U.S. DRONE OPERATORS are inflicting heavy civilian casualties and have developed an institutional culture callous to the death of children and other innocents, four former operators said at a press briefing today in New York.
The killings, part of the Obama administration’s targeted assassination program, are aiding terrorist recruitment and thus undermining the program’s goal of eliminating such fighters, the veterans added. Drone operators refer to children as “fun-size terrorists” and liken killing them to “cutting the grass before it grows too long,” said one of the operators, Michael Haas, a former senior airman in the Air Force. Haas also described widespread drug and alcohol abuse, further stating that some operators had flown missions while impaired.
In addition to Haas, the operators are former Air Force Staff Sgt. Brandon Bryant along with former senior airmen Cian Westmoreland and Stephen Lewis. The men have conducted kill missions in many of the major theaters of the post-9/11 war on terror, including Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.
“We have seen the abuse firsthand,” said Bryant, “and we are horrified.”
An Air Force spokesperson did not address the specific allegations but wrote in an email that “the demands placed on the [drone] force are tremendous. A great deal of effort is being taken to bring about relief, stabilize the force, and sustain a vital warfighter capability. … Airmen are expected to adhere to established standards of behavior. Behavior found to be inconsistent with Air Force core values is appropriately looked into and if warranted, disciplinary action is taken.”
Beyond the press conference, the group also denounced the program yesterday in an interview with The Guardian and in an open letter addressed to President Obama.
Former drone operators Brandon Bryant, Michael Haas and Cian Westmoreland.
Photo: Joe Fionda
The Obama administration has gone to great lengths to keep details of the drone program secret, but in their statements today the former operators opened up about the culture that has developed among those responsible for carrying it out. Haas said operators become acculturated to denying the humanity of the people on their targeting screens. “There was a much more detached outlook about who these people were we were monitoring,” he said. “Shooting was something to be lauded and something we should strive for.”
The deaths of children and other non-combatants in strikes was rationalized by many drone operators, Haas said. As a flight instructor, Haas claimed to have been non-judicially reprimanded by his superiors for failing a student who had expressed “bloodlust,” an overwhelming eagerness to kill.
Haas also described widespread alcohol and drug abuse among drone pilots. Drone operators, he said, would frequently get intoxicated using bath salts and synthetic marijuana to avoid possible drug testing and in an effort to “bend that reality and try to picture yourself not being there.” Haas said that he knew at least a half-dozen people in his unit who were using bath salts and that drug use had “impaired” them during missions.
The Obama administration’s assassination program has come under increasing scrutiny in recent months. This October, The Intercept published a cache of classified documents leaked by a government whistleblower that showed how the program killed people based on unreliable intelligence, that the vast majority of people killed in a multi-year Afghanistan campaign were not the intended targets, and that the military by default labeled non-targets killed in the campaign as enemies rather than civilians.
The operators said that they felt increasing urgency to speak out in the wake of the deadly terrorist attacks in Paris last week; they believe drone assassinations have fed the rise of the extremist group the Islamic State, which has claimed responsibility for the attacks.
Westmoreland said of drones: “In the short term they’re good at killing people, but in the long term they’re not effective. There are 15-year-olds growing up who have not lived a day without drones overhead, but you also have expats who are watching what’s going on in their home countries and seeing regularly the violations that are happening there, and that is something that could radicalize them.”
In their open letter to Obama, the former drone pilots made a similar point, writing that during their service they “came to the realization that the innocent civilians we were killing only fueled the feelings of hatred that ignited terrorism and groups like ISIS,” going on to describe the program as “one of the most devastating driving forces for terrorism and destabilization around the world.”
At the press conference today, the pilots echoed these sentiments. “It seems like our actions of late have only made the problems worse. … The drones are good at killing people, just not the right ones,” Bryant said. “Have we forgotten our humanity in the pursuit of vengeance and security?”
Update: November 19, 5:25 p.m.
Added previously requested statement from Air Force.
I applaud these Americans. Thank you! Your work and disclosures are very important. Keep talking! Stay in front of the media and other venues, again again.
If the enemy we were fighting abided by a code where they wouldn’t target civilians, then yeah I would be upset by unintended deaths by drones.
Considering we are fighting a war against an ideal, and our enemies behead their captives, kill civilians, destroy pieces of ancient history. I give zero fucks, I repeat ZERO fucks. It’s a war shit will happen, mistakes will be made, others will be blamed.
Its not about 2 wrongs don’t make a right, it’s about our enemy will show us no mercy, if we had done the same we wouldn’t even be talking about this right now because this shit would be over.
War will exist until people realize they are being manipulated.
-“we need to make money and sell weapons and theres nothing more profitable than war”
-How about we incite some people with different cultural beliefs , train them a bit , make fun of them and their beliefs… you know poke them with a stick ?
-Well thats all and good but you need more if you think people are gonna send their kids into a war …
-Well then we need to poke in the other direction . What if we have them bomb Paris ?
Months ago , a hospital was bombed . On purpose . Hundreds died and it didnt even make your news screen.
Tell me something Mister K.Wesa , if your wife , unborn son , daughter , mother and father were all in that building and all died , bombed “by mistakes” would you not seek revenge in … say Paris ?
Mister K Wesa , you are a sheep and youre being lead.
Yeah, they “hate us because we’re free” – couldn’t be because we have been messing with their counties for the past 50+ years?
Just remember how much material and financial support the USAQ has provided for both Al-CIAda and ISIS.
Get a clue.
Horrified? Why? Weren’t they killing game? Is the US military planning to become vegetarian in masse any time soon? They aren’t killing human beings anyway but Muslims, right? Haven’t them always been “blessed by God” to do so? So why are they mixing emotions with it all?
Also, in any case they are not killing them but reducing their existence from a biological, sentient one to a physical one
What is the point of that article?
USG
Drug abuse among military personnel appears to still be a huge problem. Its been a huge problem for a long time. It was a problem 40 years ago and its more than likely a huge problem today too.
Drug and alcohol abuse is likely tied to many significant problems within the military. One can imagine what kinds of problems are created when those under influence are placed in custody of weapons that determine the fate of human lives.
Might not such have played a role in the bombing of MSF and the subsequent “human error” claimed by the military?
Now that the drone operators who have blown the whistle have had their credit cards and bank accounts frozen, perhaps a crowdfunding program can be launched for them so they can pay their rents and feed themselves and their families.
And now the Air Force is hiring paid private mercenaries to be drone operators. These are individuals who, I doubt, will be obliged to even take an oath to the Constitution and to obey “all lawful orders”:
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-fg-drone-contractor-20151127-story.html
“The killings, part of the Obama administration’s targeted assassination program, ”
should read The killings, a continuation of the Bush doctines administration’s targeted assassination program,
It’s not as if all those killed by drones are all innocent people. If you are in the neighborhood of a terrorist then there are only two possibilities:
1) you are in any case going to die soon thanks to the belligerence of the terrorist who may whip out a Chinese-made AK-47, or explode his suicide vest to usher you personally to alla-hebdo
2) you are probably his close friend and so you are not terrorized at all, in which case the drone is the right medicine.
So our cyber-pilots should not feel guilty in any way of their role in sending you on to meet charlie and company.
You will notice that relatively good muslims like Mr Sufi here can never be found within the drone zone of any terrorist.
Got it, no one can be innocent, even children, if they are born in areas with people who hate America.
Terrorists usually stay away from children as a safety precaution. Can never trust those curious kids not to pull the cords of their vests …
@General-“Terrorsits usually stay away from children as a safety precaution. Can never trust those curious kids not to pull the cords of their vests …”
STOP IT! That’s a funny quote. I have to go to confessional and repent my sin of laughing at your sinful humor… On second thought, no……
<>
You assume as if the neighbors know that they are living next to a member of a terrorist group.
U S. Sponsored DEW’s, People Cookers.
Stalkers, worse than drones.
thank you for reporting about this vicious, illegal assassination program run by the criminals in the white house & pentagon. i say, “not in my name!”
Air Force core values…
Killing Babies
Torturing Dissidents and Delivering Death Threats When In The Mood
Threatening Nuclear War
Hone Toddlers’ Video Game Skills
Using Their Own Children to Stalk and Harass Dissidents
Mowing The Grass
Bombing Weddings
Bombing Funerals
Killing For Fun and Profit
Public Teat Sucking
Crusading — Killing ‘Em All and Letting God Sort It Out
Pension, and for some, A Religious School Teachng Gig Where USAF Core Values Are Passed to Next Generation of Monsters
Just Bomb ‘Em
Perpetual Offensive War
Perpetual Torture
Never Think — A Thinking Soldier Is A Bad Thing
Always Be Creating New Enemies
Rinse And Repeat
A special THANKS to these and all whistleblowers coming forward for the rest of us, letting us know what’s being done by a criminal empire of the greediest in OUR names.
Today is my SnowMann (Whistlebowers) Day, my alternative Thanksgiving, celebrating something for which I’m actually truly thankful – instead of the racist and genocidal colonialization of this continent.
May everyone attempting to redeem his or her self within OUR world, especially when seeking a better existence for themselves and others, at least find some personal peace for their efforts.
@mark-I have so much i could throw at you in response but for the moment with respect to this piece by Mr Hussain he got us thinking much deeper than the piece is about. To me thats mission accomplished…..
“Have we forgotten our humanity in the pursuit of vengeance and security?”
Its been a very long time since the United States cared about humanity; for several decades now, the focus has been on increasing the power and wealth of the corporate owned and operated government, and its military industrial alliance.
Empathy has been obliterated from the minds of these creatures.
Just curious, how much empathy did you see shown by the mooselimbs in their attacks on christians, buddhists, etc?
How much empathy have you shown?
The United States and the CIA destroyed the democratic secular government of Iran in 1954 when they overthrew Mossadegh so that BP could keep their oil. We installed a dictator who brutalized the country for 25 years, all for oil. You started keeping score decades too late. Further escalation because in your moronic fantasyland filled with American corporate media lies, you want to believe that they drew “first blood”. How much of a moron do you have to believe that if Iran were doing “targeted assassinations” with drones that they wouldn’t be blown off the face of the earth?
