On January 29, 5-year-old Sinan al Ameri was asleep with his mother, his aunt, and 12 other children in a one-room stone hut typical of poor rural villages in the highlands of Yemen. A little after 1 a.m., the women and children awoke to the sound of a gunfight erupting a few hundred feet away. Roughly 30 members of Navy SEAL Team 6 were storming the eastern hillside of the remote settlement.
According to residents of the village of al Ghayil, in Yemen’s al Bayda province, the first to die in the assault was 13-year-old Nasser al Dhahab. The house of his uncle, Sheikh Abdulraouf al Dhahab, and the building behind it, the home of 65-year-old Abdallah al Ameri and his son Mohammed al Ameri, 38, appeared to be the targets of the U.S. forces, who called in air support as they were pinned down in a nearly hourlong firefight.
With the SEALs taking heavy fire on the lower slopes, attack helicopters swept over the hillside hamlet above. In what seemed to be blind panic, the gunships bombarded the entire village, striking more than a dozen buildings, razing stone dwellings where families slept, and wiping out more than 120 goats, sheep, and donkeys.
Three projectiles tore through the straw and timber roof of the home where Sinan slept. Cowering in a corner, Sinan’s mother, 30-year-old Fatim Saleh Mohsen, decided to flee the bombardment. Grabbing her 18-month-old son and ushering her terrified children into the narrow outdoor passageway between the tightly packed dwellings, she headed into the open. Over a week later, Sinan’s aunt Nadr al Ameri wept as she stood in the same room and recalled watching her sister run out the door into the darkness.
Nesma al Ameri, an elderly village matriarch who lost four family members in the raid, described how the attack helicopters began firing down on anything that moved. As she recounted the horror of what happened, Sinan tapped her on the arm. “No, no. The bullets were coming from behind,” the 5-year-old insisted, interrupting to demonstrate how he was shot at and his mother gunned down as they ran for their lives. “From here to here,” Sinan said, putting two fingers to the back of his head and drawing an invisible line to illustrate the direction of the bullet exiting her forehead. His mother fell to the ground next to him, still clutching his baby brother in her arms. Sinan kept running.
His mother’s body was found in the early light of dawn, the front of her head split open. The baby was wounded but alive. Sinan’s mother was one of at least six women killed in the raid, the first counterterrorism operation of the Trump administration, which also left 10 children under the age of 13 dead. “She was hit by the plane. The American plane,” explained Sinan. “She’s in heaven now,” he added with a shy smile, seemingly unaware of the enormity of what he had witnessed or, as yet, the impact of his loss. “Dog Trump,” declared Nesma, turning to the other women in the room for agreement. “Yes, the dog Trump,” they agreed.
According to White House press secretary Sean Spicer, the al Ghayil raid “was a very, very well thought out and executed effort,” planning for which began under the Obama administration back in November 2016. Although Ned Price, former National Security Council spokesperson, and Colin Kahl, the national security adviser under Vice President Biden, challenged Spicer’s account, what is agreed upon is that Trump gave the final green light over dinner at the White House on January 25. According to two people with direct knowledge, the White House did not notify the U.S. ambassador to Yemen in advance of the operation.
A girl stands in the burnt-out remains of a house destroyed during the U.S. Navy SEAL raid in the village of al Ghayil in Yemen on January 29, 2017.
Photo: Iona Craig
The Intercept’s reporting from al Ghayil in the aftermath of the raid and the eyewitness accounts provided by residents, as well as information from current and former military officials, challenge many of the Trump administration’s key claims about the “highly successful” operation, from the description of an assault on a fortified compound — there are no compounds or walled-off houses in the village — to the “large amounts of vital intelligence” the president said were collected.
According to a current U.S. special operations adviser and a former senior special operations officer, it was not intelligence the Pentagon was after but a key member of al Qaeda. The raid was launched in an effort to capture or kill Qassim al Rimi, the leader of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, according to the special operations adviser, who asked to remain anonymous because details behind the raid are classified.
Villagers interviewed by The Intercept rejected claims that al Rimi was present in al Ghayil, although one resident described seeing an unfamiliar black SUV arriving in the village hours before the raid. Six days after the operation, AQAP media channels released an audio statement from al Rimi, who mocked President Trump and the raid. The White House and the military have denied that the AQAP leader was the target of the mission, insisting the SEALs were sent in to capture electronic devices and material to be used for intelligence gathering. A spokesperson for CENTCOM told The Intercept the military has not yet determined whether al Rimi was in al Ghayil when the SEALs arrived.
Although some details about the mission remain unclear, the account that has emerged suggests the Trump White House is breaking with Obama administration policies that were intended to limit civilian casualties. The change — if permanent — would increase the likelihood of civilian deaths in so-called capture or kill missions like the January 29 raid.
Photo: Iona Craig
The January mission was the fourth time U.S. forces have been involved in ground operations in Yemen. While none of those prior raids could be deemed successful — two were failed attempts to free an American hostage, photojournalist Luke Somers — they did not leave the same trail of destruction as the operation in al Ghayil.
The village is part of a cluster of settlements known as Yakla in the Qayfa tribal region of Yemen’s al Bayda province. A basic knowledge of the local political environment, combined with a grasp of the obvious challenges posed by the geographical layout of al Ghayil, would have provided substantial forewarning that this latest raid was a highly precarious undertaking. American military planners should have foreseen that their forces would face not only al Qaeda militants, but also heavy armed resistance from residents of al Ghayil and surrounding villages.
This area of al Bayda has been at war for more than 2 1/2 years, and the Qayfa tribe is renowned for its fighting prowess and a long-standing refusal to yield to the state. After the joint forces of Yemen’s northern Houthi rebels and military loyalists of the country’s former president, Ali Abdullah Saleh, seized control of the capital, Sana, in September 2014, they swiftly moved southeast into al Bayda. Most of the Qayfa tribe, including the men of Yakla, have been fighting the Houthi-Saleh forces ever since. Saudi Arabia joined the fray in March 2015, leading a coalition of nations in a military intervention and aerial bombing campaign, supported by the U.S., to push back the Houthis, who the Saudis view as an Iranian proxy force. In theory, the residents of al Ghayil are on the same side as the United States in a civil war that has left more than 3 million people displaced and brought the country to the edge of famine.
Al Ghayil, just a few miles from Houthi-Saleh-controlled territory, came under Houthi rocket fire more than once in the early weeks of 2017, leaving the area of Yakla on high alert for attacks and residents in constant fear of losing their homes to a Houthi-Saleh incursion. The closest town, Rada — home to the nearest hospital — had been a no-go area for the population of Yakla since it fell under Houthi-Saleh control in October 2014.
When the U.S. Navy SEALs flew into al Ghayil in the early hours of January 29 — a deliberately chosen moonless night — local armed tribesmen assumed the Houthis had arrived to capture their village. After the firefight started, some of the men who ran to defend their families and homes saw colored lasers emanating from the weapons of their opponents, raising suspicions they might be facing Americans.
Shortly after the firefight erupted, Chief Petty Officer William “Ryan” Owens was shot by a bullet that hit just above his armored chest plate and entered his heart, according to the former senior special operations official briefed on the raid. Owens died shortly after he was hit.
Further confusion set in when the attack helicopters joined the assault. Knowing the Houthi-Saleh forces do not have an air force, residents could only assume it was the Saudi-led coalition attacking them from the air. They were not entirely wrong. Troops from the United Arab Emirates — leading players in the coalition’s two-year fight against the Houthis — also took part in the raid and might have been involved in flying the helicopters that fired on civilians. Dozens of UAE Apache gunships are currently stationed in Emirati-run military bases across Yemen.
The UAE government did not respond to multiple requests for comment on its role in the raid or answer queries regarding any casualties among its personnel.
According to the former senior U.S. special operations official and a current military consultant, both of whom were briefed on the raid, the SEALs discovered by the time they arrived in the village that their operation had been compromised. It is still unclear how those on the ground were tipped off, but a current consultant to the Joint Special Operations Command, which oversees SEAL Team 6, said the command is investigating whether UAE forces involved in the raid revealed the details of the mission before the SEALs arrived in al Ghayil. (However, local residents, who are used to hearing the buzz of drones in the remote area, said they noticed the unusual presence of helicopters around 9 p.m. the night before the raid, which raised concern.)
Some men in the surrounding villages grabbed their weapons and ran to help defend their neighbors when they heard the sound of a battle unfolding, according to residents. Mohammed Ali al Taysi, from the nearby village of Husun at Tuyus, dashed to his battered SUV, tearing down a dry riverbed in the dark to reach al Ghayil from the north. But just short of the village, a helicopter flew low overhead, pounding warning shots into the ground on either side of his vehicle. Al Taysi jumped out, firing his rifle toward the Apache before retreating into the night. Other armed men closer to the village descended from the mountainside on foot to support the tribesmen of al Ghayil, who already held the advantage of the high ground on the western side of the village. The SEALs had come in from the low ground to the north, approaching the homes of Abdulraouf al Dhahab and Mohammed al Ameri from the eastern slopes below.
According to those present, the firefight quickly escalated around the al Dhahab house, halting the SEALs’ advance. As the U.S. forces fought from the lower ground and more men descended the mountainside to join the shootout, airstrikes obliterated Mohammed al Ameri’s house on the hill above, killing three of his children, ages 7, 5, and 4, and seemingly destroying any possibility of retrieving laptops, hard drives, or other intelligence material from inside without digging through piles of rubble in the dark.
With one Navy SEAL dead and two others seriously wounded, the special operations forces began to withdraw. But before they departed, according to local witnesses, the MV-22 Osprey used to extract the retreating soldiers crash-landed, forcing another aircraft to land to pull out the operators. Airstrikes then deliberately destroyed the abandoned Osprey.
The gunfight had lasted the better part of an hour. It would be another hour or more before the skies fell silent and the sound of helicopters, aircraft, and drones faded. It was in the dawn light that the mass of bodies was revealed, the missing accounted for, and dead children identified. Smoke swirled into the air from the roofs still burning and the carcass of the smoldering Osprey in the distance.
Map: The Intercept
This was not the first time residents of the remote Yakla area had lost family members to a U.S. attack. In December 2013, a drone strike on a wedding convoy killed 12 civilians. The groom, Abdallah al Ameri, survived that attack. But on January 29, the 65-year-old was killed standing unarmed beside his house as it was bombed. A picture posted online shortly after the raid showed his body lying in the rocky sand with his hand clasped around a blood-soaked head torch.
The aftermath of the raid’s destruction left villagers struggling to understand what the Americans were trying to accomplish. Abdulraouf, whose house appeared to be one of the targets, was no stranger to American attempts to kill him. He was the apparent target of at least three separate airstrikes between 2011 and 2013 in al Bayda province, including one in September 2012 that killed 12 civilians — a pregnant woman and three children were among the dead.
Following the deaths, Abdulraouf called on the families of victims to hire international lawyers to take their cases to court in the United States. Two of Abdulraouf’s brothers were also killed by American drone strikes as the U.S. was drawn into a long-running bloody feud that had split the family of some 18 brothers between those aligned with al Qaeda and those who stood with the state.
Although Abdulelah al Dhahab, a brother who survived the January raid but lost his 12-year-old son, denied Abdulraouf was an al Qaeda member, the bonds between the family and Yemen’s al Qaeda insurgency also extend to marital ties. Al Qaeda propagandist and American citizen Anwar al Awlaki married Abdularouf’s sister. Awlaki’s 8-year-old daughter, Nawar, was in the al Dhahab house the night of the raid. She bled to death after being shot in the neck — the second of Awlaki’s children to be killed by the United States since his own death by an American drone strike in September 2011. His eldest son, 16-year-old Denver-born Abdulrahman, was killed by a U.S. drone two weeks after his father.
Following the onset of civil war in March 2015, Abdulraouf played a key role in leading the self-described “resistance” of local armed militias loyal to the Saudi-led coalition, fighting on the pro-government side of Yemen’s internationally recognized president-in-exile, Abdu Rabbu Mansour Hadi. As a senior Qayfa tribal figure, Abdulraouf was a well-respected resistance leader. The day before the January raid, he was handing out salaries for pro-government fighters after collecting the money from the nearest Saudi coalition base in the neighboring province of Marib.
