Kucinich: Obama’s drone attacks in Pakistan ‘inspire radicalism

[G_j]

http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0419/kucinich-obamas-drone-attacks-pakistan-inspiring-radicalism/


Kucinich: Obama’s drone attacks in Pakistan ‘inspire radicalism’

By Sahil Kapur
Monday, April 19th, 2010 -- 10:16 am


WASHINGTON – Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) forcefully criticized President Obama's drone strikes in Pakistan as inspiring the anti-American sentiments they seek to quell, touching upon a consequence of the policy rarely discussed in the media but well-recognized in the region.

"I do not support the drone attacks," Kucinich told Raw Story, arguing that they are pushing the United States "into an area of unaccountability that would lead to blowback, where we actually lose friends, where we help inspire anti-American sentiments and fanaticism and radicalism."

The missile strikes, carried out by aircraft drones piloted remotely, have wiped out many Islamic militants, including high-level Al-Qaeda operatives, according to Pentagon officials.

But they have also killed civilians, sparking anger in the Islamic nation and fueling dissatisfaction with the United States and Pakistan’s pro-American government alike. Kucinich argued that the strikes are, as a result, counterproductive.

"Just as an occupation fuels an insurgency, these drones build feelings and resistance against the United States and help gain support for those elements who wish to do America harm," he said, alleging that Pakistan’s support and cooperation is vital to nuclear nonproliferation and counterterrorism efforts.

..more..

[Xenotime]

1. We learned this during the Bush era.

[The Northerner]

2. +1

[EFerrari]

34. Apparently, the Pentagon is unteachable. n/t

[OhioChick]

37. +2 n/t

[LWolf]

51. +3

[tekisui]

3. knr, Kucinich is right again.

[ShortnFiery]

4. Exactly.

http://yorick.infinitejest.org:81/1/img/card-predator_yemen.jpg http://yorick.infinitejest.org:81/1/img/card-weapons_of_mass_destruction_usa.jpg

[NJmaverick]

5. It's also inspiring the Taliban to consider peace

[Luminous Animal]

7. Attack on US Consulate revenge for drone attacks: Taliban

AFP, Apr 5, 2010, 05.00pm IST

"Pakistan's main Taliban faction on Monday claimed responsibility for an attack on the US consulate in the city of Peshawar and threatened to carry out further assaults on Americans.

"We accept the attacks on the American consulate. This is revenge for drone attacks," Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) spokesman Azam Tariq said over telephone from an undisclosed location.
"We have already told you that we have 2,800 to 3,000 fidayeen (suicide bombers). We will carry out more such attacks. We will target any place where there are Americans," he said. "

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/pakistan/Attack-on-US-Consulate-revenge-for-drone-attacks-Taliban/articleshow/5762687.cms

[NJmaverick]

8. Taliban’s supreme leader signals willingness to talk peace

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/afghanistan/article7100889.ece

[Luminous Animal]

9. This is about drone attacks in PAKISTAN.

[NJmaverick]

16. Where do you think the leader is currently located?

[G_j]

12. drones are not mentioned in this article, but

this was there:

"During an interview that lasted for several hours and was interrupted only by the coming and going of messengers on motorbikes, our reporter heard nothing from the Taliban leaders to suggest that the movement was weary of war, as some western analysts have claimed."

[NJmaverick]

17. Do you honestly think that the Taliban would give useful information to the enemy?

[G_j]

19. whatever, your article does nothing to support your claim

ZERO, NADA...

[NJmaverick]

24. That is completely and utterly wrong, I have provided links to FACTS

rather than just post the unqualified opinions of Dennis K

Taliban’s supreme leader signals willingness to talk peace

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/afghanistan/article7100889.ece

[G_j]

29. I read the whole article, it says nothing about drone attacks

bringing the Taliban to the 'peace table'.

[NJmaverick]

30. and yet the ONLY thing that has changed in the last 9 years of the war

has been the increase in drone attacks making Taliban leader a less than healthy occupation. Do you have a viable alternate explanation????

[G_j]

31. entirely your own conjecture,

WTF

[NJmaverick]

33. Then you have no alternative explanation

so we agree that the drones played a role in the Taliban starting to talk peace. I know you would prefer to have a debate/discussion that only included facts favorable to your point of view, but history has taught us that can be a very poor approach. We need to discuss the positives and the negatives and then reach a conclusion. Not start out with a conclusion and find the facts that fit it.

[G_j]

35. ??

never mind...

[tekisui]

38. That one likes to argue with himself in a paper bag.

He rarely is ever in the same conversation.