Your comment smacks of the kind of moral relativism so pervasive in American society today. Two wrongs apparently make a right according to you. This kind of thinking is precisely the reason America lost its moral compass a long time ago. It’s okay to kill innocent people if a few of the bad guys are killed, right? Let me ask you a question – would you personally kill ten people with your own hands if you knew that eight of them were non combatants? I’m not asking whether you are okay with someone else doing it. I’m asking whether you would do it yourself. A report released last year by Physicians for Social Responsibility (Body Count) showed that at least 80% of the victims of recent American wars have been civilian non combatants. So junados, would you kill ten people if you knew eight were totally innocent?
If you,as your handle seems to indicate,are Latino,remember the US has repeatedly shown it has no compunction of murdering Latinos,and the destruction of their govts and people.
And these thugs are as Islamic as GWB,Cruz and all the other idiot heretics are Christian.
Or are you just another serial liar?
BTW,I read today that these guys had their funds cut off.
The govt.is out of our control and in the hands of dual citizen traitors.
Mooselimbs? That is a third grader’s level of idea of an insult. Reflects the intelligence of a Limbaugh or a Hannity on Fox.
Try some reasonable discourse if you wish to make a point rather than playground taunts.
The drones are good at killing people, just not the right ones
Does that mean he thinks it’s good or acceptable to be killing other people without any process of law if they are suspected criminals? Would he have no problem if the program actually was accurate at targeting with no collateral killings? Nice as it is to see more public transparency about the murder program, it’s disturbing that even these pilots are still buying into that central premise underneath. Clearly we’ve still got a long way to go here.
9/11 was a crime.
Yes,but a complete lack of will to investigate the day,leaves US all with the logical thought that they don’t want the true perps brought to justice.
Within a matter of hours, Paul Bremmer, who was with Marsh and McLennan (offices at WTC), was on national television spouting who the perps of 9/11 could possibly be. Osama bin Laden was numero uno. And of course Iran, Iraq, Hezbollah and Palestinian terrorists were suggested. All this with ZERO hard evidence within hours of the attacks.
Also consider the role the FBI played in the last bombing of the WTC and also consider that Timothy McVeigh was convicted of the Oklahoma City bombing.
And what did Bremer end up doing? He was appointed by Bush to be the first “governor” in the Shock and Awed Iraq:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ocSww75NeGU
Agreed it was a crime. Regrettable that hysteria turned it into global wars creating animosity and thirst for revenge. If we had treated it as a crime, perhaps we wouldn’t have created thousands of new radicals with a thirst for revenge on the greatest killing machine in the world.
I would invite you and anyone else, if fact to browse for The Toronto Hearings which took place in 2011, or better yet browse for the video, “A Decade of Deceit”. Granted, you can’t have the short attention span MSM wants you to have, it is about 2 hours long and engineers, architects and even psychologists review the tragic events on September 11. The perpetrators of 9/11 are not who you all have been brainwashed in to believe them to be. Let me know what you think after you watch it. The smoke and mirrors we’ve been given by MSM is just that.
Oh, no worries! The military is testing “non-lethal” weapons on innocent citizens. These weapons (like Directed Energy Weapons) are much more targeted and spare “innocents.” Aren’t we lucky?!
T.I. Jo, the human guinea pig
I am a non-consensual victim of these Direct energy Weapons testing. Drones will soon be obsolete as an autonomous weapon plat form. The problem the Military industrial complex is faced with is there will not be a need for all the expensive conventional weapon systems that make them filthy rich. They will just have to be satisfied with being Pure Evil.
Just another T.I.
I’am a victim also of RF weapons.
A must have, microwave oven leakage detector.
Amazon.com $35, it will indicate when attacked. This is government sponsored domestic terrorism.
@jim
I know I wasted my time replying to you…..and in the end….u won’t get it…
Follow your doctor’s advice and social services': Stop Breeding Please.
@jim
People set the standard, some have higher standards than others on things. Do I want to accept the crap journalism I’ve been seeing. I don’t. You obviously do. Good for you. Accept everything given to you….whatever is written…just accept it.
But the reason I only started reading THE INTERCEPT was because of one of it’s founders….Glen Greenwald. He impressed upon me from seeing him so many times debating other journalists on youtube, that there can be a new model of journalism.
This is what he has stated in the past:
“But ultimately, the only real metric of journalism that should matter is accuracy and reliability.”
“The whole article does literally nothing other than quote anonymous British officials. It gives voice to banal but inflammatory accusations that are made about every whistleblower from Daniel Ellsberg to Chelsea Manning. It offers zero evidence or confirmation for any of its claims. The “journalists” who wrote it neither questioned any of the official assertions nor even quoted anyone who denies them. It’s pure stenography of the worst kind: some government officials whispered these inflammatory claims in our ears and told us to print them, but not reveal who they are, and we’re obeying. Breaking!”
“And part of what I wanted to do was lay out for people why I think our vision produces better journalism, and to point to some of the really bad journalism that The New York Times has produced over the years—alongside some good stuff—which I think is a byproduct of this sort of obsolete way of thinking.”
“In essence, I see the value of journalism as resting in a twofold mission: informing the public of accurate and vital information, and its unique ability to provide a truly adversarial check on those in power.”
“My view of journalism absolutely requires both fairness and rigorous adherence to facts. ”
So you see Jim, there are standards. The author of this article I felt did not meet Glen’s standard of “his” vision of journalism. I want Glen’s endeavor to do well but articles like this should be challenged whether it helps Glen’s vision or hurting it. Glen said it perfectly: “… journalism absolutely requires both fairness and rigorous adherence to facts. ”
side bar: does your son call you “Uncle Jim?” or “Pah”?
The Intercept standard of journalism wasn’t set by me, Jim.
The co-founder Glen did. Compare and contrast his articles to this author’s story.
btw…I saw your mom, Bertha has had enough of u , she was kicking a can down the street, I asked her what she was doing, she said, ‘Moving.’…
@Jim
LMAO….I see the by-product of in-breeding is still alive and well in the USA!!
Btw Jim…..do you refer to your biological mother as “mamma”? or “Aunt Bertha”???
And we have the nerve to condemn people who want to fight back? Where does that come from– it is the KissingerSyndrome.
The gay bastard in the blackhouse brags about killing…
.
Last Year President Obama Reportedly Told His Aides That He’s ‘Really Good At Killing People’
MICHAEL KELLEY
Business Insider
November 3, 2013
This will not go over well for the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize winner.
According to the new book “Double Down,” in which journalists Mark Halperin and John Heilemann chronicle
the 2012 presidential election, President Barack Obama told his aides that he’s “really good at killing people” while discussing drone strikes.
Peter Hamby of The Washington Post reported the nugget in his review of the book.
The claim by the commander-in-chief is as indisputable as it is grim.
Obama oversaw the 2009 surge in Afghanistan, 145 Predator drone strikes in NATO’s 2011 Libya operations,
.
Jeffrey Dahmer and john wayne gacy were good killers too and homosexual like 0bama…
Look,the guy sucks.but calling him unproven slurs makes him look good,and you bad.Michelle would castrate him if he went astray.
Rev 19:20
And the beast “0bama” was taken, and with him the false prophet “Bush” that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshiped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
2 months left and 7yrs tribulation will be up..
The worst has yet to come..
A relevant sidebar. USAF may need the targeting info to program any AI-driven drones.
http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21678765-american-air-force-sponsoring-zoologists-oxford-hawker-hunters
The more things change, the more they stay the same. During WW2, the US army AF had a program to develop – and I am not kidding – a pigeon-guided bomb. The problem was that conventional bombers achieve dismal performance against maneuvering targets such as ships. So the idea was, to train pigeons to peck at the images of ships on a screen on which the image of the bomb field of view was projected, and which was embedded with a grid of wires that allowed translation of the target location to distance and direction off boresight, so the bomb could be steered in flight (just as the Pave Way and subsequent generations of laser guided bombs are. But although it worked well in the lab, once in flight the terrified birds forgot all about pecking and started trying to fly for their lives. Now we see the great grandchildren of those engineers trying it again with a different breed. Might I suggest, YOU IDIOTS, that the reason it failed in the first place is that birds want to fly, not sit caged before some display.
A picture is worth a thousand words:
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian-institution/bf-skinners-pigeon-guided-rocket-53443995/?no-ist
Oh BTW, B.F Skinner was the one who devised pigeon-guided bombs. He saw it as an opportunity to highlight his research into operant conditioning. Although he did not succeed in this particular venture, he went on to devise educational methods by which children could be conditioned to happily drop bombs on their country’s enemies. Thus it can be said that many of these drone pilots are merely the victims of probabilistic determinism.
So, what is all of this nonsense about humanity….?
@phil ferrro Thank you for your reply.
Did you know how ridiculously MISLEADING ( and can BE construed as INACCURATE REPORTING) the Author’s headline really is???
“FORMER DRONE OPERATORS SAY THEY WERE “HORRIFIED” BY CRUELTY OF ASSASSINATION PROGRAM”
1. they are NOT ALL DRONE OPERATORS…as per democracy now website, guardian and linkedin…Cian Westmoreland is an Air Force Technician (communications infrastructure of the program), he is NOT a pilot in any sense of the word.
In the first paragraph the author writes inaccurately:
“….four former operators said at a press briefing today in New York.” Not once does the author use Technician to describe one of the four operators.
2. the word “horrified” was ONLY mentioned by ONE person…Brandon Bryant….He was the ONLY ONE…..as per intercept: “We have seen the abuse firsthand, ” said Bryant “and we are horrified.” Bryant uttered those words only not by the 2 operators and 1 technician.
3. Cruelty??? I’ve read the letter to Obama and one would think that the “drone operators and 1 technician” would have used such a strong adjective to describe Obama’s campaign. Right? Or find them using that word via google?? NOPE. None of them have used that word.
The full text of the letter is below:
Dear President Obama, Secretary Carter and Director Brennan:
We are former Air Force service members. We joined the Air Force to protect American lives and to protect our Constitution. We came to the realization that the innocent civilians we were killing only fueled the feelings of hatred that ignited terrorism and groups like ISIS, while also serving as a fundamental recruitment tool similar to Guantanamo Bay. This administration and its predecessors have built a drone program that is one of the most devastating driving forces for terrorism and destabilization around the world.
When the guilt of our roles in facilitating this systematic loss of innocent life became too much, all of us succumbed to PTSD. We were cut loose by the same government we gave so much to sent out in the world without adequate medical care, reliable public health services, or necessary benefits. Some of us are now homeless. Others of us barely make it.