Although U.S. drone strikes killed a succession of leading AQAP figures in the first six months of 2015, drone, air, and sea-to-land bombings over the preceding 15 years were plagued by poor intelligence and numerous civilian casualties. Survivors of the al Ghayil operation were left to speculate what intelligence led American special operations forces to storm their village “as if they were coming to kill Osama bin Laden,” as one resident noted, puzzling over whether the U.S. thought it was going after the leader of the Islamic State rather than an apparent low-level al Qaeda militant of the same name, Abubakr al Baghdadi, who was killed in the raid. “Or the Americans were tricked into killing Abdulraouf, the leading fighter in Qayfa, to help the Houthis and Saleh,” hypothesized one anti-Houthi tribal fighter.
On at least one occasion in Yemen, the U.S. was deliberately fed false intelligence by the regime of then-President Saleh. In May 2010, it resulted in the erroneous killing of the deputy governor of Marib in a drone strike. As one anonymous American official was later quoted as saying, “We think we got played.”
Though the planning for the Yakla operation began many months ago, Abdulraouf’s house in al Ghayil was built recently. The modern cinder-block walls and PVC windows stood out among the simple stone huts dominating the rest of the village. The tribal leader had been living in a tent on the rocky hillside after being run out of the al Dhahab family homestead in the village of al Manasa by Houthi-Saleh forces in the fall of 2014.
One resident, who asked not to be identified for fear of reprisals, stated that Mohammed al Ameri’s home was used as a guest house by passing al Qaeda militants — aggressive men whom the rest of the villagers avoided. To get to Mohammed’s house, the SEALs had to pass the al Dhahab home, where Abdulraouf, his brother Sultan, and their guests were holding a late-night gathering with another tribal leader, octogenarian Saif Mohammed al Jawfi, who also died in the raid. The witness claimed the meeting in al Dhahab’s house was held to resolve an issue regarding one of Saif’s relatives who had been arrested by militants connected to the guest house, as well as to arrange the distribution of the U.S.-backed Saudi coalition cash payments to anti-Houthi resistance fighters.
Those in the village speculated about the exact target of the January 29 raid. Was the house of Abdulraouf and the tent beside it the objective? Did the U.S. military believe that Qassim al Rimi, the AQAP leader, was inside the house? Or was it the next building on the hillside above, the home of Mohammed al Ameri, the Navy SEALs were aiming for? Others ventured that a woman, Arwa al Baghdadi, might have been the focus.
Arwa al Baghdadi, according to her own social media postings, was imprisoned in 2010 and tortured by authorities in Saudi Arabia after her brother was shot dead by security forces. She was later used as an apparent bargaining chip in the 2015 release of a Saudi diplomat who had been kidnapped by AQAP in Aden three years earlier (Saudi officials say there was no connection). Arwa al Baghdadi, who fled to Yemen after her release from prison, was killed in the raid along with her son Osama, and another brother, Abubakr al Baghdadi. Her pregnant sister-in-law was shot in the stomach. The unborn infant, grazed by the bullet fired into his mother’s stomach, died following an emergency caesarean section at the 26 September hospital, a five-hour drive away in the neighboring province of Marib.
Many of al Ghayil’s residents denied any presence of al Qaeda militants in the village that night. Al Rimi’s statement after the raid offered condolences to the families of those killed, and along with AQAP propaganda channels, listed 14 men among the dead, although al Rimi stopped short of calling them AQAP members. (Eight of those names were not included in the toll of the dead that villagers provided to The Intercept, as they were not known to local residents. Family members disputed claims the remaining six men were members of AQAP.)
In the current context of Yemen’s civil war, AQAP has sought to frame the conflict as a sectarian struggle against Shiite Houthis. In that narrative, AQAP regularly describes all opponents of the Houthis as Sunni “brothers” or “one of us” — part of a long-term strategy to create a more seamless blend with the local population and tribes.
Children stand in the rubble of houses destroyed during a raid by U.S. Navy SEALs in the village of al Ghayil in Yemen on January 29, 2017.
Photo: Iona Craig
The only evidence released so far to back up Sean Spicer’s claim that “the goal of the raid was intelligence gathering, and that’s what we received” was a video posted by U.S. Central Command on February 3. CENTCOM presented the clip as confirmation of the “valuable” material collected during the raid and labeled the video as an “AQAP course to attack the West.” But it was quickly taken down after it was discovered that the footage was 10 years old — pre-dating the existence of AQAP in Yemen — and was readily available online. The U.S. government has yet to produce any further proof of intelligence collected from the raid.
There are other suspect details in the U.S. version of events. In the days after the raid, the Pentagon claimed that the women killed were armed and fought the incoming U.S. special operations forces from “pre-established positions.” Yet all of the witnesses to the attack interviewed by The Intercept in al Ghayil strongly challenged this accusation, citing a culture that views the prospect of women fighting, as Nesma al Ameri put it, as “eib” — shameful and dishonorable — and pointing out the practical implausibility of women clutching babies while also firing rifles. A CENTCOM spokesperson refused to provide any details about female fighters to support its assertion.
However, the names of the dead that villagers gave to The Intercept did not include one woman listed by AQAP media channels. Propagandists and supporters of the militants claimed one unnamed woman “fought them with her own gun,” with an additional claim that Arwa, the former Saudi prisoner, had thrown a grenade killing a U.S. soldier — assertions strongly denied by Abdulelah al Dhahab, who survived the lengthy gunfight around his brother’s home. Sheikh Aziz al Ameri, the head of the al Ameri clan, lost 20 members of his extended family, six of them children, the youngest only 3 months old. “Everyone who tried to run, they killed them,” he said, standing on the hilltop outside his home 11 days later.
In response to The Intercept’s findings, Hina Shamsi, director of the American Civil Liberties Union National Security Project, called for a full investigation into the raid, including the legal basis for the operation, the adequacy of intelligence beforehand, what precautions were taken, and why any precautions failed.
“Each new revelation about this tragic operation is grievous and shocking,” Shamsi said. “Even in recognized armed conflict, there are rules to safeguard against the killings of civilians, and even under the Obama administration’s imperfect lethal force policy, which to the best of our knowledge remains in effect, there are constraints that should have prevented or at least minimized civilian deaths.”
Last week, the White House announced the Pentagon would be carrying out three reviews of the raid, looking into the death of Owens, the loss of the Osprey, and the civilian casualties.
During his first address to Congress on February 28, President Trump noted that Owens died “a warrior and a hero,” leading to a standing ovation for the Navy SEAL’s widow, Carryn Owens. Trump has made no mention of the relatives of the women and children who died that night.
By the time the whirring sound of drones returned to Yakla two days after the operation, the village of al Ghayil was largely deserted. With little reason to stay after their livestock had been eradicated, families fled in fear of further attack and imminent enemy takeover following the death of Abdulraouf al Dhahab, Qayfa’s most eminent adversary of the Houthi-Saleh forces. The majority of the men, women, and children who survived are now indefinitely displaced.
A month later, amid an unprecedented uptick in U.S. military activity in Yemen last week, the helicopters and drones returned to Yakla. Apaches descended on al Ghayil before dawn on March 2, carrying out “indiscriminate shelling,” according to Sheikh Aziz al Ameri, one of the few residents who remained in the village. Later that day, the Pentagon took responsibility for more than 20 airstrikes carried out in the early hours of the morning across three Yemeni provinces, including al Bayda.
Early on March 3, attack helicopters and drones returned yet again. An airstrike, apparently targeting Abduelah, the surviving brother of Abdulraouf al Dhahab, landed just outside the door of his house, killing three of his extended family members from their home village of al Manasa. Late that night, Abdulelah was yet again the apparent target of a drone strike that killed four men traveling with him in a car in Marib province. It is unclear if Abdulelah survived. At least six houses in al Ghayil were damaged the same night by yet more helicopter gunship fire. With the village coming under attack for the third consecutive night on March 5, Sheikh Aziz and his family finally fled; they are now living under trees several miles away. Less than 24 hours later, another drone strike killed two more children, brothers ages 10 and 12.
Pentagon spokesperson Capt. Jeff Davis said in a statement that the strikes targeting AQAP were conducted in partnership with the government of Yemen and were coordinated with President Hadi. Anti-Houthi resistance fighters on the front lines of the civil war, not far from Yakla, were also killed, according to residents of al Bayda. The following day, Davis told reporters that additional strikes were carried out early on Friday, bringing the total to more than 30 strikes in less than 36 hours — exceeding the 32 confirmed U.S. drone strikes in Yemen during all of last year.
Although Davis stated that “U.S. forces will continue to target AQAP militants and facilities in order to disrupt the terrorist organization’s plots, and ultimately to protect American lives,” NBC News reported the strikes were also part of “new directives” to aggressively pursue the Dhahab and Qayfa clans, citing a senior military intelligence source.
While the Yakla raid supposedly took place under presidential policy guidelines set up under the Obama administration — standards repeatedly used to defend the U.S. drone program — further developments last week indicate the Trump administration is no longer abiding by the condition of “near certainty” that civilians will not be killed or injured in operations.
A defense official speaking to the Washington Post stated that the military has been granted temporary authority to regard selected areas of Yemen as “areas of active hostility.” That change, while shortening the approval process for military action, effectively puts the U.S. on a war footing in any area of Yemen designated, but unlikely to be disclosed, by the military, noted Cori Crider, a lawyer at the international human rights organization Reprieve who has represented Yemeni drone strike victims. This authority has a lower bar: Civilian deaths have to be “proportionate” rather than avoided with a “near certainty,” as set out by the previous administration for the use of lethal force “outside areas of active hostilities.”
“This means that all of those much-vaunted ‘standards’ the Obama administration said they were using to minimize civilian casualties in drone strikes in Yemen have been chucked right out the window,” said Crider.
In a press briefing on March 3, Davis told reporters that the legal authority for carrying out the January raid and recent strikes “was delegated by the president through the secretary of defense” to U.S. Central Command. But when contacted by The Intercept, the Pentagon could not clarify whether al Ghayil was still considered to be outside areas of active hostilities during the botched raid.
In al Bayda, the continuing aerial bombardments are perceived by some as helping Saleh and the Houthis — who last month Spicer conflated with Iran and accused of attacking an American Navy vessel off Yemen’s western Red Sea coast. The Houthis had, in fact, hit a Saudi frigate.
Meanwhile, the villagers of al Ghayil are not calling for the usual tribal standard of compensation for the families of victims. Few wanted to be named saying so, but all expressed the same sentiment less than two weeks after the raid: This time, they want revenge, not a payout.
While President Trump continues to hail the mission as a success, quoting Defense Secretary James Mattis in Congress last week that intelligence gathered “will lead to many more victories in the future against our enemy,” in Yakla, the clearest outcome appears to be lengthening the list of America’s adversaries beyond al Qaeda.
Mohammed al Taysi, the tribesman who tried to join the fight in al Ghayil, put it succinctly as we parted company at dusk along the track out of Yakla. “If they come back,” he said, referring to the SEALs, “tell them to bring their caskets. From now we are ready for any fight with the Americans and the dog Trump.”
Iona Craig’s reporting from Yemen was supported by the Pulitzer Center on Crisis Reporting.
Top photo: Mabkhout Ali al Ameri stands with his 18-month-old son, Mohammed, in the village of al Ghayil in Yemen’s al Bayda province. Mabkhout’s wife, Fatim Saleh Mohsen, was shot in the back of the head by helicopter gunship fire as she fled with Mohammed in her arms during a U.S. raid on January 29, 2017. The vehicle in the background was also destroyed during the assault.
shame on america…..killing children…wiping out a poor village in the 3rd world…..not good.
“After the firefight started, some of the men who ran to defend their families and homes saw colored lasers emanating from the weapons of their opponents, raising suspicions they might be facing Americans.”
If I am not mistaken, US ground forces use infrared optics to “paint” targets – not colored lasers like we see in the movies. These infrared lasers can only be seen through night vision devices. I know this is a very small detail in a much larger story, but it concerns me that the villagers could not have seen what they claim to have seen (the colored lasers.) Perhaps you could clarify?
I do not know the answer, but there are ways any Yemeni militia could have just about any military equipment.
1. In 2015, the Pentagon announced they lost track of 500 million dollars of US military equipment in Yemen when they fled from the US Embassy in Sanaa. They assumed all that equipment was “lost and compromised” including, I read, hundreds of pairs of night vision googles and scopes.
