Democrats prefer killing Afghans to admitting Republicans had a good idea
July 13th, 2009 by Wil Robinson
The stupidity and arrogance of our government has never ceased to amaze me, but the latest dust-up over secret CIA plans to assassinate Al Qaeda leaders is truly Orwellian.
Apparently, long ago, in an administration far, far away, some Bush adviser actually had a brain. Imagine this: instead of dropping bombs from unmanned drones on remote villages, blindly hoping a terrorist was around at the time, the CIA actually decided to try and find the terrorists and kill them “up close.”
Call them hit squads, assassination teams, or “targeted clean-up crews.” Call them whatever you want. The idea was to - brace yourself, because this is a novel concept - avoid civilian casualties as we fight the enemy.
“The goal was to assemble teams of CIA and special-operations forces and put bullets in [the al Qaeda leaders'] heads,” one former intelligence official said.
So what did Democratically-appointed CIA Director Leon Panetta do when he found out about this secret program to kill only terrorists?
He shut it down.
Better yet, the Obama administration re-emphasized the missiles-from-unmanned-drones idea that had worked so well for the last 8 years. Because, you know, we’ve made so many friends with all those attacks on villages, mothers, children, farmers, grandparents, and poor people in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
But the cherry on the top of the whole debacle is the Democrats’ outrage at being kept in the dark about this “secret” CIA plot. (Oh, the horrors - another Bush Administration secret that violated the Constitution!) Because rendition, torture, faux-Saddam & 9/11 links, and lies about WMDs wasn’t enough. Nope, now we’ve really got Bush doing something wrong - he was trying not to kill innocent Muslims…
So the indiscriminate bombing campaigns from unmanned drones gets a boost (as it has since Obama took office). More than 40 strikes just this year in Pakistan - a “sovereign” country - (all of which have been denied by the Pentagon). Hundreds of innocent civilians murdered. Thousands of potential “friends” turned into Taliban.
So what are Democrats really angry about? Because it’s obviously not the moral outrage at taking innocent human lives. It’s not the self-defeating Bush Administration policies that created more enemies than dead terrorists. It’s not the hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis, Afghans, and Pakistanis, nor the thousands of dead American soldiers.
Democrats are angry because they were left out of the party. They’re mad because the Republicans did things without consulting them first. In fact, it’s not anger at all. It’s petty vengeance.
If you ever needed a perfect example of dismissing good ideas because they came from the “wrong people,” this is it.
No one gives a shit if the CIA hit squads would have worked better. No one cares if they would have avoided collateral damage. No one minds that the alternative is a failed policy that creates innocent victims, widows and orphans.
![[...do the math. Just in Afghanistan, U.S.-led airstrikes killed 555 civilians (of those reported). Compare that to the 730 killed by Taliban suicide bombings...]](http://www.internationalpoliticalwill.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/drone-deaths.jpg)
[...do the math. Just in Afghanistan, U.S.-led airstrikes killed 555 civilians in 2008 (of those reported). Compare that to the 730 killed by Taliban suicide bombings...]
All the idiot Democrats care about is that the idea came from Bush. From Republicans. From Neo-Conservatives. And we all know that they can’t have any good ideas.
Can we, for once, have leaders who think with their head and not with their campaign coffers? Is there a reason why politicians in Washington can’t move beyond partisanship and simply make an intelligent decision based on logic? Are we really going to sit here and feign outrage at the audacity of the Bush Administration while we actually increase indiscriminate murder of civilians who happen to be non-white or non-Christian?
A lawyer at American University who has researched “targeted assassinations” summed up why, in the end, the U.S. government chooses missiles over guns.
In legal terms, [the lawyer] said, there is no real difference between killing a terrorist with a missile or with a handgun. “In political terms…there’s a real difference. The missile feels more like regular warfare, even if it’s carried out by the C.I.A.”
So in legalese, it really doesn’t make a difference how we kill terrorists. We just like missiles that also kill innocent civilians because it eases our conscience.
Take a second and re-read that last sentence:
We just like missiles that also kill innocent civilians because it eases our conscience.
I’ll put that one right up there with “Ignorance is Strength.”