We witnessed gross waste, mismanagement, abuses of power, and our country’s leaders lying publicly about the effectiveness of the drone program. We cannot sit silently by and witness tragedies like the attacks in Paris, knowing the devastating effects the drone program has overseas and at home. Such silence would violate the very oaths we took to support and defend the Constitution.
We request that you consider our perspective, though perhaps that request is in vain given the unprecedented prosecution of truthtellers who came before us like Chelsea Manning, Julian Assange, and Edward Snowden. For the sake of this country, we hope it is otherwise.
Not once do they mention cruelty. The author’s use of this adjective is obvious …shows his bias which I don’t mind him showing but if the piece is not balanced by facts, it illustrates to me his poor attempt at sensationalism and is the type of article/news that Glen Greenwald has repeatedly complained about, poorly backed up by facts, and insufficiently researched, espousing their personal propaganda.
Did you know??
That in this report the author writes: ” Haas also described widespread drug and alcohol abuse, further stating that some operators had flown missions while impaired.”
Wow!!!! Right???
What the author failed to discover if he actually did any research or contacted Haas himself is that Haas is a drug user himself at the base!
As per independent: “When you were not actually firing a Hellfire missile, the job is pretty boring,” said former drone pilot and instructor Michael Haas, who served with the 15th reconnaissance squadron and 3rd special operations squadron from 2005 to 2011 and worked out of Creech Air Force base near Las Vegas. Alcoholism was not considered to be a problem. Every night we would get off our shift and we’d drive into Las Vegas and drink for three or four hours. I also had a cocaine problem…I’d take little bumps of bath salts and then go and instruct a ride. Synthetic cannabis.
“I’d have a bottle of Jack Daniels in my flight bag and I’d swig it walking back to my room. Anything you could do to bend that reality and picture yourself not there.”
As per newsweek: Dealing with bureaucracy, however, was far easier than the job itself; the operators say it involved sitting for hours in a dark bunker. Haas says he took drugs on the job to help him get through the experience. “In the last six months I was in, taking little bumps of bath salts when I woke up, escaping to the bathroom [for more] and go instruct a ride,” he says. “In my mind, I was thinking I was sharper and more clear, but in honesty I was just spazzing out.” He estimates that nearly a dozen others in his squadron were doing the same. “If upper command knew about it, they didn’t care,” he says. “They didn’t do anything about it.”
This is what the intercept author writes: Haas also described widespread alcohol and drug abuse among drone pilots. Drone operators, he said, would frequently get intoxicated using bath salts and synthetic marijuana to avoid possible drug testing and in an effort to “bend that reality and try to picture yourself not being there.” Haas said that he knew at least a half-dozen people in his unit who were using bath salts and that drug use had “impaired” them during missions.
Did you know?
That Haas was part of the culture referring to children as “cutting the grass before it grows too long.” Should we feel empathy or sympathy for these men??
Did you know? For now, let’s accept that the headline for this article was blurted by all four airmen…ie ” FORMER DRONE OPERATORS SAY THEY WERE “HORRIFIED” BY CRUELTY OF ASSASSINATION PROGRAM”
So Michael Haas is “horrified”….because of the stuff he’s seen…right?? You would think he would have started questioning things while he was drone pilot…I mean…he saw and was involved in the actual innocent killing of people…..right?
Well, on democracynow transcript Amy Goodman asks the following to Haas:
When did you start to have questions?
Michael Haas: Shortly after I became an instructor and I started to see how much the mentality had shifted since I had been in. And the 11th hadn’t really changed how they had trained their sensor operators from a basic-level standpoint.
So he NEVER questioned the program before that. Was he so “horrified” enough yet at that time?? So killing innocent people as a drone pilot wasn’t horrifying enough to question whether what he and the government were doing was right?? He had to wait until he became a drone instructor?? Give me a reason why I should feel empathy towards him??
My point is the narrative that this author and these pilots are giving should be questioned and vetted for absolute truth.
The editor of this article should be embarrassed for approving this crap. No first hand source and so many background information of these pilots missing. Questions that should have been asked weren’t. Sad article.
While the article may not have been up to the highest standards of journalism (not that I have ever seen any sense of the word standards in journalism) your rebuttal, which apparently only refers tot he quality of reporting and not the actual deeds being touted. I’m really not sure what your point is as, in the end, the story comes out as true enough even with your criticism. Are you saying it is sloppily written? What paper isn’t? Are you saying that because one is a technician it is all invalid? That they did drugs invalidates their claims that drug use is rampant? That the word cruel wasn’t used, makes it all wrong? Please, give us the point of your argument. I haven’t found it.
These observations which you have made are on par with mine while listening to Democracy Now. In essence, tto much, too little, too late, as the war machine churns on and there will be many more lining up to fight for America’s “interests”, oil and precious metals, screw the innocents on the ground. World is bordering on insanity and not getting any better.
‘Westmoreland said of drones: “In the short term they’re good at killing people, but in the long term they’re not effective.’
Really? Disgusting. You made you judge, jury, and executioner? Sitting in your air conditioned room directing machines to murder people, even if you kill only the ones that your bosses told you to kill it is still murder brother. Don’t get it twisted. Killing suspects is considered murder and that is all they are until a court finds them guilty of a crime. I guess you guys must have taken lessons from cops!
@mazhussain you need to take some notes from Glenn Greenwald about being a journalist. Maybe you should go to democracy now like Jeremy Schahill once did. He learned a lot from Amy Goodman. Stop spitting out mainstream weak articles. This is not investigative journalism. It’s copy and paste journalism. You have not offered any new or deep insights. Remember quality over quantity.
there are some people who read very little of MSM anymore. This article helps them. I include myself in that list
I too rely on media like TI for my english-language news, and appreciate their take on stories that are being covered by the MSM. But I also agree that their writing needs to improve. In this case, the very fact that these four men stepped forward is sensational enough, without the need to embellish or distort what they experienced or said.
And for Chirssake, how many people have pointed out that they are not pilots, but rather operators and a technician, and STILL TI has not bothered to correct the article!
You do realize that these are drones,there are no actual pilots,just guys sitting in front of computers pushing buttons.Something anyone could do,I imagine,even 5 year olds today,with all the video games.
So your talk of pilots is a misdirection,as they all were capable of actually directing the drone.
“Beware that, when fighting monsters, you yourself do not become a monster… for when you gaze long into the abyss. The abyss gazes also into you.”? Friedrich Nietzsche
Too late! Looks like we’re there! Nice to have Benji and his Palestinian Death Camps along for the ride…
How about;First they make you blind,and then reproach you for your blindness.Milton.
The more I delve into this story the more problems I find with it. How convenient that there was a press conference recently on drone strikes with release of Drone on Nov. 20/15. Does this make me more sympathetic towards these pilots?? No way. What came first??? The idea of the movie and then finding the ex-pilots for the narrative?? and holding a conference and letter to Obama days before the premier?? The author should have looked into the authenticity for the reason for the letter to Obama now rather than months before. That’s why the credibility of this article and the ex-pilots should be questioned. They are self-serving and no different from the US government.
As per Guardian: Drone premieres theatrically in North America on Friday in New York. Directed by Tonje Hessen Schei and produced by Flimmer Film, it features former drone operators as well as people in conflict zones living under threat of drone attack.
This article was amended on 19 November 2015, to correctly identify where Cian Westmoreland was based.
ok
Shhhh, don’t tell Christine Fair …
That is why they are “former” operators, if they don’t agree with the current administration’s way of doing things. Those who say that the author must be bias, because he could be muslim and blah blah, must be still believing in Santa Claus if they think that the american government is “incapable” of doing such atrocities! C’mon! You’ve swollen the hook, line and sinker! The question is here who’s behind of all this game of war! Wake up people. In doing so, take a look at the hidden messages of the January 2015 The Economist Magazine’s cover. There’s a lot being said there.
Obama serves oil billionaires and former drone pilots think he will stop it because of their letters/voices… that’s irrational. Obama is in politics because of money, profit, not because of human rights, he knows very well what is happening but he doesn’t care…
Obama is defending your way of life, smartass.
Wow,if you think shopping,sexual gratification,evil drugs,murder,racism,sexual confusion and endless war on innocents is worth defending,join up!Dumbass.
“I was just following orders.” Where/when have we heard that before?
At the moment when any of these people realized what they were doing they should have stopped. I am not filled with sympathy for the drone operators. Certainly their commanders should be held responsible, all the way to the top, but the operators are also responsible for their actions.
The entire drone program escalation, even though it is Obama’s effort to reduce loss of US lives, is immoral and reprehensible. Anyone associated with it should be held responsible.
I agree Baruch. I don’t have sympathy towards them either. I have sympathy towards those innocent lives they took after knowing it was wrong to be continually involved in the program. “I was just following orders” was heard numerous times at Nuremburg trials. I wrote the following response to a commentator:
@mark-the obvious answers to those obvious unasked questions is they have an overiding belief they operate by every day all day and that is SELF PRESERVATION. My experience with people in government either civilian and/or military is self preservation first and foremost. They will do as they’re told no matter what they’re told to do.
? Reply
mark ? Phil Ferro
Nov. 21 2015, 3:14 p.m.
@Phil- I respectfully and unequivocally disagree. Self preservation in the military should NEVER justify for NOT DOING WHAT YOU THINK IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO. These are 4 adult men, one of which, after being an ex-pilot, decided to become an instructor after killing innocent lives. Is that self preservation or a poor choice??? This is not like under the Hitler regime in that if soldiers disobeyed an order, they would have been put to death likely. There is no fear of death for these ex-pilots under US military….only fear of the consequences of losing income, reputation, dishonorably discharged, etc. And should any of these consequences justify for looking the other way for many years??? Especially if you have strong convictions when they were happening. I can’t answer these questions or you either Phil. It would have been nice if the author sought the answers from the men themselves. They lived it…we didn’t.
Phil….they had a choice just like what we teach children to think about. They CHOSE TO CONTINUE TO BE PART OF THE SYSTEM until they retired. Is that bravery or cowardice?? Honestly, to me…they were cowards. in that despite knowing they were doing something wrong, they waited after retirement to go to the news media and write a letter to Obama. I saw the video on Democracynow and after Bryant stated paraphrasing that, “the first was horrible, the 2nd was horrible, the 3rd was numbing, the 4th was numbing….”…
How many times does it take to know what is right or wrong thing to do?? They continued with being involved in this because of their own agenda…whatever they were. Bryant I believe from the video killed 13 in total.