2. The men in that village are paid and perhaps equipped by the Saudi coalition to fight the Houthi/Saleh forces.
Very informative, thanks!
This is it…
NSA “Project Dragnet Master Database”
A full century of economic imperialism in Yemen by the anglo-zionist NWO (using the UK or US governments).
The UK’s century-long war against Yemen
http://www.middleeasteye.net/columns/britains-century-long-war-yemen-809826615
…. In his book Unpeople, historian Mark Curtis pieces together Britain’s “dirty war” in Yemen between 1962 and 1969, using declassified files which – despite their public availability and the incendiary nature of their revelations – have only ever been examined by one other British historian. British involvement spanned both Conservative and Labour governments, and implicated leading members of the British government in war crimes. …
… So the current British-Saudi war against Yemen is in fact the third in a century. But why is Britain so seemingly determined to see the country dismembered and its development sabotaged?
Strange as it may seem, the answer is that Britain is scared of Yemen, the sole country on the Arab peninsula with the potential power to challenge the colonial stitch-up reached between London and the Gulf monarchies it placed in power in the 19th century, and who continue to rule to this day.
… As Palestinian author Said Aburish has noted, the “nature of the Yemen was a challenge to the Saudis: It was a populous country with more than half the population of the whole Arabian peninsula, had a solid urban history and was more advanced than its new neighbour. It also represented a thorn in the side of British colonialism, a possible springboard for action against their control of Saudi Arabia and all the makeshift tributary sheikhdoms and emirates of the Gulf. …. A peaceful, united Yemen would threaten Saudi-British-US hegemony of the entire region. That is why Britain has, for more than 80 years, sought to keep it divided and warring.
Why do these people always leave the mess as a backdrop for the subsequent ‘photo-op’? Like where’s the civic pride? Look at 9/11 – three months after it happened lots of ‘photo ops’ but no wreckage in sight. Now it’s rebuilt – a national ‘shrine’ and the scrap metal being used to shred Asia.
Well as the article said they left after the raid as their livestock was destroyed and they had no way to survive.
This has to be satire, right?
NOT IN MY NAME.
We seldom hear about the true war in Yemen, especially since the Saudis have made it almost impossible for foreign journalists to enter the country. This way they can kill and destroy the country without the rest of the world knowing about it.
Thank you for this excellent article.
Here’s the deal….although you seldom hear the term used, we (the United States) remain in a war on terrorism. US/coalition intelligence determined that a wanted bad guy was in the village. The SEAL team spent significant time working with intelligence information and other operators to plan the operation. I have no doubt that the plan was as solid as one could be; this included on-call close in fire support, if needed, by a supporting aviation element. When the SEAL team became pinned down and was (likely) threatened with destruction, on-call aviation support was called. The bottom line is that we (the United States) will not allow a US unit to be destroyed, and if civilian casualties incur in the process of extracting that unit, so be it. It is unfortunate, but again, US lives trump the lives of others when a US unit is in a precarious situation. Over the years, successive US administrations and the media have attempted to sanitize the brutal realities of war, and that effort worked…excepting those who are currently engaged in war or have been there in a previous war. So, let’s grow up. US forces do not plan to kill civilians and do everything humanly possible to avoid such but such deaths and injuries will incur before we allow a US Special Operations team to be slaughtered. Grow up!
Your “WE”?, my “WE”, Our “WE”..yes “LET’S” Let US..YOUR US, My us, Our us, GROW..UP..
BE EXCEPTIONAL..ACT EXCEPTIONAL ..USA!!…USA!!…USA!!…USA!!…USA!!…
US lives are not worth more than the lives of others. In particular the lives of US servicemen are worth less than the lives of civilians. Suggesting that a highly trained combat unit who put themselves into a dangerous situation is justified in killing civilians in order to extricate themselves is reprehensible. Those civilians did not put themselves in harms way, the SEALs did. The SEALs should have sacrificed themselves rather than kill a single civilian. Your contention that the most highly trained combat unit in the US military with NV body armor and vastly better arms than the poor villagers could not fight their way out of the situation without calling in air support is insulting to the SEALs.
NobodySpecial, those “civilians” most certainly *did* choose to put themselves in harm’s way. I would suggest redirecting your hatred away from the United States and its servicepeople and towards those who are so unconcerned with their own women and children’s lives that they will happily use them as human shields for not just their own protection but the propaganda which you’ve apparently swallowed without a moment’s hesitation as well.
Are you seriously suggesting that they “put themselves in harm’s way” by living in their village up in the highlands where their families have probably lived for hundreds of years?
“In particular the lives of US servicemen are worth less than the lives of civilians…The SEALs should have sacrificed themselves rather than kill a single civilian.”
If you are a JSOC operator and engaged with the enemy, the priority is always going to be the lives of your mates. Then civilians. Every military that I know of operates in the same way.
Intentionally killing civilians is never justified, but is that really what those SEALs did?
What is the purpose of US forces in Yemen?
I’m not sure how you can fault men who when faced with murderers sent to kill them in the night chose to pick up their guns and defend the families – who wouldn’t do the same?
What simplistic thinking. Congratulations, you killed one low level terrorist, and succeeded in turning hundreds of people against “us” by killing their families, therefore creating more terrorists. How is the war on terror going by the way? It seems that for every year the war on terror continues, there are more terrorists than there ever were before. Destroying people’s lives and countries doesn’t leave them many choices.
Sorry there Sonu but being a pacifist doesn’t work in the dealing with evil men that would chop your head off along with your family with a smile on their face. People like you live in a safe bubble due to soldiers like these, that put their lives on the line. Plus, you are dealing with a religious ideology, so in their minds if you do not believe, you are fair game to oppress and kill. Good luck making friends with that.
Yep, we were all going to have our heads cut off by a group of men who live in the middle of nowhere Yemen and barely afford to feed themselves. If not for those brave Navy Seals and the backing of the entire US and Saudi military’s we’d all be ISIS slaves right now. You’re a delusional psychopath and I’m ashamed to have to share a planet with you.
First, this really wasn’t “Trump’s” raid. These types of raids take several weeks of planning followed by days to bring forces into position. Trump was in office 9 days when it went down. Most of the planning went down under Obama. Second, it was highly successful, yielding hundreds of contacts. Third, this article is nothing but political spin by couple of bots.
So now we live in a situation where we can’t kill terrorists or terrorist leaders if there is a possibly of civilian casualties. We will never stop radical Islamic terrorism by trying to fight a politically correct war. Just let em grow till the strait of Hormuz and the entrance to the Suez Canal are completely shut down.
We lost thousands of men in one day at Normandy and Iwo Jima. We lose one special operator in a raid in Yemen and the press goes crazy. No wonder the WW11 generation is called the Greatest Generation and this generation is called The Snowflakes.
I think it is a shame and disgrace to the 3000 innocent people killed by Islamist extremists on 9-11 15 years ago that our country is ready to throw in the towel and basically quit. General Patton and MacAuthur would loose their minds if they had to fight withe the rules of. engagement and the politically correct attitude of this country in 2017.
I’m sure WW11 was a typo, but as long as people with your mentality and way of thinking are in power, we shouldn’t actually be too far away from WW11.
Trump’s being called out by name for these deaths. During the Obama administration it was always the Pentagon or a spokesperson or the ‘US’ who took responsibility for casualties.
Even with the MSF hospital bombing in Afghanistan, Obama was never called out by name as the responsible party.
That is not just.
You need to read The Intercept more often. They called out Obama by name for his failed policies.
The US economy is so dependent on the industrial military complex that it needs continuous wars all over the world. The problem is that with nuclear proliferation the number of nuke-free countries is getting more and more limited. Plenty examples: Ukraine…..first make it nuke free and then start a war, attack and destabilise Libya before France sells it some nukes, prevent Iran from getting nukes so the wars in the MiddleEast can go on and on. We are living in the shadow world and the only way out is total destruction. Happy week !
So the combatants in these “continuous wars” bear absolutely no responsibility for their own actions? Is the United States also responsible for those groups and countries which purchase their arms from other nations like Russia? I’m afraid to break it to you, “Voice from Europe”, but no-one outside of your own political echo chamber is buying what you’re selling any longer. Most of us don’t look at the world’s non-U.S. population as a bunch of children haunted by the boogeyman of U.S. foreign policy anymore. We understand that all human beings possess agency and the capability to make their own choices & judgments, and that includes whether they make the decision, without any legitimate provocation beforehand, to kill their fellow citizens for petty reasons such as being commanded to do so by their antiquated religious texts. I hope one day you’ll join our ranks.
A full century of economic imperialism in Yemen by the anglo-zionist NWO (using the UK or US governments).
The UK’s century-long war against Yemen
http://www.middleeasteye.net/columns/britains-century-long-war-yemen-809826615
…. A peaceful, united Yemen would threaten Saudi-British-US hegemony of the entire region. That is why Britain has, for more than 80 years, sought to keep it divided and warring.
I can’t understand how we can continue to get away with this murderous crap!
We are degenerate in our foreign policies…….and we are succumbing to outright tyranny within our own borders.
How much more damage are we going to do before someone really drops one on our heads????
It’s true. Most Americans believe all this crap and are just downright sheeple.
To expect anything different from this president is wishful thinking despite all his BS rhetoric as being against the Establishment.
Until we can dismantle the National Security State we will continue to descend into tyranny and bloody murder even within our own borders.
You “can’t understand” because you still believe that the
faking U$A is something more than a tool for private profits.
Approximately 98% of the voters in the election of 2016
endorsed one lying privatizing corporate agent or another.
The democrats and the republicans are agents of
GLOBAL corporate domination and they only use their
corporate base in North America as a launching pad for
injustice and inequality globally.
You use the words “we” and “our” as if such a sense of inclusion
is real. It is NOT. The focus on “freedom” is,
and has been for decades,
a corporate freedom from restrictions which puts human
beings in the category of human resources which are used
by the most greedy
for their own profits
and every time anyone votes for a democrat or republican
they are endorsing lies, war, and the reduction of human rights
in the name of greed.
Trump is a very good reflection of what is prioritized by
democrats and republicans
while they LIE about their intentions.
Your comment reminds me of that classic quote from Macbeth: “…full of sound and fury…” especially the bits I omitted before and after each set of ellipses.
Pro Tip: Quoting Shakespeare does not make you any less of a maniacal sociopath. You feel so strongly about the ‘turrurists'; why are you on internet forums arguing and not out there gunning down Civilians, GI Joe?
when Russia bombed Aleppo, the west was accusing Russia of war crimes. Today after the Yemeni raid , the west silence is deafening. Rumsfeld was correct, we are creating more terrorists faster than killing them
The horror here is that the U.S. is waging a proxy war on Yemen, the poorest country in the region (thru its client oil state Saudi Arabia, which no doubt is happy to fight the Houthis) because Yemen deposed the U.S. lackey Ali Abdullah Saleh.
Sinan’s head split open, did the SEALs canoe her in anger?
On behalf of humanity, thank you.
I’m now wondering if in what remains of my life if I’ll see a president unwilling to commit war crimes – claiming it keeps the cowards in OUR country safe.
I don’t think any Americans now living have experienced the administration of a president unwilling to commit war crimes, so the odds are against any of us seeing such a thing, regardless of our ages.
War Criminals R Us.
Absolutely correct. Most of us weren’t looking hard enough before GWB, but it’s always been there. And few schools here will ever teach how OUR country’s really built on the backs of slaves, murdered or exploited indigenous peoples everywhere – and poorly defended petroleum nations. We’re literally a pirate empire.
The Rising Tide of Militarism in the 21st Century: From Clinton, Bush, Obama and Trump
http://petras.lahaine.org/?p=2130
Want to help protect future children like you would your own or your loved ones?
Stop the Saudi CIA drone war in Yemen.
Simplifying…
Stop the CIA.