[Donnachaidh]

14. weak deflective tactic -- look at the shiny keys over HERE...

next... :eyes:

[NJmaverick]

18. Facts seem to annoy you

[G_j]

22. what facts?

enlighten us

[NJmaverick]

23. These FACTS

Taliban’s supreme leader signals willingness to talk peace

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/afghanistan/article7100889.ece


Which is better than the unqualified opinions of Dennis that you posted.

[bvar22]

42. You have become a parody of yourself.

See Post #17 by NJmaverick:

And yet, in Post #23 you are citing useful information from The Taliban to support your speculation.


My, my.

[flyarm]

13. orrrrrrrr..inspired our guy Karzai to join the Taliban..you know Conoco oil guy Karzai that we put

in office in Afghanistan.........




Karzai to lawmakers: ‘I might join the Taliban’
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36178710/
Afghan leader made threat twice at closed-door meeting, witnesses say


updated 12:53 p.m. ET, Mon., April 5, 2010
KABUL - Afghan President Hamid Karzai threatened over the weekend to quit the political process and join the Taliban if he continued to come under outside pressure to reform, several members of parliament said Monday.

Karzai made the unusual statement at a closed-door meeting Saturday with selected lawmakers — just days after kicking up a diplomatic controversy with remarks alleging foreigners were behind fraud in last year's disputed elections.

Lawmakers dismissed the latest comment as hyperbole, but it will add to the impression the president — who relies on tens of thousands of U.S. and NATO forces to fight the insurgency and prop up his government — is growing increasingly erratic and unable to exert authority without attacking his foreign backers.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

It might be hyperbol here in the states ...but I would bet the farm it wasn't in his private meetings with lawmakers!!

[NJmaverick]

21. That's a huge stretch, why would Karzai care about what is happening in Pakistan?

[bvar22]

15. Taliban say buildup under way...Associated Press:

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan – The Taliban are moving fighters into Kandahar, planting bombs and plotting attacks as NATO and Afghan forces prepare for a summer showdown with insurgents, according to a Taliban commander with close ties to senior insurgent leaders.

NATO and Afghan forces are stepping up operations to push Taliban fighters out of the city, which was the Islamist movement's headquarters during the years it ruled most of Afghanistan. The goal is to bolster the capability of the local government so that it can keep the Taliban from coming back.

The Taliban commander, who uses the pseudonym Mubeen, told The Associated Press that if military pressure on the insurgents becomes too great "we will just leave and come back after" the foreign forces leave."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4348330

[NJmaverick]

20. They are talking bold, but their leader is talking peace

something he wouldn't have been inclined to do if there wasn't a constant fear that he will be attacked by a drone.

[bvar22]

25. Can you post a link to your claim?

Or have you talked to him in person?

Or are you just making stuff up again?

[NJmaverick]

26. Yup, here it is

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/afghanistan/article7100889.ece

[bvar22]

39. That is a far cry from what you claimed.

Here is what "The Taliban" has said:

"All the mujaheddin seek is to expel the foreigners, these invaders, from our country and then to repair the country’s constitution. We are not interested in running the country as long as these things are achieved."

So, The Taliban will agree to PEACE as long as every "foreign invader" (US) leaves their country.

[tekisui]

40. And Sharia law.

IMO, the Taliban offer was more of a PR stunt than anything.

[tekisui]

44. That may have been a false report.

Taliban reject the claim.

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2010-04/20/c_13260107.htm

[jpak]

6. Yes - this radicalism inspired the Mullah Omar to knuckle under and sue for an end to the war

right on Kooch

:D

[tekisui]

45. No knuckling under, apparently.

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2010-04/20/c_13260107.htm

[frylock]

10. knr

[RickyM]

11. They are also arbitrary

and wittingly or not end up disproportionaly targeting civilians which violates international law.

[Robb]

27. Kucinich is, in this case, completely wrong.

The people in Waziristan http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x229576">actually support the drone attacks.

Much more troubling are the http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2010\04\09\story_9-4-2010_pg1_6">scores, http://www.thenews.com.pk/top_story_detail.asp?Id=28263">perhaps hundreds of civilians who have been killed in the last month by the Pakistan army moving into the area and http://pakobserver.net/detailnews.asp?id=25245">killing indiscriminately.

Kucinich cozying up to Pakistan at the moment does little to suggest he has any clue what's going on. :eyes:

[NJmaverick]

28. Agreed, I am not even sure Dennis has visited Pakistan at least not in years

[Robb]

41. Nothing from the Dennis boosters?

Surely.