Remember, these ex-pilots had a choice to disobey if they truly believed that it was a wrong, unlawful thing to do.
The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) 809[890].ART.90 (20), makes it clear that military personnel need to obey the “lawful command of his superior officer,” 891.ART.91 (2), the “lawful order of a warrant officer”, 892.ART.92 (1) the “lawful general order”, 892.ART.92 (2) “lawful order”. In each case, military personnel have an obligation and a duty to only obey Lawful orders and indeed have an obligation to disobey Unlawful orders, including orders by the president that do not comply with the UCMJ. The moral and legal obligation is to the U.S. Constitution and not to those who would issue unlawful orders, especially if those orders are in direct violation of the Constitution and the UCMJ.
During the Iran-Contra hearings of 1987, Senator Daniel Inouye of Hawaii, a decorated World War II veteran and hero, told Lt. Col. Oliver North that North was breaking his oath when he blindly followed the commands of Ronald Reagan. As Inouye stated, “The uniform code makes it abundantly clear that it must be the Lawful orders of a superior officer. In fact it says, ‘Members of the military have an obligation to disobey unlawful orders.’ This principle was considered so important that we–we, the government of the United States–proposed that it be internationally applied in the Nuremberg trials.” (Bill Moyers, “The Secret Government”, Seven Locks Press; also in the PBS 1987 documentary, “The Secret Government: The Constitution in Crisis.”)
Senator Inouye was referring to the Nuremberg trials in the post WW II era, when the U.S. tried Nazi war criminals and did not allow them to use the reason or excuse that they were only “following orders” as a defense for their war crimes which resulted in the deaths of millions of innocent men, women, and children. “In 1953, the Department of Defense adopted the principles of the Nuremberg Code as official policy” of the United States. (Hasting Center Report, March-April 1991)
Phil, my point in commenting on this article is that it is not of the type of quality that I expected from Greenwald’s “THE INTERCEPT”. The article is poorly written, pieced together from 2nd hand or 3rd hand sources and lacked substance, and insight from these men and left so many unanswered questions such as providing background information on these ex-pilots so that it can help the objective reader to decide if they are credible or not. I have watched Greenwald in many youtube videos debating and what is impressive is that HE DEBATES OR OFFERS EXPLANATIONS OF HIS VIEWS OR OBSERVATIONS WITH EVIDENCED FACTS. He has the foresight to know what his listeners are going to ask and so he provides well prepared answers. This piece is no different from main stream media. For the reasons mentioned, I actually find it underwhelming sensationalism. The author allows himself to be open to a lot of criticism for not mentioning this or that fact.
@mark-most of your comment I agree with completely. If I may rephrase a piece to “their choice to self preserve was a poor choice” instead of either or.
As to the part about the author……. There has been many pieces by the staff of TheIntercept that pissed me off sufficiently to research some of the details to better understand what was going on. And more often than not after researching I wished the authors had directed criticism to the audience as a slap to our faces. We all have our heads up our asses and a slap or 2 is a very efficient method of communicating to those afflicted with cranium enduced colitis.
I believe that how ever the published work is structured I should seriously think about it. Edward, Glenn and Laura put their lives on the line to inform me and you! I have a hard time critiquing knowing that. Additionally, it’s a form of art and art is undefinable and in my opinion they are artists that deserve their paycheck.
Mark, I think I see the problem here. You are an idiot. In this one, you quote the disobeying lawful orders mantra. If you were ever in, you’d know that it is never really an option. Military lifestyle is mostly a brainwashing operation and while you’re in, you fucked. Look what we do to people who actually DO uphold that standard, Bradley (or Chelsea) Manning, for example. He (or she) is in jail now for doing what was obviously the right thing. Edward Snowden. Not in the service, but still it shows what happens in this country when you try and do the right thing. Your point is still unknown. These people don’t deny their wrong-doings, they are admitting to them and calling for a halt to the entire program. Apparently you are upset because the article isn’t up to some supposed standard of excellence you have set. There is no such standard, as anyone in the real world knows. You don’t. I think the whole point of your letters are that you are just a bitter old nobody. If you wish to enlighten us with an example of perfect journalism, please submit a copy of something you’ve written. Please don’t count your bitter comment section rants. I’m talking professional journalism.
Wow, your racism really has you by the balls, doesn’t it?
The problem with this article is who it’s written by… Murtaza Hussain!
I mean how am I suppose to trust that the author is not completely bias? He is obviously an Arab, possibly Muslim and people are expected to believe that his interest in US foreign policy and Obamas drone campaign is not an attempt to project the Muslim islamophobia victim doctrine that gets shoved down our throats.
Yup, you are a genius! The secret is out. The author is the “obligatory” Muslim on the staff implemented to provide death to the “infidel” bias. How can a business run when very smart people like you, James, figure everything out?
Since the cat is out of the bag people need to know that Snowden and Greenwald are Muslims looking to create chaos in the US….
If all the other media have an agenda why would the Intercept be any different?
@James-what I believe about you is that your perception of the world is through the lense of hate suggesting an intelligence equivalent to a rock. Most people won’t give that type of person the time of day no matter what comes from your mouth.
I guess you completely missed the fact that he is REPORTING what the former drone pilots are saying, and not voicing his own opinion. Bigotry does tend to cloud the brain .
“Murtaza” being a Persian name, how can he be “obviously an Arab”?
We, here, Mericuns, don’t discriminate against them different kinds of Ayrabs. Persian Ayrabs, Black Ayrabs, Jew Ayrabs, they’s all de same to us. That name of your’s looks kinda ayraby to me. Bertha, go get me mah shotgun! Damn Terrorists are here!
You clowns crack me up.The whole Western media is filled with Jews,run by Jews,lies to US repeatedly,and are all dual citizen Zionists(openly proud of such)and you critique the rare muslim voice?
I forgot to add that this article felt like it was more of cut and paste of previous reports on the subjects. It would have been better if the author actually spoke with them to get a feel that THE INTERCEPT was trying to get first hand information rather re-circulating 2nd hand or 3rd hand information. I want to go to a news website that AREN’T of the main stream mentality. I want AS MUCH TRUTH AS POSSIBLE IN THE ARTICLES BACKED WITH FACTS. I truly hope The Intercept editors are more careful of what articles make the cut. This clearly did not. This article is in contrast to the McDavid story which I enjoyed tremendously because it answered most of the questions a reader would want to ask.
I saw these 4 interviewed yesterday morning on Democracy Now!. They are also in a movie coming out shortly called “Drone.” Perhaps some of your questions can be answered by looking into it. The effect of drone strikes is generational, not in our favor at all. Need to look at our deadly policies before we start questioning and complaining.
Those “operators” and “drone pilots” are sensor operators, they are not pilots in any sense of the word, what so ever. Also the accounts of a few SrA and SSgts are questionable at best. Not to discredit the enlisted force what so ever, but with the current size and scope of the RPA force and the amount of scruenty it’s currently under someone just a “little” higher ranking would wave the LOAC flag if these claims of wide spread civilian casualties and “fun sized terrorists” comments were true. It’s sad articles like this are spreading such false information.
I thought you had to be an officer to be a drone operator, at least from the articles I’ve read about them. These guys are enlisted men.
Repeat;This is electronic warfare,they don’t fly in the drones.And the one guy was a drone pilot instructor,which obviously means he knew how to control the drone.(Fly it!)
Incredible;False info.This is a truth site in a world of BS.Is everything discussed here gospel?No,but it sure has a proximity to truth that the MSM would have US die for.
Thank you for the article and it really isn’t anything new that we haven’t heard or seen on tv drama about the consequences of drone strikes (eg Homeland). I thought The Intercept was going to be more factually based than the rest of the journalism media but this article seems to may be think that The Intercept is no different. Where are the logical follow-up questions regarding what did these “ex-pilots” do after seeing their colleagues intoxicated? Were they also involved in using drugs? (you have 4 ex-pilots and one who states that ” he knew at least a half-dozen people in his unit who were using bath salts and that drug use had “impaired” them during missions.” Why wait to report these incidents AFTER they have retired?? Were there any documentation of any of them reporting these things to their superior? Did any of these pilots have in their records disciplinary actions against them? Mr. Hussain, this is not what I had expected for Greenwald backed article. It isn’t, in my assertion, investigative journalism.
The four were interviewed on today’s Democracy Now:
http://www.democracynow.org/2015/11/20/exclusive_air_force_whistleblowers_risk_prosecution
which also shows some drone video. Those of you who believe that the imaging systems are capable of identifying the people who are being murdered, and those of you who think that the problem of collateral damage will be solved by “facial recognition software” and the like ought to watch it. Pretty hard to identify someone when their face is reduced to four pixels.
No one is identifying them by facial recognition. This is not the movies. Typically they are killed because they are either firing weapons at good guys or there is “other intel” confirming they are the target. This is just an example of another idiot who does not know how this is done.
They bombed the international volunteers of Doctors Without Borders in a marked Afghanistan hospital while they were treating patients. While they were on the phone with US officials pleading for the bombing to stop.
The fact that you refer to “good guys” tells me a lot about your overall developmental level.
Seriously? How old are you? If your age has reached double digits, you should know the stupidity of reducing a fellow human to “good guy” or “bad guy” at all, let alone using that guess (and it’s only a guess) as basis for deciding to murder them. After all, this is not the movies.
If you’re using those terms as shorthand for who’s on the right or wrong side of the law, then you need to remember the Murricans are the ones waging constant unjustifiable aggression against other nations. They’re the bad guys. Anyone who fights back is exercising their innate right to self-defense.
It took courage for these fellows to reflect on what they have done and speak about it in front of the world. If more people would act for the public good based on critical self- and social-awareness perhaps we would have a bit less killing.
Also check out Winter Soldier testimonies, including Kerry’s.
It’s only a matter of time before one of these psychopaths the military is creating to kill children overseas, by pushbutton, goes, with a gun or three, into a restaurant or movie theater or daycare center in the ‘Homeland’ and ‘mows some grass’.
Imagine, if you will, a future where drones, platformed with active denial systems, DNA disrupting tetra radiation, targeted via RFID chips, nano-particles, etc…located by GPS satellite systems circling the globe from space, causing intense pain and suffering (torture), death for those human beings who had the unmitigated gall to stand up to the Satanic oligarchy who used the 9/11 false-flag attacks to expropriate the wealth of the world, while enslaving it gargantuan police state.
https://twitter.com/WG_Burton/status/667787719322406912/photo/1
It is good that they have come forward, but they are still cold blooded murderers. I wonder how many they have murdered from the comfort of their leather chairs.