I’m glad that these victims were attacked by Trump and not Obama, or the liberal press would have remained silent. I think the Intercept has covered this raid more than when Obama’s team bombed Hospitals Without Borders:
https://theintercept.com/2015/10/03/one-day-after-warning-russia-of-civilian-casualties-the-u-s-bombs-a-hospital-in-the-war-obama-ended/
https://theintercept.com/2015/11/06/u-s-journalists-who-instantly-exonerated-their-government-of-the-kunduz-hospital-attack-declaring-it-an-accident/
https://theintercept.com/2015/10/05/the-radically-changing-story-of-the-u-s-airstrike-on-afghan-hospital-from-mistake-to-justification/
https://theintercept.com/2015/10/06/why-bombing-kunduz-hospital-was-probably-a-war-crime/
And another:
https://theintercept.com/2015/11/05/day-before-deadly-bombing-u-s-official-asked-if-any-taliban-were-holed-up-at-msf-hospital/
I posted in reply to your comment. It included three links from The Intercept on the subject of US military bombing the hospital. My comment might take awhile to post, if at all, because of the multiple links. But whether or not my comment posts, your “I think” is incorrect thinking.
Good find!
Now please post the CNN, MSNBC, WaPo and NYT links as well.
Thanks in advance!
Recall:
Yemeni small boat attached a bomb to a US warship off the Yemen coast and almost sunk it. Since then, the USA has been stamping its foot (on any Yemeni available) and otherwise terrorizing Yemen for this affront to USA world hegemony. We are the world’s bully boy and a stronger opponent needs to arise and stop the madness. It will happen and it will be horrific.
Its funny, the way this article reads all were innocent, yet people
from the village engaged a special operations team for an entire hour.
Killing one of them.
This reporter has obviously gone native and can no longer report with impartiality. Time to bring her home or cut her loose
https://www.democracynow.org/2017/1/10/new_intercept_expose_uncovers_seal_team
The village is near the frontline of the Yemen War. The men in that village, and the villages nearby, are armed “Popular Resistance” militia who are allies of the Saudi/US coalition. They were on the Hadi/Saudi/US coalition payroll to fight the Houthis. Their weapons may have even been supplied by the Saudi/US coalition.
As clearly stated in the article, at first the villagers thought they were being attacked by the Houthis, so all grabbed their weapons to defend their homes and fight.
US involvement in the Yemen War is an enormous strategic blunder.
Don’t blame the reporter, when you do not like the news reported.
When Americans start feeling hate for this Trumpolini scum, then we will get somewhere!
Mr. Trump is merely acting in his own best interests. During his state of the union address following this raid, commenters declared that Trump was finally behaving in a ‘presidential’ manner. Americans love a failed military mission, especially when it is sold to them as a great success. And it was a success. This village was apparently one of the main computer centers in Yemen, and the intelligence from the captured computers shows ‘everything is going to hell in Yemen’ (although I probably shouldn’t be revealing classified military secrets).
However, Mr. Trump is not yet a pro on a level with former President Obama. Mr. Obama knows the proper way to conduct such a mission is to wait until you receive confirmation that the target has been dead for a number of years. Then you launch a mission and claim you killed the target and dumped the body at sea. Mr. Trump, however, was too impatient and launched his mission immediately. He doesn’t have Mr. Obama’s self discipline. However, he partially makes up for that with a tremendous level of enthusiasm.
But the real problem isn’t Mr. Trump or Mr. Obama, or this particular mission, as horrible as it may have been. The problem is that the US is helping Saudi Arabia to commit genocide against the Yemeni people, and the American public doesn’t seem to care.
I’d instead argue Saudi Arabia and UAE are actually helping the US empire commit that genocide.
Also, by the time the UN Human Rights Council chaired by a Saudi Ambassador finally admits a humanitarian crisis exists in Yemen – I suspect the US will be pressing for a Saudi annexation “to protect and feed the starving people there.”
Place a people under siege while bombing every essential infrastructure from electricity to food and water production, then claim you’re forced to save those same people from resulting warlords and starvation. Insidious shit.
I’m pretty sure Israel wants to help Gaza and eventually Lebanon in a very similar manner.
Ahh yes, harken back to the 1990’s and the humanitarian bombing of Kosovo, Yugoslavia..and 2 years ago in Syria under the cynical, clinical, industrial R2P..”Right to Protect” rule..
So funny, Benito!
If the American people had a slogan it would be, “Who knows? Who cares? Why bother?”.
I used to wear a pin with that choice meme. I should start wearing it again!
1. All powered by a state of the art underground electrical grid and fiber optic infrastructure, no doubt, and …
2. The ‘Trump dog’ didn’t need to raid this village to determine “everything is going to hell in Yemen” … the UN just compiled and released an extensive ‘intelligence’ report indicating Yemen is the greatest humanitarian disaster in the world today.
“The problem is that the US is helping Saudi Arabia to commit genocide against the Yemeni people, and the American public doesn’t seem to care.”
There is only one genocide. It only happened once to one group.
Don’t ever forget.
Did you see Las Vegas is finally getting a hockey team? The Golden Knights.
I understand they have a special shower planned just for wealthy sports fans.
Thanks Mr Adelson.
It’s an intense story and is immensely unsettling. There seems to be little rhyme or reason.
Three strikes a month later? Stop the madness.
No doubt that they are creating more (potential) terrorist than they might kill.
Lying bastards – CENTCOM, CinC, and the fumbling Press Sec’y – a predictably loathsome and cringe-worthy job in this administration.
Of course they’re creating more terrorists..they’ve been “successful ” at it since the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia , the various death squads in central and South America, and more recently, Mujahideen/ Al Qeada/AQAP/ISIL-ISIS-Daesh….and in over in Africa..there’s numerous “Al Qeada affiliations ”
War is a business
War is a scam
Instead of accepting death “benefits,” hearing a family cite revenge brings it closer to home though, doesn’t it?
I concur..and it’ll get worse
As a German, my country was the enemy in WWII. The marshall plan helped war battered Germany with billions in economic and food aid. Planes would fly over West Berlin for month after month dropping food for the civilians. They even threw down candy for the kids. German’s lovingly called them “Raisin bombers”.
The Yemini people are literally starving to death, since Saudi ships blocking supplies at Yemen’s harbors.
Wonder what would happen if, once more, we dropped food instead of bombs.
I came here to check out a site I had not been to before hoping for interesting, enlightening reading but what do I find? Politico lite. Just more brain-dead liberal drivel.
“I came here to check out a site I had not been to before hoping for interesting, enlightening reading but what do I find? Politico lite. Just more brain-dead liberal drivel.”
You mean you were looking for more self validation and found a different perspective I think.
Want pablum? Go to Fox and Breitbart. This seems a little difficult for you.
…..thanks for the excellent piece of journalism……exacting detail…..stellar….
….What are Americans doing in Yemen?…..and, what does the Trump Administration, especially Trump himself, know about the history of Yemen and its people?….. the man will not even listen to his own intelligence people……as to the immediate raid, it is not possible to believe anything reported about the raid from the Trump administration…..amazing that they even had the correct country…….
…….anyone who keeps “planning” raids while having dinner in full public view is not to be trusted or believed….
….sickening……
The Deep State wants Saudi interests to be honored and Iranian interests to be destroyed.
Trump is simply DOING WHAT HE’S TOLD, like Obama before him – although Obama (to his credit) tried to mitigate the Iranian situation even as he (not to his credit) provided billions in arms sales to the Saudis and did his own fair share of bombing the crap out of Yemen.
I’ll repeat once more: WHY DON’T U.S. FORCES STAY THE FUCK HOME??
No one needs them, no one wants them, no one invites them and without exception wherever they go they create nothing but heartbreak havoc and destruction let’s be clear on this.. it isn’t a Defence Dept. ..it has never been used that way since it’s inception. Name ONE time when it was..it is an Offence Dept. Which costs taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars for what???? For boys to play with their toys, kill and maim others. And create hatred towards the United States. When that hatred is expressed (and even if it isn’t)..off they go again..guns blazing. It’s a vicious fucking circle. Stay the fuck home.
I think the Saudis want them.
White House plans meeting with Saudi prince amid terror threats
The Trump-SoftBank-Saudi Connection
This is just like innocent people being killed in shootouts with bank robbers when robbers take innocent people hostage. Anyone killed is the responsibility of the felons.
So the terrorists are the ones who bear responsibility, since they are using innocent people as human shields, a well known tactic among terrorists.
The mental gymnastics you have demonstrated is something only a patriotic American could say
It isn’t so simple, you can’t transfer all responsibility for the killings onto a single party. Killings are always, yes always, the responsibility of the person or persons a) ordering the attacks, and b) executing the attacks (using the weapons) – regardless of the justifications of either side.
Both sides think they are right, but neither side can ever hope to justify or excuse the killing of women and children.
In this case, the Americans have to take full responsibility for the deaths of the women & children – there is no excuse, no moral, military or political justification that can EVER make that right!
You seem to know a lot about crime and hiding behind folks. Watch Fox News much? Breitbart?
A Norwegian here that likes Breibarts Steve?
Orange is the threat-level for the country alright.
This is a very good report, as are some of the comments. But let’s continue to keep the focus on the big picture.
The US should completely pull out of the Middle East, Africa, and elsewhere. Bring all the troops home. Stop all manner of interference in the affairs of other countries. This would be non-intervention, not the dreaded isolation.
Due to geography and our powerful military forces, we are immune to any conventional military attack. They only threat to us is nuclear. Let us promote peace with Russia, China, and other nuclear powers. Making a peace treaty with N. Korea is long overdue and will go far toward lessening hostilities in their part of the world.
We slaughter and oppress people the world over. We steal their natural resources. We support local tyrants who do the same and do our bidding. We overthrow democratically elected foreign governments.
The people who pull the strings are interested solely in their own self-aggrandizement. These psychopaths care not what harm comes to anyone else.
People in other countries bear us well justified ill will because of our crimes against them. If we pull out and let them be, they will let us be. Furthermore, the idea that we can solve the problems of others is ridiculous. They must solve their problems themselves.
True journalism. Congratulations!
“Although some details about the mission remain unclear, the account that has emerged suggests the Trump White House is breaking with Obama administration policies that were intended to limit civilian casualties. ”
Really? I’m guessing I’m not alone in being dumbstruck (and angry) about that last bit. Obama and Company had a policy in place to limit civilian casualties? My God.
You guys realize that this raid was planned under Obama right? Why are you blaming Trump?
And yes, in order to defeat the Islamic terrorists civilians will be killed. It’s unfortunate that the people of Yemen don’t do it themselves but I guess they are just a bad culture. Trump has faith that they can be better eventually with help. The Intercept apparently does not
I guess that’s why you guys hired antisemitic terrorists like the one who was recently arrested
1) The raid was planned under Obama but he ultimately decided not to authorize it because he felt he didn’t have enough intelligence, whereas our current president didn’t even undergo traditional briefing procedures and approved the operation over dinner.
2) Yes, civilian casualties are inevitable in any war, but that doesn’t justify indiscriminately shooting people. Especially when those are the people you should be building good relationships with.
3) The Intercept was quick to condemn Juan Thompson, to imply that they’re guilty by association is dumb.
It was Obama who planned the raid but it was also Obama who held off because of the probability of civilian casualties. It was Trump’s order to attack and ignored the civilians who would be killed because he wanted to make a statement that he was forceful.
If you cannot act in wartime due to the fear of civilian casualties you will lose.
Joe: Reply to Your sentences: And yes, in order to defeat the Islamic terrorists civillians will be killed. It`t unfortunate that People of Yemen don`t do it themselves but I Guess they are just a bad culture” Bad culture?: ever been there? Here is a description from a norweagian citizen from Yemen :
“What once was my school and where I develop myself as a person, is bombed by the Saudis. The hospital where I was born, is bombed, and even the streets where I performed practical driving when I would take the driving test, is unrecognizable. They are completely broken. Sanaa, my town that has for thousands of years, is under bombardment by Saudi Arabia and their coalition with nine other Arab countries. Social media also conveys to me who have lost their lives. I have lost friends and colleagues, so many that it all feels unreal. Although I myself will not be present physically, I experience the war psychologically and emotionally. I feel the war closely at me every time I hear family members’ votes over the phone, when they say that they are doing well, but I understand the tone that they hold things back that I should not have worried.
As the war has raged, I’ve thought a lot about what it is that drives war, and how these Gulf countries have weapons that will enable them to go to war. Yemen is the only country in the region that experienced the Arab Spring, and is also the country at the top of the list of countries gulf dictatorships will embark on. I was shocked when I discovered that peaceful Norway is involved in selling ammunition, military equipment and weapons parts to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, as daily bombings and wars in Yemen. These are weapons my family can hear and feel the rumbling of.”
