Tweet
The ex-Bush speechwriter with a boner for torturing people, evidently intent on maligning his own reputation, goes after Obama for merely killing terrorists with drones when he could be torturing them, and everyone’s having a good laugh. Kevin Drum, for instance, and Matthew Yglesias and lots of other people without blogs.
And that’s well and good. It’s obviously not a sign of weakness to use drone strikes. But it’s also not necessarily a sign of wisdom. In Yemen, we’re waiting to see a strategy for dealing with AQAP that relies on anything other than violence — some development or political or governance work that can address the conditions that allowed AQAP to take root there. Without it, the U.S. and the Yemenis are merely shwacking people when they pop up.
Now, I get it: drone strikes are what you do when there’s a threat in a non-permissive environment; and none of this has anything to do with the frivolous non-issue that Thiessen raised. I just don’t want everyone’s heckling to entail an uncritical embrace of drones.
2 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About ATTACKERMAN
RSS/XML Feed
I’ve been to Yemen a few times, most recently in March 2008. The Yemenis I know, and those I’ve encountered in the street, to a man don’t believe that AQ is organized or active at a level that warrants concern. They believe it’s a game concocted by the US and the Saleh administration to justify military action by the government, military support for the govt by the US, and the flow of funds.
What are they thinking about drone attacks there? What will they think when a family or two gets wiped out? I dunno, I’m not headed back there till later in the year.
Strange sense of values.
Why is better to kill someone (so they’re dead, dead as in forever dead) than capture them, interrogate them and lock them up until they’re not a danger so us?
Most people prefer to be alive under unpleasant circumstances than dead. But you think its better to be dead. Or, do you only think its ok to propose that warped view of life when you can score political points?
BTW: I personally think sending guys into the wilds of Pakistan to try to capture the muj leadership is a misuse of our troops. But, if a muj leader is “easy” to catch, its smarter and more humane to do catch, interrogate and warehouse than it is to kill. First, we get whatever they know (a good). Second, we don’t kill them (another good). Third, we can try to minimize collateral damages, something missles aren’t good at.
Of course, it’s possible you think the only good muj is a dead muj.