To answer your question, watch the interview on Democracy Now. And, you might also ask the same question concerning the ones who are to this day murdering people “from the comfort of their leather chairs”, who have not come forward, and those in training to augment or replace them. Your son, cousin or nephew, perhaps?
If they were cold-blooded murderers they wouldn’t care about this and they certainly wouldn’t risk their future careers by speaking out.
That our actions in the Middle East have created mass numbers of terrorists should be obvious to anyone with a lick of sense or objectivity. That’s why I think their critiques of the policy–reiterating at length what’s so obvious–sounded political and distracted from the serious, and as yet, unexamined, issue of the emotional/mental/social fallout these people are experiencing from having such positions. I thought that that fallout was supposed to have been the thrust of the article, but their political views were given equal time. It just kind of bugged me.
EXACTLY! DISAPPOINTED. THIS IS WHAT I EXPECTED FROM MAINSTREAM MEDIA. PEOPLE ARE TIMES DEFINED BY THEIR ACTIONS AND INACTIONS….THE ARTICLE DIDN’T ASK THE OBVIOUS QUESTIONS….LIKE WHY DID YOU STILL WORK THERE IF IT BOTHERED YOU SO MUCH?? WHY WAIT NOW?? IF IT REALLY REALLY BOTHERED YOU?? MAYBE THEY DID REPORT TO THEIR SUPERVISORS BUT WHY WASN’T THAT INCLUDED IN THE ARTICLE?
@mark-the obvious answers to those obvious unasked questions is they have an overiding belief they operate by every day all day and that is SELF PRESERVATION. My experience with people in government either civilian and/or military is self preservation first and foremost. They will do as they’re told no matter what they’re told to do.
@Phil- I respectfully and unequivocally disagree. Self preservation in the military should NEVER justify for NOT DOING WHAT YOU THINK IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO. These are 4 adult men, one of which, after being an ex-pilot, decided to become an instructor after killing innocent lives. Is that self preservation or a poor choice??? This is not like under the Hitler regime in that if soldiers disobeyed an order, they would have been put to death likely. There is no fear of death for these ex-pilots under US military….only fear of the consequences of losing income, reputation, dishonorably discharged, etc. And should any of these consequences justify for looking the other way for many years??? Especially if you have strong convictions when they were happening. I can’t answer these questions or you either Phil. It would have been nice if the author sought the answers from the men themselves. They lived it…we didn’t.
Phil….they had a choice just like what we teach children to think about. They CHOSE TO CONTINUE TO BE PART OF THE SYSTEM until they retired. Is that bravery or cowardice?? Honestly, to me…they were cowards. in that despite knowing they were doing something wrong, they waited after retirement to go to the news media and write a letter to Obama. I saw the video on Democracynow and after Bryant stated paraphrasing that, “the first was horrible, the 2nd was horrible, the 3rd was numbing, the 4th was numbing….”…
How many times does it take to know what is right or wrong thing to do?? They continued with being involved in this because of their own agenda…whatever they were. Bryant I believe from the video killed 13 in total.
Remember, these ex-pilots had a choice to disobey if they truly believed that it was a wrong, unlawful thing to do.
The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) 809[890].ART.90 (20), makes it clear that military personnel need to obey the “lawful command of his superior officer,” 891.ART.91 (2), the “lawful order of a warrant officer”, 892.ART.92 (1) the “lawful general order”, 892.ART.92 (2) “lawful order”. In each case, military personnel have an obligation and a duty to only obey Lawful orders and indeed have an obligation to disobey Unlawful orders, including orders by the president that do not comply with the UCMJ. The moral and legal obligation is to the U.S. Constitution and not to those who would issue unlawful orders, especially if those orders are in direct violation of the Constitution and the UCMJ.
During the Iran-Contra hearings of 1987, Senator Daniel Inouye of Hawaii, a decorated World War II veteran and hero, told Lt. Col. Oliver North that North was breaking his oath when he blindly followed the commands of Ronald Reagan. As Inouye stated, “The uniform code makes it abundantly clear that it must be the Lawful orders of a superior officer. In fact it says, ‘Members of the military have an obligation to disobey unlawful orders.’ This principle was considered so important that we–we, the government of the United States–proposed that it be internationally applied in the Nuremberg trials.” (Bill Moyers, “The Secret Government”, Seven Locks Press; also in the PBS 1987 documentary, “The Secret Government: The Constitution in Crisis.”)
Senator Inouye was referring to the Nuremberg trials in the post WW II era, when the U.S. tried Nazi war criminals and did not allow them to use the reason or excuse that they were only “following orders” as a defense for their war crimes which resulted in the deaths of millions of innocent men, women, and children. “In 1953, the Department of Defense adopted the principles of the Nuremberg Code as official policy” of the United States. (Hasting Center Report, March-April 1991)
Phil, my point in commenting on this article is that it is not of the type of quality that I expected from Greenwald’s “THE INTERCEPT”. The article is poorly written, pieced together from 2nd hand or 3rd hand sources and lacked substance, and insight from these men and left so many unanswered questions such as providing background information on these ex-pilots so that it can help the objective reader to decide if they are credible or not. I have watched Greenwald in many youtube videos debating and what is impressive is that HE DEBATES OR OFFERS EXPLANATIONS OF HIS VIEWS OR OBSERVATIONS WITH EVIDENCED FACTS. He has the foresight to know what his listeners are going to ask and so he provides well prepared answers. This piece is no different from main stream media. For the reasons mentioned, I actually find it underwhelming sensationalism. The author allows himself to be open to a lot of criticism for not mentioning this or that fact.
Perhaps watch the video link to Democracy Now above. They were in the military, not flipping burgers at Dairy Queen. I imagine you don’t just go running in to resign, though one of the soldiers may have done just that.
Hi Susan. I did watch some of it. And in it I found things that supported my view that question the credibility of the ex-pilots. I’ve written it somewhere below already. I also researched other things about two of the pilots. Bryant and Haas have been involved in the program for at least 5 years. I can understand that you can’t just quit over night…..maybe can’t quit even in 1 year…..but Susan…..they continued this until up to their retirement. If I felt as strongly as they try to impress upon us on how wrong it was….I would have quit less than a year. Wouldn’t you?? If you felt as strongly as they did?? In addition, Haas, despite knowing he killed innocent lives for over 4 years….he CHOSE to become an instructor so HE COULD TRAIN OTHERS TO KILL INNOCENTLY. I don’t buy their story the way it is written out…it doesn’t make sense. You feel this badly but it took you over 5 years to have a press conference and a letter to Obama….oh…and how convenient that two days later is the premier of Drone that you guys are in. Hmmm. Susan, they aren’t true whistle blowers. They are self-serving. They, like the government, have a hidden agendas…only they know what it truly is….but it doesn’t make sense to stay in the program for 5 years when you have a choice to quit. True whistle blowers is like Sibel Edmonds, who worked for the FBI for only 6 months because once she exposed or complained to the Justice Department of the government misconduct she discovered , she was fired soon after. That is what bravery is…..to speak up at the right time (or reasonable time) disregarding the consequences of your heroic action. In my assessment, these ex-pilots were cowards. What is brave in what they are doing now….two days before the Drone premier??
WHEN YOU SEE SOMETHING UNLAWFUL OR UTTERLY WRONG SPEAK UP AND MAKE A STRONG STAND.
I saw the video on Democracynow and Bryant stated (paraphrasing) that, “the first (kill) was horrible, the 2nd was horrible, the 3rd was numbing, the 4th was numbing….”…
This bothered me greatly. How dare you say that ….when you continued to do it for 5 years! ie killing innocent people….just say NO! and so what if you got dishonorably discharged. Cowards!!
How many times does it take to know what is right or wrong thing to do?? He did this for 5 years Susan. They continued with being involved in this because of their own agenda…whatever they were. They don’t deserve sympathy. They made bad choices and they have to live with it.
Political views?How does that square with your saying that anyone with an lick of sense knows that our actions have created more terrorists.
It’s not political but realism,and both real conservatives and real liberals concerned about America as American patriots support that view as such.(realism)
The only political org that’s drone happy is Zionism and their MIC pol whores.
Unfortunately,I believe they are to stay though,as all nations (and non)are striving to get them.
“THIS” PIVOTAL STORY
Amy and Juan interviewed these very brave and haunted young men on Democracy NOW! this morning. It was – not to be missed.
http://www.democracynow.org/
if you cannot take the heat, get outta the kitchen. You think ISIS care one jot about collateral damage , they kill anything that moves….
Brave, haunted young dopeheads should certainly be culled out of the armed forces, I agree. Replace them with patriots…
Strap them blinkers on a little tighter, sonny, and keep pretending you’re somehow the more brave and patriotic for actually wanting to be in a kitchen that’s ready to “kill anything that moves,” before anyone kills you. Get help.
Hey now, Mark is brave. Droning him up some kiddie corpses could give him a blister on his joystick thumb.
How about you, Mark. How about getting off your easy chair and joining up. If the military won’t take you, not to worry. There are a number of American crusader outfits over there and I am sure they would take you.
Your definition of a “patriot” is someone who kills innocent children? Wacko! I hope that some day you become an IS hostage.
IsUS are dopeheads too.They caught a Saudi prince in delivery at Beirut Airport a month ago or so.Methamphetamine.
Pious Muslims do not do drugs……
IsUS are our boys,they operate under our limitations,and the only time we strike them is for political cover,and when they stray off the Sunnistan the Zionists have planned for them.
Saudi Srabia can only do what we and our master Zion let them.
Why did the MSM totally give them a pass after 9-11 and instead focus on Saddam,one of our other creations when “He went too far”,off the res.
When are you guys gonna wake up,in hell?
Yankee come home!
Well, how else are we to sustain an ‘endless war’?
Why is there general news blackout on the pivotal story????????
This isn’t really so easy. After all, history shows us that Allied bombers flew over the cities of Germany, dropping countless stupid bombs, each ready to blow itself apart on war plant or empty tarmac, SS officer or child. They didn’t have cameras and no one saw what happened, and maybe that makes it easier for some to deny they did wrong. But what was the alternative?
