Welcome to PatsFans.com

One more reason to hate the UN

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by TBradyOwnsYou, Jun 4, 2010.

  1. TBradyOwnsYou

    TBradyOwnsYou 2nd Team Getting Their First Start

    Joined:
    May 17, 2010
    Messages:
    1,586
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Leading UN official criticises CIA's role in drone strikes | World news | The Guardian

    Basically, some blowhard at the UN is crying that the CIA drone strikes against the Taliban and Al Qaida in Pakistan are illegal.

    Um, since 9/11 was almost 9 years ago, I don't see how this is considered pre-emptive... Or are we only allowed X amount of drone strikes per plane they flew in to to our buildings?
     
  2. chicowalker

    chicowalker Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    13,175
    Likes Received:
    132
    Ratings:
    +274 / 3 / -3

    I haven't read the report (have you?), but my takeaways, from a different article, were different.

    First, I didn't see him claim that they were illegal.

    Second, he made a distinction between using drones in Pakistan and Afghanistan, where he thought they were probably OK due to self defense, and using them elsewhere, which he thought was more questionable and possibly opened up issues as more countries gain access to drones.

    Third, he thought the program should be under the purview of the US military, rather than an intelligence arm, for reasons of accountability as well as increased likelihood of following laws re. warfare.
     
  3. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,834
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +23 / 0 / -0

    #80 Jersey

    I believe he is pointing to the "pre-emptive war" Bush doctrine, and its legality in a place that isnt at war with the United States.

    its legality in general needs questioning.
     
  4. TBradyOwnsYou

    TBradyOwnsYou 2nd Team Getting Their First Start

    Joined:
    May 17, 2010
    Messages:
    1,586
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I read the story on a couple sites that said basically the same thing, but didn't read the report itself. And ya, poor wording on my part, I mistyped that. He didn't go so far as to say it was illegal.
    The 2nd part I guess what I got from the articles I read were that he was against the bombings in Pakistan as he judged them to be pre-emptive as opposed to reacting to contact as they are generally used in Afghanistan.
    I don't think they should be under the perview of the military at all. As it is they are able to do things the military has no way to do.
     
  5. PatsWSB47

    PatsWSB47 Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    7,887
    Likes Received:
    88
    Ratings:
    +175 / 0 / -0

    #12 Jersey

    Stop it for God's sake. He absolutely questioned the legality and he made the report just days after drones killed "Mustafa Abu al-Yazid, al-Qaida's main liaison with the Taliban in Afghanistan and a close ally of Osama bin Laden." I suppose just a coincidence:rolleyes: His concern that it may get out of hand is noted but disingenuous at best. Just another USA beat-down as far as I'm concerned.
     
  6. chicowalker

    chicowalker Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    13,175
    Likes Received:
    132
    Ratings:
    +274 / 3 / -3

    If you have an interest in responding to my post, please respond to what I've written. Otherwise your "response" is pretty useless.
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>