Maybe you can ask here what kind of culture they have got.
And to be honest With you I am not sure who fits the “terrorist” definition most, USA/Saudiarabia or Al quaida supporters. If you Count the losses of lives and pain caused by US military/governments- Al quaida one can start to reflect where the evil axis is. Maybe we should make an Equation , the Equation of evilness?
Do you have an defination of a terrorist?
Once again:
To those that just take for granted that those who criticise the Yemen attacks committed by US army under Donald Trump leaderchip were/are indifferent on the drone policy under former president Obama: Just read the comments under this article carefully and you will find commentators who find that both Donald Trump and Barrack Obama has lead war policies that are very unethical and inhuman.
I am not an expert on this field but from the essence of the reports on the 29th of jaunary attacks in the village of al Ghayil one might could suspect that some policies has become seriously changed under Donald Trumps leadership(to the worse). New guidelines after Donald Trump became president are:
-military has been granted temporary authority to regard selected areas of Yemen as “areas of active hostility”
-Donald Trump government has shortened the approval process for millitary action
-The authority under Donald Trump has a lower bar: quote from this article: “Civilian deaths have to be “proportionate” rather than avoided with a “near certainty,” as set out by the previous administration for the use of lethal force “outside areas of active hostilities.”
Guidelines and the attitudes communicated by US war forces highest Commander are certainly of relevance both to the planning and the performance of attacks.
I also recall that Donald Trump announced during the Electoral campeign that he wants US army to execute familiy members of the suspected terrorists. Already the targeted killings of people only suspected being a “terrorist”(The definition of what is terrorism and a terrorist is neither a defined sciense and should probably have been debated much more. I also think I read in one of The Intercepts articles that among those surveillenced on suspection of being involved in terrorism a review revealed a big portion of those had never been in contact with any known terrornetworks)killed outside any battlefields, people that US intelligence havent bothered to use human intelligence research to “proof” fits their terrorist definition,far from a court level of evidence building as we know, killing decisions only based on metadata gatherings often¨as the base to a kill commando- is not according to international law and very unethical. If killing of the “terrorists” familiymembers becomes an order from the president of US this will stretch the inhuman “war on terror” actions and probably also the attitudes of those who commit the killings to an even worse point than we have seen till now probably. Executing children whether belonging to a Al-quaida active father or one suspected to be- as a policy – could it be called something else than pure fascism?
Executions of civillians obviously happened under operations under Barrack Obamas leadership as well. Its not a god sign anyway when a president regard it openly to be a wanted policy to kill even children. What could be the next guideline? And the next commando after that stretcing of whats considered acceptable inhumanism? Less and less human considerations and a stretcing of whats considered accepted evilness?
What if someone suggests to use gas execution one day in the future.
We cant wait to “see what can happen”.
In the text we are informed:
“The following day, Davis told reporters that additional strikes were carried out early on Friday, bringing the total to more than 30 strikes in less than 36 hours — exceeding the 32 confirmed U.S. drone strikes in Yemen during all of last year.” (Davis: Pentagon spokesperson Capt. Jeff Davis). So that information, Donald Trumps attitudes or rethorics towards Islam/muslim people, the new “war on terror” guidelines and the reports from among others the recidents of the village of al Ghayil village executions of civilians gives a reason to fear for the Development of “war on terror”, i am afraid.
I still wonder what Donald Trump meant when he announced that US under his leadership in Cooperation With US allies will “extinct radical Islam and its Networks”. How can one make sure that all radical islamists get extincted? It sounds bloody to me.
We know there culture is bad because of what their culture currently is.
We are not living in a parallel universe.
And yes Trump is obviously overstating the possibility of completely extinguishing Islamic extremism. He does not mean it literally. Just as Chruchill vowed to extinguish Nazism yet there are still some nazis around today. How could you not understand this?
So..in understanding your logic, One reason the USA needs to be in Yemen is because what their culture currently is..
Before the UAV’s , and Seal Team 6 arrived was their culture even worse
Aren’t we living in parallel universes?
Do you and your children experience PTSD as you hear Yemeni drones above as you sip your morning cup of Mocha Sanani at the local Peet’s ,reading a story about Yemen on The Intercept on your iPad , musing, “humph..that’s where my coffee comes from, no wonder it’s so expensive..Isn’t commerce fascinating?”
So the Norwegian government also sells arms to the Saudi Kingdom, good business . Combine this with selling fossile fuels to the rest of the world and Norway sets a great example for our future generations. You can be proud of your country !
Poor, poor President Trump. That evil Obama made him say “yes” to the raid.
Little Donald couldn’t help it.
Yo do realize that Obama did not complete the plan, give the go ahead, and have any control over it, right? And then after being in office for just a few days, Trump goes ahead before he has hardly any of his administration, including key security advisory personnel in place, in place. You’re logic is almost as flawed as most of Trump’s.
Maybe living amongst a terrorist organization is not such a good idea. When there are that many goats in the area that alone will attract jihadists.
pictures tell a thousand words, right? i dont see a single bullet hole or blast mark. these photos represent nothing. fake news???
Is the following question really that hard?
How do we arrest those who planned the Charlie Hebdo attack, and those who helped and trained Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab? Considering
1) They told the world their location (Yemen)
2) They said they will do more of these attacks and they proved they can do more
3) The Yemeni government says it cannot arrest them
and finally,
4) Suppose drone strikes, boots on the ground, and economic sanctions are not allowed because those policies will result in civilian casualties.
If so many commenters are against US policy in Yemen, so at least some of them do know a better solution that would result in no civilian casualties while the AQAP leadership who told the world they are indeed responsible for the CH attack is properly arrested and brought to a court.
The most effective way to avoid killing civilians is to not drop bombs on them or shoot at them.
“The most effective way to avoid killing civilians is to not drop bombs on them or shoot at them.”
That is not only the most effective way. That is the perfect way. Hence, I put condition 4) above: NO DRONE STRIKES, NO BOOTS ON THE GROUND, NO ECONOMIC SANCTIONS because all those policies will result in civilian casualties.
Tell us considering condition 4) how those responsible for CH attacks and the underwear bomber would be arrested and brought to a court. The Yemeni government says it cannot arrest them.
Go ahead: tell us.
“Go ahead: tell us”
I do not know. Hence, why I am asking the questions to those I assume would like those responsible for the CH attack be arrested and prosecuted without any civilian casualties in Yemen.
Are you saying you do not have an answer to my question, but at the same time you want AQAP members be arrested and prosecuted without civilian casualties?
Hey yank…try something original. Stay out of the rest of the world, instead of goose-stepping across it, creating your own problems.
1) I am not yank
2) That is exactly what proposition 4) is. No drones, no boots on the ground, no economic sanctions. I can even make it better just for you. No US military, US intel agents, US diplomats at least 500 miles from Yemen.
Now answer the question. How would those responsible for CH attack and the underwear bomber be arrested considering condition 4) and the Yemeni government says it cannot arrest them?
Hint: It is okay if you cannot answer a simple question.
Now answer your simple question.
I do not have an answer, hence I am asking you! I remember another commenter called you “smart”. So, you must have an answer to that question. You must have a proposal regarding how you would arrest those responsible for the CH attack without civilian casualties.
How does another commenter calling me “smart” imply that I must have an answer to that question? That I must have a proposal regarding how you would arrest those responsible for the CH attack without civilian casualties?
Point taken. Now can you answer the question. Yes or no?
You’re saying you want AQAP members to be arrested and prosecuted. But if arresting terrorists and killing Osama bin Laden and many other people didn’t solve terrorism, there’s very little reason to believe a few more arrests will either.
If you want to stop terrorism, the question to ask isn’t:
because experience has shown that arresting and killing people doesn’t stop terrorism.
If you want to stop terrorism, the question to ask is:
Read the question again. How many times I have to write it?
I DID NOT ASK YOU HOW TO STOP TERRORISM.
The question has nothing to do on how to stop terrorism. I gave you specific example of crimes and I asked you how the perpetrators should be arrested and brought to a court without civilian casualties.
Stay calm.
That’s why you can’t answer it. It’s the wrong question.
“It’s the wrong question.”
Conclusion: you have absolutely no idea how to apprehend the perpetrators of the CH attacks and the underwear bomber attack without civilian casualties.
Nor do you.
So?
Maybe my problem is that I do not understand your principles and goals (though “HOW TO STOP TERRORISM” doesn’t appear to be one of them).
Principles – at least valid ones – are universal. Otherwise, they’re not principles but rather rationalizations and even hypocrisy. Your principles will be better clarified through their consistent application in the following:
How does the US arrest the ones who leaked the NSA and CIA files – Snowden and Assange – and those who help and protect them? Considering:
1) They told the world their location (Russia and the UK)
2) They said there will be more leaks, and Assange has proven he can do more.
3) The Russian and UK governments cannot or will not arrest them
and finally,
4) Suppose drone strikes, boots on the ground, and economic sanctions are allowed because even though those policies result in civilian casualties, they’re acceptable to you in Yemen and other third world countries.
Since we are supposing civilian casualties are acceptable to you in the pursuit of American goals, can you offer a good reason the US shouldn’t use drone strikes, boots on the ground, and economic sanctions to arrest Putin, Snowden, and Assange to bring them to trial?
Or was the preceding question really that hard?
That is an extremely easy question. I am quite shocked that you are described as “smart” and you really have to ask this question.
1) Assange. Even if an US arrest warrant was issued against him the UK and the US have an agreement on how criminals sought by the US and located in the UK should be handled. Example, Navinder Sarao and Lauri Love. The UK NEVER stated they will not arrest Assange. They actually arrested him at the request of Sweden. UK, USA and Ecuador have a clear agreement stating that the use of force is prohibited when the criminal is inside an embassy. (Vienna Convention)
2) Snowden. He is in Russia based on an agreement the US and many countries around the world accepted. Are you aware of political asylum? You also purposely ignore that Russia through its president made it clear that political asylum will be granted with the condition that he cannot participate in any criminal activities against the US.
Both Assange and Snowden are protected by agreements that the US signed itself.
About the perpetrators of the CH attacks?
The Yemeni government has said years after years that they want to arrest them because they have committed murder in Yemen as well but they don’t have the capability to do so.
So, let me get it straight. Your question is why the US is not using force to catch criminals in UK and Russia while US agreements with those countries made it clear it cannot? As opposed to other countries such as Yemen that has an agreement with the US to use force on its territory? That’s not a smart question at all.
“Since we are supposing civilian casualties are acceptable to you in the pursuit of American goals”
They are not acceptable to me. Since you don’t even have an argument so I understand why you want to impute some words or beliefs to me.
The bottom line is that you have absolutely no idea how you would arrest those responsible for the CH attacks without civilians casualties in the process. I think it is an information worth mentioning not only by you but also by those who opposed use of force in Yemen. The following should be your view :
“The US has killed hundreds of civilians in Yemen but I have absolutely no idea how the US or Yemen can apprehend AQAP members without civilian casualties.”
Or you can have the following argument :
“The US or the Yemeni government should not use force against AQAP members because civilians will probably die in the process.”
I hope you understand the second argument would make Yemen a safe heaven for terrorists.
The emptiness and contradictions of your argument have dropped to a new low.
Suppose drone strikes, boots on the ground, and economic sanctions are allowed imputes no more than your presumption:
Your resort to double standards doesn’t save your argument here either:
The women and children shot dead in Yemen are protected by agreements that the US signed itself too, including the Geneva Conventions and the United Nations Charter.
You didn’t get it straight. You weren’t even close.
Perhaps you should try following some of your own advice for once:
The question was:
Since we are supposing [read the word again. How many times do I have to write it?] civilian casualties are acceptable to you in the pursuit of American goals, can you offer a good reason the US shouldn’t use drone strikes, boots on the ground, and economic sanctions to arrest Putin, Snowden, and Assange to bring them to trial?
Your argument is irrational. You have not expressed a single standard, idea, or principle that allows for the US to inflict civilians casualties in Yemen but not Russia or the UK without contradicting yourself and invoking straw men.
That’s impressive: after freely dispensing one admonishment after another, you are now imposing your words on me. Your hypocrisy is truly staggering, but I can still unwind the miasma of contradictions for you and sum-up your position:
“The US has killed hundreds of civilians in Yemen and I have absolutely no idea how to defend it.”