I am not eager to second guess soldiers who start out wanting to stop barbarities and end up wondering if they’ve bombed innocents. Not even their gallows humor convinces me for sure they intend wrong. No one denies war does wrong, but we still need to hear the alternative.
Of course, no one can justify people strung out on bath salts making life and death decisions – that is something obvious for the military to crack down on. They should also consider getting with the times and decriminalizing real marijuana for people trying to relax during their downtime (at least, stuff with a natural CBD/THC ratio).
I actually have suggested an alternative to bombing … it’s just a little crazy. I think we should porn-bomb them! We should go after these Islamic regimes with the full, unadulterated power of American decadence and drop treats for all the disobedient little boys and girls (and big ones). Sparkling wine from California, tasty pork sausages, and of course, booklets that intersperse the prettiest Arab ladies we can point a camera at with the occasional guy-on-guy action and numbers for American intelligence tiplines.
Perhaps the military could subcontract the drone production to Amazon, which has more interest in researching the kind of war I’d prefer.
Now to be clear … the alternative I suggest is intended to cause civilian casualties. Just not casualties of war. We want the locals … especially family members of powerful leaders … to give into our temptations, knowing some will become increasingly non-Muslim, while others will end up being served up as ISIS’ favorite flavor of non-halal barbecue.
Come on, guys! America is the Great Satan, right? So let’s be a tempter. Let’s sow discord. Let’s bring such conflict to such people as it takes to make them turn on one another. Let’s create a network of defiance within their communities. But let’s not attack them ourselves; let’s not be war criminals when we can be peace criminals far more effectively! They have death enough over there; the question is just, can it find the right people? And can the right other people start to opt out from it?
This is the most perfect solution. Go, Satan, go! (soundtrack by Messer Chups)
And “Peace Criminals” – brilliant!!
WNT, you need a high level cabinet position immediately, preferably one from the Kama Sutra.
We ALL need to bask in the primordial, always-present glory of life in this very moment, celebrate it by making tons of Love and Music, and get off of the pernicious, addictive drug of our imaginary desires, fears, and death-wish tendencies.
“What fools these mortals be!” – Puck
“Everything you’re longing for is already here.” – Longchenpa
According to most historians,that bombing hurt the war effort more than it helped.by enraging the civilian population,and it certainly didn’t help CC camp occupants either.It certainly didn’t help supply the camps,with the roads and rails attacked constantly and i would imagine that the anger against the allies was also focused on the camp occupants.
You do know that what is called synthetic marijuana sold in quick stops has nothing to do with weed but marketing,and a useful way for the MSM to slime marijuana itself.
Marinol?and a few others are synthetic.
The frequent “accidental” drone attacks on wedding parties support the notion that the US is targeting civilians, as with the air strike on the Doctors Without Borders-run hospital in Iraq. The only other possibility is the ignorant view that “high-value” targets are “worth” killing innocents.
Dear Tom,
i guess you didnt get the article right. it clearly points out, that most of the people beeing killed are innocents. So your statement is wrong in itself because the people beeing killed by drones are mostly not the ones running around with AKs and shooting people. So, as you can easily see, they cant give a rats ass about the ones they killed, because actually they didnt killed anyone. think about it. By the way, War is not about killing people and breaking things, war is about accomplishing your goals and interests with less resources, killing people is ´´just´´ something that happens in the process. Also there are rules for war and for the sake of simplification lets just say you´re not allowed to kill or harm people which arent directly a part of war-actions. If you are interested:https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genfer_Konventionen#Wichtige_Bestimmungen
So pls stop producing such a nonesense which even motivats someone who lives in the middle of europe to respond to you
Furthermore this article is not about the question ´´is it legit to kill enemies in a war´´ but about the fact that -via drone- you kill one suspected enemy, eight civilians who had nothing to with it at all and create another 50 potentially new enemies for the future.
sorry for bad english, not a native speaker
Yep.
Like the “victims” over there give a rat’s a$$ about the civilians they kill in terrorist attacks. War is about killing people & breaking things until one side runs out of will or people.
Yes, except that when one side begins to undermine itself by practicing technological terrorism, the other side grows in potency and in numbers. Do not underrate the enemy nor overrate the power of drone technology. When you sow hate, you will harvest the wind.
Tom, THERE IS NOT A WAR ON.
There is just America murdering people because they think they might do something bad in the future.
The way YOU think would equally justify them killing YOU.
It is the same thing, except America is far more richer and better equipped and able to ignore opposition or bully the world into accepting its own CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY.
You are a disgrace man, and so is your military and its leaders.
STAND DOWN, SIR.
What war? I didn’t know the US was at war against muslim children!
“Update: November 19, 5:25 p.m.
Added previously requested statement from Air Force.”
Long day, but I’m not seeing it. My apologies in advance, if I’ve simply missed it.
Thanks for your good work. Great article.
Weep, the beloved country!
I believe them. My nephew was a drone operator. He took his own life a year after his discharge. He wasn’t on drugs. He just wasn’t the same person when he returned from Afghanistan.
Even when it is “honourable”, it is just murder and burning shame.
I live in an R&R resort in Thailand and the US military would come here lots (we’ve stopped it for now) after tours of duty and they’d all come in the bars, like little boys, utterly confused to a man. The Brits and Ozzies would drink and drug themselves numb, but the Americans are always nervous because they get drug tested and thrown in the lockup for letting off too much steam.
I sat with a group once, none of them were much older than 21, I could’ve been all of them’s dad. They’d lost 4 guys to IEDs and half were furious and the other half were trying to accept it as part of war. I started to feel real unsafe around them, like they were going to explode, and I’ve seen my fare share of rough bars and trouble. They knew death more than any “tough guy” I’d met before.
I thanked them for their bravery and told them it was time to switch it off and get far away from it. And then I did the same.
Horrible and tragic even for the winners.
There is more to this story than the perspective of a few Airmen operating from trailers in Nevada. The operators cited in this report were not responsible for any decisions to conduct airstrikes and not in a position to see the effects of those strikes, only in a position to speculate. From the ground commander’s perspective who would have ordered the strikes there was no difference between calling in artillery, a fighter airplane, or a drone. The airstrikes they called in almost certainly met the exact same criteria as airstrikes from manned airplanes. An honest critique of such strikes would examine the rules of engagement and Law of Armed Conflict under which all strikes are conducted.
The article also makes no mention of the utility of drone strikes compared to other military means. While some strikes cause collateral damage, the damage is a fraction of what it would be using a B-52. The implication of articles such as this is that the US should not use drones, but they leave unexamined the question of whether alternative policies would result in outcomes that are much worse. Would you rather a drone with the ability to watch suspected terrorists, such as Jihadi John, for days on end wait for the opportune time to conduct an airstrike, or have B-52s drop over target for a few minutes drop enough bombs to level a city block to ensure that he was killed?
This critique is not to say that drone strikes are not counterproductive, but that the focus on them distracts attention from more important policy questions. The focus on drones is ultimately illusory because the actual critique being made is about whether we should be conducting military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan at all. By focusing on tactics rather than policy you also risk implicitly sanctioning outcomes that are even worse.
How about choice #3–neither.
Amen on the neither!
So you would leave Jihadi John alive to continue beheading civilians? The point is that the tactical use of drones are not as important as the policy to conduct airstrikes instead of using ground forces or a multilateral solution. It is also impossible to measure whether or not drones have helped terrorists in recruiting, and it seems that the slick media productions of ISIS have been far more effective at radicalizing young Europeans than drone strikes. Why does The Intercept focus on drones rather than the more violent acts of ISIS or the demonstrable ways that ISIS’ propaganda has been effective? If drones are not a useful instrument to combat terror, what is? There is no more discriminating tool to target terrorists, so giving up drones implies either doing nothing to combat ISIS or deploying ground forces. Focusing on drones distracts attention from more important questions and are ultimately just a provocative topic for journalists who want to get attention without saying anything productive at all.
Will one day Nick awake to the fact that we are terrorists too?Will he admit that we started it,in their country(these terrorists come from many Muslim lands,but we’ve f*cked with every one in one way or another),long before the day that changed everything?Does he realize they don’t consider themselves terrorists as much as our soldiers do?Will Nick ever realize that the only way for peace in the ME and world is when every nation,and every people are safe and secure?And that sticking sticks in hornets nests,and then arming the hornets with all sorts of weaponry,creates division and strife,and has worked out terrible for US,with tens of thousands maimed,wounded and dead,for absolutely nothing?
Yankee come home..
What a weak forced dichotomy. You should be asking, “Which do you prefer, that we bend over and present our asses to the enemy with flowers up our butts, or that we H-bomb every inch of the Middle East?”
There, that’s more like it.
A cogent well thought out comment. I read it twice because it pissed me off the first read. My take is, naively, we shouldn’t be conducting military operations at all. We’re civilized, right? We have the UN.
Please don’t dismiss the pilots. These four were affected by their service.
The point of the operators,that it creates more terrorists than we can kill,borne out by the increasing geometric numbers of so called masterminds(sheesh,22 year old masterminds),which minorminds like you and your ilk,fail to recognize,or is it you just don’t care,as your hatred dwarfs there hatred.
We’ve been there 14 years now,and they, the terrorists,are coming out of the woodwork.
Yankee come home.
the rules of engagement and Law of Armed Conflict
Maybe you haven’t noticed, but this isn’t an armed conflict.
Someone close to me quit the USAF after he was assigned to Creech doing technical support on the drone program, a few years before he could have retired.
Although he was a tech, and not a pilot, he was well aware of what was going on. Much of what he said echoes this article and the article in the Guardian, so I won’t repeat it. But what really hit him is how obvious it was that the people who were targeted were clearly not trained in war or combat, based on their reaction to being attacked. They had no weapons, no defense, and were not doing anything “suspicious”. They were clearly just going about their business in the garden, or getting gas, or looking for lost goats, or whatever.
What he saw were “things you can never unsee”, and after several years, he still has vivid memories and lingering PTSD. For most of his military career, he believed in what he was doing, but it became too terrible to bear, too obvious to ignore that the US military is full of sociopaths (top to bottom) and no longer has any positive purpose.
For those who scoff that he, or the others in the story, should have quit immediately, they have clearly no idea how the military works, or any understanding of the principles on which the Stanford Prison experiment is based on. The tactics that the military uses on impressionable young men every day to destroy their conscience happens every day.
