US Officials: Drone Strikes Will Go on in Pakistan

[The Northerner]

U.S officials say the White House has no intentions to end CIA drone strikes against militant targets on Pakistani soil. That could set the two countries up for diplomatic tensions after Pakistan's parliament unanimously approved new guidelines for the country's troubled relationship with the United States.

The guidelines allow for the blockade on NATO supplies to be lifted, but also demand a halt to CIA-led missile attacks.

U.S. officials say they will work to find common ground with Pakistan over the coming weeks, but if a suspected terrorist target comes into the laser sights of a CIA drone's hellfire missiles, they will take the shot.

All officials spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the high stakes diplomatic jockeying.

Pakistan has suggested transferring the drones to its control.

Source: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/us-officials-drone-strikes-pakistan-16134392


So, more innocent civilians will continue to be slaughtered as long as suspected "militants" are present or killed in the area?

How is that justifiable?

[HIMYM]

1. because the gubmint said so?

[msongs]

2. your commander in chief: executions of civilians is ok nt

[gratuitous]

3. It's apparently not illegal when the President does it

Nixon couldn't be prouder.

[RKP5637]

4. These will be wars of a hundred years. By the time the US is finished there

is going to be so much hatred for the US it will go on for generations just like in other areas of earth.

[FirstLight]

5. can we just stop?

Where do WE get any say in this? Nobody is even okay with us BEING there, much less doing remote-killing... I guess I will have to search around and see if there's a 'stop the drones' group...

[Poll_Blind]

6. NOT UNTIL WE'RE COMPLETELY BROKE. nt

PB

[RKP5637]

7. The profiteers don't give a damn what the citizens think or want. These wars are

raking in tremendous profits for the MIC. None are going to stop this because they have too much $$$ to gain.

[sad sally]

8. Neither will the night raids in Afghanistan end - especially since madman Sgt Bales is off the

media radar. And oops if more civilians just "accidentally" get in the way or are deemed to be harboring anyone who might resemble an al-Qaida terrorist, well, too bad - they might just be killed or taken to an American funded prison to be tortured until they tell the truth.

Analysis: Night-raid deal in Afghanistan is largely symbolic
By CHRIS CARROLL
Stars and Stripes
Published: April 10, 2012

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon won’t come right out and say it, but the agreement that governs night raids in Afghanistan is a largely symbolic document that eases United States-Afghan relations, while having little effect on the U.S. military’s ability to nab Taliban insurgents and other high-value targets.

That’s the assessment of national security analysts who have studied the memorandum of understanding signed in Kabul on Sunday by top Afghan and U.S. military officials.

The agreement itself only governs what it calls “special operations,” defined as joint Afghan-U.S. operations approved by Afghan security and law enforcement officials. There’s room around the edges for exceptional circumstances, like a high-ranking al-Qaida operative who turned up in the country, said Lisa Curtis, a South Asia specialist at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative Washington think tank.

“It defines it fairly narrowly, and leaves open the possibility of a counterterrorism raid conducted by a CIA paramilitary group or other unit,” she said. “That’s not to say those operations will occur regularly … but it stands to reason that if the United States had a very high-value target in its sights, it would pursue that target as it needed to.”

Though Defense Department officials would not answer questions Monday about whether the U.S. would ever mount a unilateral night raid in Afghanistan, a counterterrorism expert said that given the right circumstances, the answer is clearly yes.

http://www.stripes.com/news/analysis-night-raid-deal-in-afghanistan-is-largely-symbolic-1.174071