“imputes no more than your presumption:”
The two suppositions are completely different than your own sentence:
“Since we are supposing civilian casualties are acceptable to you in the pursuit of American goals”
I believe in English (I assume your native language, not mine) the proper pronoun should be “I” (referring to you) not (we) as I, Swisscheese, never supposed that civilian casualties are acceptable to me.
“The women and children shot dead in Yemen are protected by agreements that the US signed itself too, including the Geneva Conventions and the United Nations Charter.”
Yes, they are. And? What is your point? Did the commenter “Swisscheese” wrote that the US or any other country is allowed to kill civilians?
Let me read the question again:
“can you offer a good reason the US shouldn’t use drone strikes, boots on the ground, and economic sanctions to arrest Putin, Snowden, and Assange to bring them to trial?”
Let me answer the question again:
The US shouldn’t use drone strikes, boots on the ground, and economic sanctions to arrest Putin, Snowden, and Assange to bring them to trial because the US signed agreements with Russia, the UK and Ecuador regarding the status of citizens offered political asylum and the use of force against individuals who took refuge in an embassy.
Now read the answer again.
“Your argument is irrational. You have not expressed a single standard, idea, or principle that allows for the US to inflict civilians casualties in Yemen but not Russia or the UK without contradicting yourself and invoking straw men.”
That means
1) You have no idea what an argument is. I asked you a question. I did not offer an idea opened to discussions. You admitted that you were unable to answer that question
2) Neither my question nor your question related to whether the US is allowed to inflict civilian casualties in Yemen, Russia, or the UK. Your question was related to the USE OF FORCE or ECONOMIC SANCTIONS. You should read your own question. Your question was not whether civilian casualties are allowed. Not a single country on earth is allowed to inflict casualties on civilians, but every single country on Earth is allowed to use force in some circumstances.
“That’s impressive: after freely dispensing one admonishment after another, you are now imposing your words on me.”
I believe in English (your native language, not mine) the appropriate word associated with “should” is not “to impose”, but “to suggest”. Read my sentence again:
Since you are unable to offer any idea on how AQAP members can be arrested without civilian casualties, then you SHOULD have the above view, which by the way is just a repetition of what you have said by stating your inability to answer the original question.
Since English is not my native language, so I double check again and this is what I found:
“Should express weak advisability and are used when WE DON’T WISH TO IMPOSE will on someone else impolitely.” grammar-quizzes,com
Reading your complete incomprehension of English words, I can only assume that you are unaware of the definition of “hypocrisy”.
I am not really sure why you seem troubled about your inability to offer a solution regarding how perpetrators of the CH attacks can be arrested without civilian casualties. You do not have a solution, then fine. But until you can provide that solution, I am not sure how you will convince the French, the US, or Yemen not to use force against AQAP members.
Swiss cheese sucks
The ones responsible for the CH attack are…NATO countries…who continue the Eurocentric goose-stepping of centuries.
You are poking a dog with a stick and then bitching when it bites.
And, if you are so smugly Swiss, what did you think of the Bronfmans outing your precious banks for hoarding Nazi gold stolen from Jews? Just part of the Eurocentric illness of imagined superiority.
The U.S.-facilitated slaughter of civilians in Yemen continues:
http://in.reuters.com/article/yemen-security-hodeidah-idINKBN16I075
I suppose imperialist mercenaries will suffer more casualties under President Oranguturd than under President Obomber. Unfortunately, that probably means more innocent non-combatants will also die.
Using silly names adds to your argumentation. Well done !
I’m sure you could do better. Lol
On Friday 10th March 2017:
“More than 20 people have reportedly been killed in a Saudi-led coalition airstrike on a marketplace in the town of Al Hudaydah in Yemen. Graphic footage obtained by RT’s Ruptly agency appears to show debris and bodies burning in the aftermath of the bombing.”
It shows the paralysis inflicted on the rest of the world, rendering any opposition to barbaric practices by US, Nato, Israel, Saudi Arabia, futile.
The U.S. military is a criminal organization worldwide. The Navy Seal who was killed is no hero. He’s a war criminal. He who lives by the sword dies by the sword. If you volunteer for the Empire’s military, you can expect to suffer for your crimes against humanity.
With such wisdom ……You should be a preacher.
To those that just take for granted that those who criticise the Yemen attacks committed by US army under Donald Trump leaderchip were/are indifferent on the drone policy under former president Obama: Just read the comments under this article carefully and you will find commentators who find that both Donald Trump and Barrack Obama has lead war policies that are very unethical and inhuman.
I am not an expert on this field but from the essence of the reports on the 29th of jaunary attacks in the village of al Ghayil one might could suspect that some policies has become seriously changed under Donald Trumps leadership(to the worse). New guidelines after Donald Trump became president are:
-military has been granted temporary authority to regard selected areas of Yemen as “areas of active hostility”
-Donald Trump government has shortened the approval process for millitary action
-The authority under Donald Trump has a lower bar: quote from this article: “Civilian deaths have to be “proportionate” rather than avoided with a “near certainty,” as set out by the previous administration for the use of lethal force “outside areas of active hostilities.”
Guidelines and the attitudes communicated by US war forces highest Commander are certainly of relevance both to the planning and the performance of attacks.
I also recall that Donald Trump announced during the Electoral campeign that he wants US army to execute familiy members of the suspected terrorists. Already the targeted killings of people only suspected being a “terrorist”(The definition of what is terrorism and a terrorist is neither a defined sciense and should probably have been debated much more. I also think I read in one of The Intercepts articles that among those surveillenced on suspection of being involved in terrorism a review revealed a big portion of those had never been in contact with any known terrornetworks)killed outside any battlefields, people that US intelligence havent bothered to use human intelligence research to “proof” fits their terrorist definition,far from a court level of evidence building as we know, killing decisions only based on metadata gatherings often¨as the base to a kill commando- is not according to international law and very unethical. If killing of the “terrorists” familiymembers becomes an order from the president of US this will stretch the inhuman “war on terror” actions and probably also the attitudes of those who commit the killings to an even worse point than we have seen till now probably. Executing children whether belonging to a Al-quaida active father or one suspected to be- as a policy – could it be called something else than pure fascism?
Executions of civillians obviously happened under operations under Barrack Obamas leadership as well. Its not a god sign anyway when a president regard it openly to be a wanted policy to kill even children. What could be the next guideline? And the next commando after that stretcing of whats considered acceptable inhumanism? Less and less human considerations and a stretcing of whats considered accepted evilness?
What if someone suggests to use gas execution one day in the future.
We cant wait to “see what can happen”.
In the text we are informed:
“The following day, Davis told reporters that additional strikes were carried out early on Friday, bringing the total to more than 30 strikes in less than 36 hours — exceeding the 32 confirmed U.S. drone strikes in Yemen during all of last year.” (Davis: Pentagon spokesperson Capt. Jeff Davis). So that information, Donald Trumps attitudes or rethorics towards Islam/muslim people, the new “war on terror” guidelines and the reports from among others the recidents of the village of al Ghayil village executions of civilians gives a reason to fear for the Development of “war on terror”, i am afraid.
I still wonder what Donald Trump meant when he announced that US under his leadership in Cooperation With US allies will “extinct radical Islam and its Networks”. How can one make sure that all radical islamists get extincted? It sounds bloody to me.
Just wondering…how are things going in Sweden ? Have they reintroduced conscription yet ?
War is bloody unless you surrender.
As Bush, Obama and now Trump have abundantly demonstrated, Muslims are simply Collateral Damage Fodder.
Americans ask all the time: Why do they hate us?
T’is a deep mystery… Must be buried in the Q’uran somewhere…
Thank you for this excellent report, Iona Craig.
Wow. That was a kick in the stomach. As much as I loath war pigs, they never cease to amaze me as to how they glorify killing. And in this instance, end up creating enemies more than vanquishing them.
end up creating enemies
No, nO, NO: they hate us for our freedoms and our way of life, dontcha’know?
/sarc off
I’ve linked to this excellent piece.
Thanks again, Iona Craig.
I feel bad for not finishing this story, but it was just too painful. After I got to the bit about the villagers being confused because they were under the impression that they were on the same side as the USA, I wanted to hit my screen with my keyboard.
The USA does not know this region; I doubt if it has a clear idea whether the Houthis really are an “Iranian Proxy” or if they have their own (perhaps good)reasons for fighting and Iran is just supporting them – or for that matter if the Saudis are making all that up because they just don’t like rebel tribes.
Did anybody stop to think that any stray bullets used in getting some AQAP guy would hit allies? If he’d been holed up in Cedar Rapids, would the same force have been applied?
The whole attitude seems to be that poor Arab villagers are simply not relevant: enemies, allies, whatever, shoot ’em all, let God sort ’em out.
People wonder that there was little Islamophobia right after 9/11 and here we are with Muslims being shot in Montreal while they kneel at prayer. Why now? Well, now is after 15+ years of this kind of thing…where EVERY Arab casualty is treated as nothing, not news, not a failure, not important.
Think about whom was positioned as the good, allied, sympathetic Arabs in Iraq during the Iraq War: none of them. Can you remember a single Arab name from the Iraq War that was not an enemy? The only name I can think of is Maliki.
The whole war might as well have been against every single Iraqi, psychologically – just look how it was one the list of banned nations until there was outrage about all the translators and other allied Arabs thereby kept out. But the first instinct was to regard the whole country as enemy…and EVERY Arab country as an enemy.
The US just needs to walk away, disengage. If the American people don’t believe we have any allies over there, there’s really nobody to fight for.
Despite what some commenters have been saying, The Intercept was one one of the very, very few media outlets that gave two shits about Obama’s dramatic expansion of drone warfare and assasinations. Use the search feature on this site and type in “Obama drone”, and you will find a couple dozen stories pretty quickly.
Please continue to bring these stories to light. These are real people we are killing. They have a right to their own lives just like we do. We have no right to end those lives. These stories humanize them and defuse propaganda.
And for the commenters who attribute all of this to Trump, do that search for “Obama drone.” Educate yourself. You will find that Obama was no man of peace, and was worse than Bush in many violent ways. You will find that Michael Flynn– the man who mush-brained liberals sacrificed on the burning pyre of idiocy that is the Russia Conspiracy Theory– spoke out publicly against Obama’s drone assassinations. Flynn said exactly what many here are saying: That it was wrong, that it was not helping, and that it was creating far far more terrorists than it eliminated.
I hope Trump can find someone to replace Flynn who has some of the same views Flynn did. And I hope Trump will stay true to his word and reduce the Obama escalation in military engagements worldwide.
This cannot be repeated enough, despite protestations by partisan Trumpkins!
Partisanship is the willfull hypocrisy that allows this shit– ALL the shit– to continue. Because no matter what, half the country will reliably cheer, or turn a blind eye.
Sadly, that is 100 % true.
Gert, only extremists are 100% convinced of the truth. Normal people should always have doubts.
That counts you out then: you’re hardly normal, now are you?
Counts me out of what ?
Hee hee!
It’s an honest response. As a long time lurker, the Intercept has infuriated me (Schwarz) while also enlightening (Greenwald). This type of reporting is uncomfortable when your “side” is in power, ammunition when it is not, and starkly truthful regardless if you care to remove the filter of politics and the world order from your view. Please do continue reporting it. As often as it can be said, war is already a step too far.
In my opinion, a free and independent press is the most important foil to tyranny.
That is why our hyper-partisan press should not be tolerated by the public.
While The Intercept (at least 3 writers at the Intercept) paid attention to Obama’s war-mongering, the rest of the press “turned a blind eye” to his abuses, while “cheering” every banal step he took. Contrast that to the extraordinarily hostile press treatment of Bush, or Trump.
I don’t suggest for a moment that the press should overlook Trump’s missteps and faults. But our press cheers every banal step of one side, and turns a blind eye to the crucial faults and missteps of the same side; but viciously attacks every real (and imagined) fault of the other side.
Our press spent the last eight years as panting lapdogs. Now, suddenly, they have woken up and remembered they have teeth. A hyper-partisan press does not serve the cause of liberty.
There is no side that can do no wrong, nor is there a side that always does wrong. The press would do well to remember their crucial role in the scheme of things.