It’s not an excuse, and I don’t think any of these young men are making any. But they have found each other and are following their conscience, and that is quite something when you’ve been immersed in military culture.
Oddly enough, they are three Senior Airman and a Staff Sergeant, meaning they are/were enlisted service members, not officers. Currently, only officers are drone pilots. (See e.g. http://www.airforcetimes.com/…/enlisted…/72806812/… .) So if they are lying about being pilots, what else is not true?
Enlisted drone pilots? Decision expected early next year
AIRFORCETIMES.COM
How do we report spam? ^
What, are you trying to discredit them? They are referred to as “operators”, which according to the very article you refer to
http://www.airforcetimes.com/story/military/careers/air-force/enlisted/2015/09/28/enlisted-drone-pilots-decision-expected-early-next-year/72806812/
says that enlisted personnel perform operator tasks, for example sensor operator, although officers command the drones. So, you see, there are enlisted personnel looking at the scene as the attack takes place.
It was an error for Murtaza to refer to them as pilots, though he did it only once. The other references, calling them operators, employ the correct terminology.
Bryant and Lewis were sensor operators, and Haas was a sensor operator instructor, which probably means he was also a sensor operator at some point, and certainly means he saw what was going on. Sensor operators have the dubious honor of guiding missiles to their targets, and can abort a strike at the last minute, or not, hence they are implicated as personally responsible for the kills in which they participate.
President Obama is clearly engaged in war crimes here. The drone program, and the wars in Asia and Africa will bear bitter fruit for the U.S. government and its supporters in due course.
already have….
I’m disappointed those drone participants didn’t have the Snowden/Greenwald balls to speak out and put themselves in the crosshairs long ago. The number of civilians killed by them suggests they would have saved one or more if they spread their legs and let their balls hang like men of Honor and Integrity. Speaking out is better late than never, I guess?
Given the attitude of the Government and the military toward whistle blowers and dissenters, we should be grateful that these men stepped forward. I am still waiting for an officer to do so. In the mean time, I am glad they added their voices to the conversation, and appreciate the considerable courage they showed by doing so.
Another thing: My guess is that as enlisted personnel, they are not allowed to perform any command activities, like actually flying the drones or releasing weapons. Not saying that this exonerates them from any responsibility, but it’s the officers pulling the triggers.
I was wrong in guessing the operators don’t have anything to do with weapon releases. See Mark Gubrud post above. In any case, Linda is wrong.
These guys were brainwashed Americans,probably from poor rural areas,or urban,and thought enlisting in the military was a way to be patriotic,I guess.
Obviously reality has changed their minds,and they,and you, know that today,to make any kind of rational AW statement makes you a target of slander,called unpatriotic by dual citizen traitors,and subject to financial issues,as I read today their electronic funds were cut off.
Give them a break.
Wonder if the technical-colleges advertising “drone pilot training” are educating students about the war crime indictments to come years later? Or that they may be banned from future travel abroad if an international criminal court charges them with war crimes.
Bet that’s not part of the training program!
Great follow up on these revelations.
“What do I think of Western civilization? I think it would be a very good idea”.
“Is it not enough to know evil to shun it? If not, we should be sincere enough to admit that we love evil too well to give it up”
Mahatma Gandhi (2.10.1869 – 30.01.1948)
I’ve got a critique about something I see here at The Intercept too often.
In the second paragraph, you write:
‘ Drone operators refer to children as “fun-size terrorists” and liken killing them to “cutting the grass before it grows too long,” said one of the operators, Michael Haas, a former senior airman in the Air Force. ‘
Just a handful of paragrafs later, you repeat this, as if it wer brand new information:
‘ The deaths of children in strikes was rationalized by many drone operators, Haas said, with minors in the targeted warzones described as “fun-size terrorists” and their potential deaths in strikes likened to “cutting the grass before it grows too long.” ‘
I’m a writer and editor, not of news, but of non-fiction, and this comes across to me as too quickly written, not reread and refined, poorly edited or just unedited, and just sloppy. And I wouldn’t call it regular, but I have seen stuff like this a number of times here at The Intercept. I have a hard time understanding this with the first-class editing crew here.
I agree. I have seen this too and it matters because reporters rely on the perception of their professionalism.
Be quick, but don’t hurry; be fast, but don’t rush.
This was an editing oversight on my part, not Murtaza’s fault, thanks for the feedback :-) It’s been fixed.
Wow, thank you for that quick reply, Ryan. Too good.
I think the content of the articles is far more important than the stylistic niceties, so I’d say he’s being a pedantic twat.
But you’re waaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyy more polite than me anyways.
I’ve been a professional writer too, travel journalism and auditing and report writing and technical manuals and teaching and training – banging it out – and these guys are operating on a relative shoestring pretty much on their own doing a job that NO OTHER media institution is inclined to even do.
They have no commercial aspect AT ALL on the site – no adverts no sponsors no nothing – generating money for them. They usually have no one on the ground able to go to events such as this and get interviews and first-hand quotes, nor are they able to get access to counter-stories from the establishment as they are pretty much persona-non-grata.
Stop being smug about your own plentitudes and maybe offer them some of it, gratis. Or spend your time writing to the big media companies and ask them WHY they are doing NOTHING when these guys are telling stories that the whole world should be hearing and heeding.
Otherwise, shut up.
Money shouldn’t be required to write a small article without sounding like an amateur, ultimately losing credibility. The point is, as you stated, this story IS important. So tell it like a boss, right??
The fact that the editor responded before you – in a positive fashion – highlihgts how much of a dumbass little prick you are.
And this:
‘these guys are operating on a relative shoestring’
…is hilarious. You obviously know nothing about First Look Media.
I have to agree with LThom 100%.
“I’m a writer and editor, not of news, but of non-fiction, and this comes across to me as too quickly written, not reread and refined, poorly edited or just unedited, and just sloppy. And I wouldn’t call it regular, but I have seen stuff like this a number of times here at The Intercept. I have a hard time understanding this with the first-class editing crew here.”
LMTHOM IS CORRECT. They do have a first class editing crew here AND backed up by rich pockets. Google :
Pierre Omidyar commits $250m to new media venture with Glenn Greenwald
I had a hard time accepting this article conceived and edited by The Intercept. The way it was written is similar to main stream media: shock us with headlines, author buys into what the subjects are saying without imparting objective data such as any data or interviews with people who joined terrorist groups as a result of drone strikes. This article appears more like cut and paste information….like so many main stream media.
It’s important for us readers to hold The Intercept with a higher standard than the rest of media because Glen Greenwald is all about that. I have high respect for his intellect and vision for this news website.
250 million?? Shoe string, really?? Also, don’t be surprised AND I SAY THIS NOW NOV. 21/15 TO FIND EVENTUAL ADS ON HERE. DON’T YOU KNOW? EVERYTHING EVENTUALLY REVOLVES AROUND MONEY.
I have high respect for readers like LThom because they see the truth. In my opinion, you lack this ability as I re-read your post.
LThom shouldn’t shut up. Just as Greenwald likes more accountability in journalism, The Intercept should be held accountable for poor editing and allowing this lack of evidence based reporting.
You want commercials?You should watch football,oy,I’ll tell ya.
I bet the gals were all thrown off by the face right?
They never knew.How sad.
Sometimes descriptive passages of human depravity need repeating.
Reminds me of Israeli talk.
That is true, but it should be done in a way that makes the whole piece a sensible narrative. Commenters here are bizarrely acting like writing well doesn’t matter. That’s nuts.
Grow up! This is not about editing etiquette you f’ng nitwit.
Gee, who should I go with – the Intercept editor who responded kindly, thanked me for my feedback, and changed the damn text – or doofuses like you?
To take the human emotion out of this program, I can imagine the development of a graphics application that converts all images of humans the drone operators see on their screens – regardless of age, gender or actual threat – into cartoon-character boogey-men, wearing menacing dark clothing and pointing RPGs right at them…
Perhaps part of the problem is that no one gets a good enough view to really determine what is going on before the button must be pushed. If a human cannot do it, I doubt that software can either.
I don’t believe that is true. Targets are identified by their facial appearance, as well as their actions and locations. The images provided by the drone cameras are detailed and magnified, and they know exactly who they are killing, and who are the collateral damage…
The results suggest that none of what you said is true.
Go to The Guardian and watch a video describing “bugsplats”, human beings being assasinated all for the “war on terror”. Also as you watch it notice that the human beings pretty much like you and I are not clearly defined but blown away anyway. Check back in with your observations, please.
I guess I’m making assumptions based on my knowledge of the technical capabilities of current imaging technology, and I’m sure the military uses the best available, but I’ll take your word that they don’t use that technology to its fullest extent.
And on what do you base your belief? Certainly not any analysis of the sensors. You might educate yourself by downloading an image of a Predator drone, from which you can get an estimate of the visual sensor aperture. Knowing it’s a FLIR operating in the 8 – 12 micrometer regime, you don’t even have to know anything about the focal plane to be able to calculate the resolution. Then, knowing the typical slant range to the target (available from official sources, no less) you can calculate the number of pixels across the face of a target assuming the pixels are ideally matched to the aperture. That would convince you that your beliefs are nothing but bullshit.
The thing that amazes me about people making these absurd claims is that the math and physics needed to do the analysis is at the high school level. You don’t need a fucking PhD to show that the Air Force and White House are led by pathological liars.
Nonsense. The definition of a signature strike is that they have no idea what or whom they’re seeing.
I’ve thought of this too. The False Flag universe we find ourselves in might be a good thing. Fake enemies, green screens, fake targets, studio-produced ISIS videos, less people killed, etc. And still, the military industrial complex gets its annual order for weapons from the sociopaths in DC. Win win (I guess).
The whole point of CIA/Pentagon terrorism is to provoke a response and thereby justify more money for CIA/Pentagon. It is the opposite of what one would do if one actually wanted to protect the US from terrorism.
Sure, lots of innocent brown people die. And eventually even a few white people. But nobody important.
And just think of the obscene profits, kickbacks, and “speaking fees”!
Exactly.
“Ain’t war hell?”
Except this isn’t really a “war,” but a vile, cowardly campaign of high-tech terrorism aimed at defenseless people on their own soil.
Yeah if drone advocates were targets of drones they’d change their underwear(and tune) every second.
If these individuals were so horrified by the results of their own actions, they would have quit the military as quickly as possible – conscientious objector. But like earlier commenter Kathleen Lowrey notes, this sounds like some CYA against future legal or not retribution.
