanced conversation needs to be had and so I asked tough questions:

1) How should Israel stop the rockets being fired at it? - This is a reasonable question that needed to be asked. It does not mean I support the killing of civilians except in your mind.

2) Gaza and the lack of scale is, like this OP, designed to get people to apply a sense of scale to their thoughts. When they US kills hundreds of thousands (and US citizens have the political power to change the situation by voting) it is not reasonable to go off the handle for 50 or 100 deaths when there are true issues of defending oneself that actually are happening.

IOW, you want to remove any nuance from the discussion and paint me as a black and white comic book figure. That is a tactic that really belongs on some kind of idiotic Fox news discussion. It is really unworthy of DU.

[Bonobo]

21. And you continue to mischaracterize AND derail the thread. Why are you defending drone strikes? nt

[Bonobo]

13. Nice attempt to derail thread and disavow responsibility by the US for their actions. nt

[Cali_Democrat]

16. Nope. The US is responsible for this.

I oppose these drone strikes and I oppose the Israeli actions in Gaza. I have created countless posts criticizing US drone strikes since I've been on DU.

You, on the other hand, are wildly inconsistent when it comes to the issue of targeting alleged terrorists.

[Bonobo]

17. On drone strikes, I am entirely consistent as anyone can tell you.

The real question is why are you trying to minimize this?

11 people killed. In one strike. And it has been going on for 12 years.

Forgive me if you do not sound particularly critical.

[Bonobo]

18. Now you have made two claims about my positions that you cannot provide evidence for.

First you claim I support the Gaza offensive but cannot show any evidence that I do (I do not.)

Now you claim I am "wildly inconsistent" about the issue of drone strikes. (I am not).

Are you finished mis-characterizing my political views yet?