It is neither panting lapdog nor biting attack dog that serves the public. It is vigilant guard dogs that we need.
Help! I can’t fond the “search feature”!
On a mobile device, there are three little white lines stacked vertically on the top right corner. Tap those. A menu comes up on the left side of the screen. Tap the magnifying glass icon. Search away!
Well, Sean Spicer, here’s a piece of intel for ya, and I didn’t need a taxpayer-funded psychopath support-group to go and fetch it for me, either; you know that village your superheroes plastered with explosives? That’s an entire village whose hatred for the US has just jumped up far higher than what the 9/11 attackers probably felt – and their hatred is THOROUGHLY justified.
“I M
March 10 2017, 7:19 a.m.
“…the account that has emerged suggests the Trump White House is breaking with Obama administration policies that were intended to limit civilian casualties…”
That’s amusing. Where has The Intercept been during the Obama Drone Wars? And where were all these people crying about innocent victims while Obama was slaughter wedding parties with drone strikes? Oh right, it wasn’t Obama’s fault because he was just cleaning up Bush’s mess, and he tried real hard not to hurt anyone.
Just Pakistan. Notice what happens immediately after Obama’s swearing in.
http://drones.pitchinteractive.com/
Despite the claims from the fanatics below, the military doesn’t send in a SEAL team to indiscriminately kill innocent women and children, that’s what drones are for as Obama demonstrated. The SEALs go in to capture either a person or intelligence. The massacre that ensued was because the operation went bad and the SEALs were fighting for their lives to escape. Would the preference have been for them to surrender and stand tall for the public executions? The new fact that UAE piloted Apache air support was involved helps to explain the wholesale slaughter since minimization of civilian casualties is not a priority for the armies of the ME, as other evidence suggests. That’s not an excuse, just a fact. Don’t lose sight of the additional fact that operational planning for this began under Obama and there is a strong possibility that Trump deferred to the generals and commanders running the show rather than micromanage the operation. Again, not an excuse, just a fact.
At least someone else remembered this:
https://theintercept.com/2016/10/10/u-s-and-u-k-continue-to-actively-participate-in-saudi-war-crimes-targeting-of-yemeni-civilians/
? Reply”
Why is this comment so sacrosanct that replies are not allowed?
My understanding is that this was a high-risk operation with little justification, rejected by the Obama administration. The story I read was that all it took to get Trump to approve it was to tell him that Obama didn’t.
…and there’s proof of that…where? The DailyClinton?
The Obama Times, I think…
LOL
My heartfelt condolences to the poor Yemeni villagers who were murdered by American terrorists.
Makes one think that if Americans are justified in launching wars and blowing people up because terrorists attacked the US, then surely these people would be well within their rights under US standards to attack the US. After all, it seems pretty clear that the US government is an organization intent on killing their families
So easy….
Earlier in the comment section I put forward an idea for a database or website dedicated to documenting the victims of the Global War on Terror.
It might be interesting to think about how you would go about it. For example you might try to leverage previous reporting on the subject. Find a reputable journalist (I believe Canada still has one or two), then send letters to other news organizations asking for old reports on GWoT subjects. A lot of the leg work has been done. Organizing it into an online resource with timelines and searchable databases might take a bit of time and effort.
It would be interesting to see which news organizations would be willing to contribute to the cause.
The victims could be added through user generated content like a wikipedia entry, or memorial posting by their families and friends. But no matter how much we humanize the victims, we will not have change unless we take on the military industrial complex that glorifies militarism and drives global military spending.
The glorification of militarism hides the fallacy about the effectiveness of military force in dealing with terrorism.
In a world with non-state combatants in a war without confined battlefields or a confined time frame, there will never be a military solution that ends in defeat with an unconditional surrender by the non-state enemy. How many countries will be destroyed by war and left as failed states, without an effective central government, before we recognize warfare has fundamentally changed?
Our military power will not mean anything in this new world. It is the countries with educated populations, economic power, and non-violent moral legitimacy in the world that will lead to a brighter future.
Using children to prove a point is not journalism but activism…or a form of well written propaganda. Amanpour does the same.
They killed a bunch of women and children (and men defending their homes) because:
“the goal of the raid was intelligence gathering, and that’s what we received”
Who are they ? Americans, soldiers….that is nothing new. Put several pictures with suffering children in the column and put the blame on the President and you have propaganda….
I suppose that one should just scrub over that…unless they are Christian children…then…???
“They” are the idiots that ordered this fiasco. Murdered children are facts, not propaganda. The “President” is idiot doesn’t have a clue what he’s doing. Flying a “President onto an aircraft carrier with “Mission Accomplished”…now there’s some propaganda fer ya. Maybe they could dress the “President” up in a seal team six outfit…now that would be “Presidential” After all was done…”mission accomplished”
They are your fellow countrymen and governments. They are what your democratic system has created and financed for centuries. They are you, Steve.
You stupid ratfucker.
The images exist because the events are real.
Amanpour is far from perfect but has more intelligence and integrity in one little finger than you have in that entire cauliflower between your ears.
Yes, Amanpropaganda is sooo intelligent !
LOL!
Your comments proved my point that putting pictures of suffering children in columns is effective propaganda. It works on the emotion of the readers and extinguishes any rational thoughts. Name any president in the history of the USA who was not involved in war ? Exactly…this is nothing new.
ROFL!
After September 11th, the congress issued an open-ended order to fight al-Qaida. The U.S. ended up cooperating (too heavily, we might say) with the Saudi Arabian government, and AQAP was kicked out into Yemen, where they continued to hold territory, and where the U.S. continued to fight them. So Democrat and Republican presidents alike continue to send people to fight them. They found a base full of operatives, engaged, and won. In the process, some shots were fired that clearly shouldn’t have been. That may mean that the military needs to figure out why the unnecessary civilian casualties happened, and above all quit trying to lie, because they do a lousy job at it, but it doesn’t mean they were villains from the start! They did what we told them to do after the attacks happened, with almost no dissent. If you want them to stop seeking out and killing al Qaida, if we want them to let al Qaida have South Yemen, maybe make a peace with the Houthis in North Yemen, have the U.S. recognize the two as countries, send ambassadors and make trade arrangements… well, then you can tell Congress that, have them call off the war, bring about a peace. But until then, there are only a few individuals whose decisions are at issue, and it’s up to the military to decide what they should have known and what they were responsible to do.
Food, Not Bombs.
“…the account that has emerged suggests the Trump White House is breaking with Obama administration policies that were intended to limit civilian casualties…”
That’s amusing. Where has The Intercept been during the Obama Drone Wars? And where were all these people crying about innocent victims while Obama was slaughter wedding parties with drone strikes? Oh right, it wasn’t Obama’s fault because he was just cleaning up Bush’s mess, and he tried real hard not to hurt anyone.
Just Pakistan. Notice what happens immediately after Obama’s swearing in.
http://drones.pitchinteractive.com/
Despite the claims from the fanatics below, the military doesn’t send in a SEAL team to indiscriminately kill innocent women and children, that’s what drones are for as Obama demonstrated. The SEALs go in to capture either a person or intelligence. The massacre that ensued was because the operation went bad and the SEALs were fighting for their lives to escape. Would the preference have been for them to surrender and stand tall for the public executions? The new fact that UAE piloted Apache air support was involved helps to explain the wholesale slaughter since minimization of civilian casualties is not a priority for the armies of the ME, as other evidence suggests. That’s not an excuse, just a fact. Don’t lose sight of the additional fact that operational planning for this began under Obama and there is a strong possibility that Trump deferred to the generals and commanders running the show rather than micromanage the operation. Again, not an excuse, just a fact.
At least someone else remembered this:
https://theintercept.com/2016/10/10/u-s-and-u-k-continue-to-actively-participate-in-saudi-war-crimes-targeting-of-yemeni-civilians/
“Where has The Intercept been during the Obama Drone Wars?”
https://theintercept.com/drone-papers/
https://theintercept.com/2015/04/24/obama-drone-apology/
But you already know that, troll, because I found it on google by searching “the intercept obama drones”.
Those articles began when? In 2014 when the Intercept formed (around when I started reading it because GG was here). They are all based on the “Drone Papers” that were released to the Intercept. Unfortunately, only a handful of authors (the impartial few) chose to cover the details of Obama’s wholesale drone slaughter. Since then the coverage has been very thin and the historical coverage of the years from ’09 to ’11 when Obama was ordering strike after strike (as revealed in MY link) is virtually non-existent.
But I’ll amend my statement anyway to say: Where was THIS author and others like her, such as Alex Emmons (who allegedly writes about Human Rights), that dedicate their careers to revealing Trump as Satan incarnate but can’t seem to find any fault with the Obama clan?
Did you even bother to read your own link to the alleged Obama apology? He only apologized because the drone strike killed two westerners by mistake because they were hidden among the AlQaeda targets, NOT for the thousands of innocent women and children in the hundreds of strikes before and after this singular event. Worse, it is highly likely that Obama only spoke about it because he was already under pressure for his policy of targeting Americans with nary a backroom trial.
““As president and as commander-in-chief, I take full responsibility for all our counterterrorism operations, including the one that inadvertently took the lives of Warren and Giovanni,” Obama said. “I profoundly regret what happened. On behalf of the United States government, I offer our deepest apologies to the families.””
“….When asked by The Intercept if the president’s words meant there would be a policy change in how the U.S. deals with claims of civilian casualties resulting from counterterrorism operations, an administration official declined to comment.”
Mustafa Qadri, an investigator with Amnesty International, has spent years conducting investigations in Pakistan, including into the strike that killed Momina Bibi. Speaking to The Intercept on Thursday, the human rights investigator said he was pained by the death of Weinstein, but noted that there are scores of other innocent people who have been killed in drone strikes.
“Obama’s statement is really moving,” Qadri said. “And we welcome that, I welcome the fact he has done that.” But, he added, “there are hundreds, potentially thousands of others who deserve the same apology.”
… and the historical coverage of the years …
Should have been:
… and the historical investigation of the years …
“Where has The Intercept been during the Obama Drone Wars?”
I searched google for the intercept obama drone.
I found this…
https://theintercept.com/drone-papers/
and this…
https://theintercept.com/2015/04/24/obama-drone-apology/
Apparently, when I M comments, no replies are allowed.
Now, now!
Just took an unusual amount of time; I had much later replies appear before those above. Considering they linked to The Intercept’s own columns, it struck me as strange.
If you have more than one link in your post, it takes an unusual amount of time. I think multiple links trigger a human approval process.
Because those suffering from cognitive dissonance need not apply.
Yeah, I guess the Generals rolled Trump like they did Obama on his first raid.
I am glad you found one article to post, but really, TI has been on Obama’s drone wars from the beginning. Check out The Assassination Complex: Inside the Government’s Secret Drone Warfare Program, written by Jeremy Scahill and the staff of The Intercept. Perhaps you are just not familiar with the journalism at The Intercept.
One would think operational planning would be up-to-the-second verified when sending people into battle, wouldn’t one? President Obama put the mission on hold longer ago than 1/20/17.
Don’t lose sight that Mr Trump gave his approval without consulting or verifying with anybody – unless Mr Kushner and Bannon count.
Who taught Trump to blame Obama for the raid that he authorized and who taught Trump to blame the generals for losing Chief PO Ryan Owen? Not Mr Obama this time.
Don’t lose sight that POTUS is an embarrassment and a coward.
See my other comments above about drones and The Intercept; I won’t repeat them here.
“Yeah, I guess the Generals rolled Trump like they did Obama on his first raid.”
Using that logic then one (and the media) should immediately give Trump a Mulligan like they gave Obama, no?
You also make many assumptions as to WHY Obama put the mission on hold. Perhaps it was because the target’s presence at the location was cyclical or random and he/they/it weren’t there until just before Trump ok’d the raid, which could explain exactly why the decision seems hasty and why he would defer to the generals and intelligence personnel that have been following it longer knowing there was a tiny window of opportunity. But I don’t know, and neither do you, so stop the assumptions and partisan nonsense about the Kushner/Bannon court because you reveal your deficit of impartiality.
“Who taught Trump to blame Obama for the raid that he authorized and who taught Trump to blame the generals for losing Chief PO Ryan Owen? Not Mr Obama this time.”
Well, if Trump deferred to the generals then they do own it, but Trump should have taken responsibility anyway. On that we do agree.