Government leadership can NOT perpetrate horrors; they simply talk/write ,even when issuing orders. Willing acceptors of those words – military and domestic GovEnforcers – do the actual harm.
Your doubts about whether these people truly feel remorse and regret about what they’ve done are valid.
But as to the second part of your comment, government leaders are just as responsible for these deaths. Obama orders them. He could refuse, but he doesn’t. No one should let him or top military personnel off the hook because it all starts with them. Obama & his military stooges put the gun (drone) into the hands of people like these four guys, and the latter pulls the trigger. They’re all responsible, all complicit, all should be prosecuted.
Oh,so they’ve come forward to maybe write a book?They can make a killing.Not.
It would be published by an obscure printer,500 copies.
the stinkin Zionist MSM does not publicize rational tomes on the War of Terror.
Holier than thou,that’s it!(I knew there was some parable for crumb buns)
How can you not understand the idiotic position you have put yourself in by making that statement? You blame young and impressionable soldiers for thinking the would be doing good for their country and being slow to understand, while you are duped into believing that those really responsible are not. Are you not too old for that?
people laughing about “fun size terrorists” — or staying in the room when others do — aren’t dewy eyed fauns thinking they are making the world a better place. give it a rest.
So you think the ones leading that barbarism are the ones now “recanting” to stay ahead of the retribution. Of course you are anticipating a possible result. If anybody catches hell it will be the lowest level and the least responsible. Take your rest and shove it.
Since when are soldiers that? (Maybe in an armchair Liberal’s imaginary world, true.)
Clearly you’ve have zero exposure to anyone in the military, or law enforcement – or MEN for that matter. Jeezus. I just rolled on the floor at “fun-sized terrorist” crack, and now again from your post. Outstanding work!
As Veronica Sawyer said, “You’re beautiful.”
You seem to be incapable of distinguishing between MEN and the sort of sick, cowardly bastards who would find humor in the killing of children. The US military and law enforcement are full of such scum.
Pinkerton’s are cops.Can’t be trusted.
Real men make love,not war,btw.We aint gonna our cojones shot off,not if we can help it.Imagine volunteering for it?(I was almost drafted myself,but an oak tree got in my way.)
I imagine there were good cops long ago,but today they are all schmucks(mostly the white guys unfortunately),bald headed mean arrogant racist bastards,corrupt as the mob they wish they had joined instead.
Very sad.
This is exactly right. We’ve had 50 years of hearing about the effects of warfare on the poor American soldiers that in that period of time have been responsible for the deaths of upwards of 6 million people.
Vietnam vets? The 54K who died? PTSD? Gulf War Syndrome? Who fucking cares?
These people all had choices and they made them.
Using the excuse that they didn’t know better, were “young and impressionable”, would be laughable if it weren’t so deliberately stupid.
One of the reasons “the left” was so wrong to attack American Sniper was that what they were attacking was a reality they too often refuse to acknowledge.
That is who these people are. That is how the milieus they come out of see them. And that is how America manages to sleep at night with all that blood on its hands.
Savages.
quote”These people all had choices and they made them.”unquote
Says one who has never been DRAFTED.
Oh,so the purpose of the military is to make the world a worse place!
Tell all the people that you know!
True confessions are great!
True. In this day and age of the all-volunteer military, they signed-up for this crap, and also signed-up for this type of duty. They are as guilty of war crimes as those who give the orders…
The civilian leadership has issued all orders for war the last 15 years,and throughout our history.The military follow their orders.
What do you think this(US) is,Egypt?
Not yet.
Humans are the weak link in the drone assassination program. The new generation of autonomous drones will eliminate that problem.
“Have we forgotten our humanity” is not the right question. More pertinent is: “Will humanity be forgotten?”
Possibly not, if the new autonomous drones are equipped with non-volatile memory chips.
The technology is already there: Samsung has been fielding ground robotic sentries, some mobile, some stationary, with AI.
http://www.ubergizmo.com/2014/09/samsung-sgr-a1-robot-sentry-is-one-cold-machine/
Putting it in a flying system is the next obvious move, with the advantage that an AI operator won’t hold press conferences or develop qualms.
DARPA has been working on fully automatic drones for several years now; the work actually started more than a decade ago. Progress has been slow, not because of any difficulties in having the drone take off, fly to its mission area and back, then landing, but for the reasons that have been documented in The Intercept’s series on the Drone Wars. Having the drones automated does not solve the logistics problems, and does not make targeting any more accurate, because despite what one reads in gee-whiz novels, sees on Faux Noise, or in the attempts by Hollywood to portray the military as all knowing and invincible, there is a great deal of uncertainty involved in actually identifying the person or people in the crosshairs.
I don’t want to say the problem is insoluble, but there is a tradeoff that nobody wants to make: To make the sensors capable of sufficient resolution to allow positive identification of a person based on their face, the sensors would need to be much larger. According to the Brueget range equation, when the payload weight increases, either the aircraft must fly slower, or have a shorter range, or some combination of the two. Flying slower means more time to transit from base to and from the combat zone, and a shorter range means less time on station. So it translates into more aircraft (and more expensive ones at that).
Of course we would never know about these things if the people involved didn’t come forward, so that’s good. But I keep thinking about that BBC interview with the American officer talking about Camp Nama and how he had been there, but really disapproved and thought it was terrible, and is coming clean about it…. now.
Part of me feels like these guys know war crimes investigations are inevitable down the road, and they are just smart enough to get out ahead of them by signalling how they always thought everything they were involved in was terrible. Even though they didn’t intervene at the time. So dumber, less sophisticated involved folks can take the fall later on.
Inevitable? Astoundingly unlikely is closer to the truth. If the FBI can create domestic terrorism at will, why do you think anyone can stop the CIA and the military.
No, I disagree. Pinochet didn’t expect Baltasar Garzon to issue a warrant in 1998, 8 years after he left power and 20 some after many of his worst atrocities in Chile.
Miguel Etchecolatz thought he was home free, I imagine, about “what happens in the Dirty War stays in the Dirty War”. He’s in prison now in Argentina.
Does Henry Kissinger travel freely? (actually I don’t know. maybe he does on private planes. but I have read he has to be careful about it)
Justice doesn’t always triumph in the end, but it does sometimes. If you have a very bad set of crimes on your talons, that’s gotta keep you awake at night.
That is why if you do these sorts of things, you want to work for the most powerful force on the planet, and continue to do so for your whole life. Pinochet did not.
quote:”Justice doesn’t always triumph in the end, …”unquote
Yes it does. @ the real “end”.
@ Mike Sulzer
Astounding unlikely if not impossible. Unless and until another nation or group of nations defeats America in war. Short of that, it will never ever ever happen. No American elite would ever submit themselves to the jurisdiction of any appropriate international body.
“War crimes” prosecutions are for the losers of a conflict never for the winners or most powerful military forces on the planet. Just like you’ll never see a “war crimes” prosecution for anyone from Russia, China, Israel, Britain, France, Pakistan, or India. Have any guesses as to what the common denominator is in giving “free passes for war crimes” when committed by any of those nations’ citizens? Anyone? Buehler? Anyone?
Let me rephrase that, no high ranking military or political officials of any of those nations will ever be tried for a war crime unless and until their nation is defeated in war by another nation or group of nations. Every once in awhile those nations like to trot out a sacrificial lamb of the low ranking variety to keep up the fiction there is accountability under the Geneva Conventions or international law. There isn’t except for the defeated or relatively less powerful nations and their elites. That is the de facto legal immunity nuclear weapons possessing nations and their elites enjoy.
You are exactly right. But there are two other possibilities, which I would rank as more likely than a military defeat: economic collapse, or revolution. It seems to me that we have already closed the loop on a positive feedback situation, in which the ever increasing demands of the war machine lead to increasing neglect of the nation’s vital interests at home, including infrastructure, health care and education. This together with our corporations which feel no loyalty to their workers, their customers, or the nation that they inhabit, will lead us to collapse. Like the Roman Empire, we are destroying ourselves from within, with each new foreign military adventure only hastening our doom. But unlike the Roman Empire’s, our collapse will be rapid and utter.
@ 24b4Jeff
I’d agree with your comment for all intents and purposes. However, I don’t think “economic collapse” would lead to war crimes prosecutions in and of itself so long as there was some sort of functioning US government and a military that could at least defend our shores. The US government will never allow its high ranking officials to be subjected to that sort of legal scrutiny absent some other nation or group of nations having the capacity to physically apprehend them on our shores and forcing them to stand before some international court or body.
Revolution on the other hand I’d agree could lead theoretically to war crimes prosecutions but that would be a function of the winning side in an American “revolution” giving them up physically. In any event I’d think another “revolution” in America would ultimately be the end of America as it exists today in the same way defeat in war would be. So for me I guess it is a matter more of semantics rather than the ultimate condition(s) or route that could/would yield war crimes prosecutions.
It goes without saying that the US government will never willingly allow any American, especially someone associated with the government itself, to be judged by outsiders. Hell, we see that already in the way that US military are exempt from the laws of the countries where they are based. (For instance, US Marines frequently rape Okinawans, but the Okinawa authorities are prevented from doing anything about it. Typically the Marines get transferred, and that puts an end to it. Unless of course you happen to be the person who was raped, or her family.) What I was suggesting is that in a post-collapse environment the US may be too weak to prevent its war criminals from being arrested when they travel outside the US, as Pinochet was. Surely they will remain untouchable as long as they stay in their bunkers.
As far as revolution is concerned, I mentioned it only as a possibility that might lead to vulnerability for the American war criminals. I completely agree with you that a revolution would only make things worse, that what little is left of civility and ethics in our society would vanish. Anyone who wants a revolution is certainly insane.
…took the words out of my mouth.
between the silent protester and edward snowden, there is a huge range of possibilities. i have known people in a very similar position to those this article is about.
the blacklisting and loss of benefits for not completing service duty is a motivating factor for what you claim is ‘coming clean’. within the culture of the military, you may disagree, but you keep quiet. then you get out and you think some more, and maybe you can’t keep quiet any longer. i’m not saying it’s right, i’m just saying i believe their intentions are pure, that they’re perhaps based somewhat on guilt, and most of all, that they are definitely not trying to stave off future war crimes investigations.
in fact, that statement is so ridiculous, i am surprised you have that much faith in our government…