Tags: predator drone, taliban, War of Misinformation, secret assassination squads, Pakistan
I’m going to have to disagree with you on this one. What the Democrats find so appalling about Republicans is the proclivty for sociopathic behaviour. The rethugs won’t EVER admit that they did anything wrong or illegal. They have been controlling business and the govt and the media for so long (basically since the Reagan era) that they appear to believe that the law DOES NOT APPLY TO THEM. If you know more than a half dozen Republicans personally you will see this syndrome up close and personal. They seem to have their values bass-akwards in my mind. They seem to believe that business is OK, but individual human beings have no right to interfere with the all important profits.
Your point about legalese goes without saying. Capitalism, even in it’s most inhumane form is something that is almost worshipped in this country. It’s revolting, it reminds me of the Chinese and their “It’s glorious to get rich” campaign.
San Diego happens to be a haven for militaristic asinine right-wing Republican fucktards. It is very evident to me why the drones still have so much power. They are manufactured around 5 minutes from my house. Good jobs those RepugnanThuglicans provide in largely military districts with huge M-I-C presences. The military and M-I-C have become jobs programs in this country. It has certainly been the case for the last 40 years when the industrial base began to leave for other countries with lower labor costs.
Nunya–
Do you think Afghans give a shit about who thinks the laws apply to them or not? Obviously no laws - including human rights - apply to Afghans/Muslims, since we seem to be content to drop bombs on whomever.
And this has absolutely nothing to do with capitalism.
This is about the value of human life, which evidently, neither Republicans or Democrats have for someone who isn’t just like them.
And that is shameful, and has no defense - whether the Republicans are breaking the law or not.
Hold on there sparky, I didn’t say anything about how the Afghans feel, now did I?
“And this has absolutely nothing to do with capitalism.”
Oh really? Afghans know goddamned well that they can get a better price for opium poppies than they can for anything else don’t they?
That said, the making of drone planes has everything to do with capitalism bub, in THIS country. The whole political system here is about capitalism and it has been since the fucking Dutch set up shop here and sold stock in New Amsterdam, now known as New York.
I didn’t say it was right, or honorable, I said it IS. Jeebus boy, how old are you anyway?
I was referring to Republicans and Democrats in general, not necessarily politicians. Politicians are corporate whores no matter what their label says. Of course they place no value on lower life forms, they are the second highest caste in this country, the highest being CEO’s.
Nunya–
What you did in your original comment was move from my focus on human rights (i.e., let’s figure out how to help humans) to partisanship (your words: “appalling about Republicans is the proclivty for sociopathic behaviour. The rethugs won’t EVER admit that they did anything wrong or illegal…If you know more than a half dozen Republicans personally you will see this syndrome up close and personal.”) That is a partisan attack - an attack that will do little to nothing to help Afghans being bombed by airstrikes.
It also demonstrates where priorities are - in nailing Republicans to the wall - instead of stopping the killing of innocent people.
The bottom line is: CIA assassination squads will kill far less innocent civilians than airstrikes.
But Democrats don’t seem to care. They are more interested in pinning blame on the Republicans. Otherwise, why stop the program? Why not just bring it under Congressional oversight like it should have been in the first place?
Of all the things you can blame on Republicans, of all the violations of constitutional law, lies, and everything else, do we really need to add this one to the list - even if it means killing more innocent Afghans?
Saying that something “is” isn’t trying to figure out a solution. It’s figuring out who to blame.
Two things:
1) If you stop using the f-word, your comments won’t get moderated. Not my own prudishness, just a way to stop x-rated spam.
2) Watch it with personal attacks. What are you, maybe 5 years older than me? And how much experience do you have beyond what you read from Naomi Klein, Noam Chomsky, and Michael Moore, or living in Southern California? None.
See? No one likes personal attacks. So avoid them and I’ll do the same - focus on the issue.
The war in Afghanistan is all about capitalism. Ever heard the term “pipelineistan?”
Pipeline deal is sweet music for Iran Jul 15, 2009
By M K Bhadrakumar
“All the idiot Democrats care about is that the idea came from Bush. From Republicans”
not partisan?