[defendandprotect]

32. k/r

[tekisui]

36. Obama's Targeted Assassinations:

Some foreign policy decisions are causing Barack Obama to be seen as an enigma wrapped in a riddle. The issue is not whether he is tough or a pushover prone to poetic speeches. It is whether he is law-abiding in international relations when under pressure or an illusionist throwing wool over foreign eyes?

The current concern is over his decision to target an American citizen for assassination without offering hard proof of involvement in actual terrorist acts. American Anwar al-Awlaki, a radical Islamic preacher living in Yemen will be shot dead by the US military or its allies on suspicion that his sermons encouraged the Fort Hood shooter and the wannabe underwear bomber. Perhaps the US Constitution gives Obama this authority but that does not lessen the misgiving abroad.

If Nobel Peace Prize winner Obama does this to his own citizen in a foreign country without demonstrating guilt, what might he be capable of doing to foreign citizens in their homelands? The use of violent stealth abroad is the ultimate instrument of coercion in foreign policy. The fact that many innocent local citizens are killed by American missile strikes in countries with which it is not at war makes the violence egregious.

Those whose sovereign and territorial integrity will be violated by assassins obeying a direct order from the US President may perceive an abuse of American power. Regardless of Obama’s wise words about talking to enemies, seeking peace and promoting prosperous democracy, countries other than America’s closest allies will see another proof of US exceptionalism unmindful of international law. Their anger will be amplified by their helplessness as US missiles take the lives of citizens uninvolved with terrorists.

In foreign relations, international laws are agreed to ensure that countries do not use national laws as justification for violent acts perpetrated on foreign territories. Of course, the US has conducted target assassinations secretly for decades outside its own borders but mostly against foreigners with a clear record of killing Americans or posing imminent threat to American lives. For these reasons, governments have turned a blind eye but that may be changing because of the rising “collateral damage” in terms of dead and wounded.

In Pakistan, American drones are currently targeting recognized terrorists who are easier to kill than capture. This is being done with the local government’s tacit permission but it raises the level of fear in many other countries. The US has made missile strikes in countries with which it not at war a regular part of the coercive components of its foreign policy. This has happened and expanded especially under Bill Clinton, George Bush and Obama.

The new element is the extensive toll of innocent civilians caused by the strikes because they are usually conducted through unmanned drones with devastating payloads or cruise missiles. For the moment, the US is able to use such methods without significant reprisals because most governments have no choice but to acquiesce.

Empirical studies of civilian collateral deaths and maiming are few and unclear. But the Pakistani press has cited a ratio of 50-1 and researchers in both Afghanistan and Pakistan suggest that killing the leaders of religion-based terrorists like the Taliban is more likely to increase recruitment than cause the movement to wither away. Usually, younger, tougher and more innovative leaders replace those who are assassinated.

more: http://themoderatevoice.com/69783/obamas-targeted-assassinations/

[quaker bill]

43. I think

flying aircraft into large buildings is about as "radicalized" as they can get. Strapping on a bomb and walking into a crowd to self-detonate seems pretty radical as well. What exactly does DK imagine these guys will do if they go to greater extremes? I am a bit unclear how starting from this place one can become "more" radical.

[G_j]

46. there are moderates who can be "radicalized"

the number of "radicals" is actually small. Obviously he is talking about their numbers increasing.

[Robb]

47. No, obviously he's pandering to a particularly ignorant set of Americans.

[G_j]

48. that was a response to me?

sorry, if I don't comprehend.

[Robb]

49. Those who avoid the difficult questions.

Good luck with that.

[quaker bill]

50. So then

there is something about this particular form of killing that is more "radicalizing" than the carpet bombing, fuel-air explosives, torturing, raping, tanks, machine guns, depleted uranium munitions, cluster bombs, A-10 strafings, stealth bombings, artillery fire, bazooka rockets, hand grenades, cruise missles, and MOABs we have used over the last 9 years?

If all that are likely to become "radicalized" are not so by now, do you really think a few more targeted hellfire missles will turn them? Short of nukes, I am not sure exactly what form of "encouragement" in this direction we have not already offered them in massive quantities. Does DK actually think this takes things to another level? Has he been paying attention? We have been conducting "cross border" raids for a very long time now.

I don't support any of this killing, but I think concerns about "radicalizing" these populations is unfortunately water well under the bridge and quite far downstream at this point. This was a very good reason to vote against the wars, which I believe he did, and I applaud him for it. 50 years of really bad foriegn policy will not be corrected by holding fire at this point. I am not sure that shooting helps either.