“Don’t lose sight that POTUS is an embarrassment and a coward.”
And don’t lose sight of the fact that you’re just bitter because you lost the election so you sling your partisan accusations without a shred of evidence.
May Karma destroy the lives of everyone involved in this massacre.
Chromosomally aberrant murderers running amok across the planet MakeAmericaGagAgain.
I think we can put that theory to rest now.
*with almost no local reporting on the conflict in Yemen I have been unable to determine ‘the sides’ at all … much needed and courageous reporting Iona Craig.
postscript. The Washington Post is reporting:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-administration-looks-to-resume-saudi-arms-sale-criticized-as-endangering-civilians-in-yemen/2017/03/08/a259090a-040e-11e7-b1e9-a05d3c21f7cf_story.html?utm_term=.03a5460ad9c0
*no mention of Trump Admin.’s ‘massively successful’ raid on our allies?
“the Pentagon claimed that the women killed were armed and fought the incoming U.S. special operations forces”
Even if they were armed, who gave those US criminal invaders a licence to kill armed Yemeni women?
Look how many armed women are in the US. Does that mean it is OK for foreign troops to land in Texas, and kill these American armed women?
When the foreign troops are asked, why did you kill the women in Texas, imagine the reply: “They were armed!!”
They were armed, so it is OK for foreign troops to come and butcher them!
Nice!
asked
this point doesn’t even seem to register in the Exceptional minds. like, the light is on but no one is home.
I did not go beyond the title…
An operation that started way before Trump took office under Obama administration – who actually started it, suddenly is blamed on Trump only because he okayed it ( and he could not do otherwise)…
I am not Donald supporter by I feel almost insulted when I am asked to believe uncritically that everything evil under the sun is Trump’s fault one way or another…Please Intercept , you are still the most sane journalism reporting…keep the high standard.
Do you believe that Donald Trump wants to fight under the flag “war on terror” in an different way from the way Us army did 29th og january? Why dont you show just as much worry for the killings of civilians commited by troops now under Donald Trumps leadership as you do to Intercepts journaists that shows the cruelty that US army commited? What is your opinion: Donald Trump annonced thar he want the policy of killing familie members of SUSPECTED (children included). Even the SUSPECTED terrorists might be å totally peacefull soul. And this is in my opinion to go Even further
Into an inhuman direction from the Obama administrations actionspill and attitudes.
It’s Trump’s now…not Obama’s. All Trump had to do was say, “No.”…the dreaded two-letter word.
No, the operation was shelved by Obama because he and his staff felt that it was a high risk, low reward mission and the chances of failure were too high.
Trump said Obama was a coward for not going ahead with it, and ordered the operation over dinner.
And here’s where I have the most trouble understanding this logic. After the operation, Trump & Co lauded it as a huge success.
And when criticized over the loss of life and failure to acquire the target, suddenly it’s Obama’s fault and Trump had nothing to do with it.
*three slow claps*
maybe you should have read the article then.
You didn’t read beyond the title but then you go on to lecture The Intercept on how to write. Fucking dumbfounding logic there “george.”
I agree that they seem to be blowing their credibility too soon by blaming Trump for operations that were planned before he came into office.
IMO, they should wait to blame him for another few months, when they really will be his fault. I’m sure Trump’s government will plan attacks that are just as bad, but I fear that the stories about them (when they happen) will be lumped in with stories like this one and ignored.
It’s interesting that the other readers attacked you for your comment though, isn’t it? Almost like this is just a political fight and the only thing they believe in is that they want their team to win.
You have to actually read the article to know what is in the article. Also, if you knew anything about the author of the article you would know that this line of yours,“Almost like this is just a political fight and the only thing they believe in is that they want their team to win,” is that of an ignorant idiot.
Very factual. There’s one thing bothering me though : your use of the word ‘resistance’. The first time you use it, it’s between quotation marks and with a caveat (“self-described”). Afterwards, it’s simply ‘the (anti-Houthi) resistance’. Knowing the Houthis are but a minority in Yemen, both Saleh and Hadi have blood on their hands, and the latter was very democratically elected with 99,8 of the votes for a two-year transition term, which he unilaterally extended, which in turn prompted the Houthi uprising, which led him to become a Saudi puppet in exile who supports the dirty US-backed Saudi war against his own country, don’t you think any party to the conflict could claim the ‘resistance’ label ?
al-muqawma al-sha’ibiyya = the “popular resistance” in Arabic. This is the name used by local defense militias allied with the Hadi, Saudi, US coalition. I understood the writer to mean she was indicating she was neutral and therefore had “resistance” in quotation marks to indicate it was a self identifying label by villagers, not a descriptive term. It may have been clearer to capitalize it when used in translation, not sure.
Thanks for the clarification… I think she should have kept the quotation marks throughout the article though.
And suddenly the exceptional people discovers they are exceptional in many different ways.
God bless America !
To find the extent of this so-called ‘exceptionalism’, one needs connect the dots between killing these Yemeni women and the assault on Jacqueline Craig in Dec 2016. Be alarmed to find, these two incidents are in fact just one perpetual assault on anyone US monsters consider undesirable!
http://heavy.com/news/2016/12/jacqueline-jackie-craig-brea-hymond-fort-worth-texas-police-arrest-video-facebook/
This raid was done by the CIA and DOD, and Trump believed them, but they cheated him. The whole raid was the sabotage against Trump. The CIA and DOD that manage private military industry profit from the war, we know how much Saudi order weapons form the USA, and it is used in Yemen. 20 billion bucks, to make that money, the CIA/DOD will manufacture terrorism and prolong war as they do in Afghanistan (they sell arms to afghan army and let them to fight alone).
Tragic destiny of many kids in Afghanistan, Yemen, etc, in the name of profit of owners of lockheed martin, boeing, etc. The CIA managers of these companies manufacture conflicts, war and terrorism and they set up Trump because he is against the war with Russia. One raid is just part of this bigger picture, but even one raid can destroy the life of many people and kids. It is good that the Intercept published details about war that brings profit to the owners of mentioned companies.
“Shot from behind” probably as she tried running towards the people the US navy seals were hunting! Are we supposed to feel bad that these terrorists bring their kids around this sort of stuff? What do you expect to happen when you’re a terrorist? You’re going to take the word of some future bomb jihadi over that of your own country? It’s called collateral damage so stop being such a Nancy. You think they care when one of their Islamic terrorists kill an innocent American? I doubt it and at the minimum they’re indifferent to it. There’s like 4 houses in the picture you provided lol it’s pretty obvious they all knew each other and had a general idea of the company they kept as well as their neighbors (all 3 other homes) get real…
“future bomb jihadi?”
hmm, tough call. am i going to take the word of a person in their own village who survived seeing their family randomly slaughtered by Saudi and US forces and who consequently (we predict, because while it hasn’t happened yet, what other response should we expect) takes arms against an unknown future target over the word of those who have actually, already killed people in their own homes?
that’s a real head-scratcher.
“Are we supposed to feel bad that these terrorists bring their kids around this sort of stuff?”
Uh…that’s their home. You’re confused because there are no WHITE picket fences.
And the American people still wonder why we were attacked on 9/11. How many 9//11’s has this country caused to other countries?
The callousness of our government, the military leadership and the troops who plan or take part in these types of atrocities is hard for me to understand.
There is no reason for this country’s military to go into other countries and kill innocent civilians or anyone else they want.
The USA has been doing these types of activities for over two centuries and it deserves to be attacked so its citizens can get a taste of what their country has been doing to other people’s countries.
And this type of activities isn’t even for keeping this country safe or to protect its freedoms.
It’s so that the corporations can steal other people’s resources.
I can’t believe how many people haven’t heard of Smedley Butler and his book War is a Racket.
It can be found online for free from a search for it.
He told us that he had spent 33 years in the military being muscle for hire to make it safe for corporations to take resources and to make a few people rich.
Look for it, read it and share it.
And quit believing that the troops are fighting for our freedoms and to spread freedom and democracy to other countries.
It’s pretty hard to enjoy them if your family or friends are dead or if your country is destroyed.
9/11 was multifold, but had only a contrived relationship to the Middle East. It was at once an experiment to gauge reaction from Americans; and it was an excuse to be able to finally pass legislation that Joe (“my bill”)* Biden drafted two months before OKC in 1995. Too, it was to heighten tension in Clash of Civilizations.
But it was also a deliberate, high-profile occult ritual played out for the public in broad daylight. The twins were Boaz and Jachin. 7 was the central pillar on the First Degree Tracing Board (also the central path on the Etz haChayim). And 9 directly to 11 has a numerological connotation.
It’s also possibly Christ’s birthday according to historical record. (Dec. 25 may actually be Nimrod’s.)
* https://www.cnet.com/news/joe-bidens-pro-riaa-pro-fbi-tech-voting-record/
coo-coo.
ok . . . that explains a lot.
and i don’t mean about 9/11.
Let’s start the attack with you traitor!
Traitor to a fascist nation like the United States of America needs to be lauded…unless one is in the Klan.
*DEVGRU Operators would never have used weapons with visible lasers. They are visible with the proper tech (infrared) only.
I only mention that as a statement, not condoning anything. There is nothing positive or good about any of this. Poor families.
Lol a front facing camera on an iPhone can pick up infrared and if you take the coating off the back camera lens you can also see it
So your suggesting that this village, under attack, took out their Iphone’s and took the coating off the lens then shined them into the night? Give your head a shake! Of course there are other ways of seeing infrared, it’s just not commonly found in remote 3rd world villages.
So author want us to believe that those children have only memory capacity of two months.
And they do not remember what happen last year or a two years before or that they are being killed by US drones and Saudis best friends of Obama daily meaning, only in Orwellian mind of the author, that it has never happen.No even that this particular murder was concocted planed and approved by Obama himself, only delayed due to weather.
Another Orwellian propaganda construct. Sleep, forget the past, even two months of the past, the history started on Jan 20, and it always have been that way.
Sorry but we are not Lippmann orphans. We remember.
To which children are you referring? 5-year-old Sinan al Ameri, who described and mimed his memory of his mother being shot in the back of the head?
Other kids? Which ones?
How long would you expect their memories to be? Just FYI, on average, the earliest recallable memory is from about 3 1/2 years of age.
Is there, for instance, some specific event you know about in Sinan’s earlier life (say the 18 months preceding this massacre) that you believe he should recall? If there is, what is it and why do are you confident that it would have been relevant to this story and that the authors should have included it — assuming they knew about it an knew how to elicit it from him?
Your just proved yourself a Lippmann orphan, so go to sleep and keep dreaming.
Why waste yer time on this ignorant prick.?
So author want us to believe that those children have only memory capacity of two months.
WTF?
All that The Donald had to do was say “No!”
from the article;
Somehow I think these folks who live in a town that hosts so many AQ fighters and leadership are not nearly as oblivious and innocent as they seem.
These are the people that blew up the world trade center, take hostages, and kill evildoers who do not follow their brand of religion.
Yet we are so quick to believe that we are the badguys here.
I’m generally on board with articles here and I am glad this point of view is getting out- but I dont agree with premise.
America needs to thicken her skin occasionally we cannot allow AQ to exist — to do so is a threat to all of us.
Attacking Iraq after the WTS bombing was dumb and pointless but this is spot on. Arguably what we should have done in the first place.
You’d make a good spokesman for AQ, since they use the exact same logic to justify their bloodshed.
Counter-terrorism is complex. There was very little indication by January 2017 that the members of AQAP had international ambitions after the deaths of all the Afghan Arab leadership in AQAP. (The ‘Afghan Arabs’ being the Arabs the CIA indoctrinated to fight in Afghanistan in a global jihad during the 1980s.)
Yemen is a war zone with local grievances. The armed men killed in the raid were home from fighting with the Hadi Yemeni/Saudi/ US coalition against the Houthi/Saleh coalition. Abdulraouf al-Dhahab had just picked up pay for his men in the popular resistance from the coalition the US supports.
Attacking a Yemeni village and killing innocent women and children will never be “spot on”, nor will it ever be an effective counter-terrorism strategy.
It appears there were no high value targets to justify a Seal Team 6 raid into a remote village filled with families at the front line of a war zone.
The garbage and false statements in this hack piece are beyond disgusting.
Judging by your chosen screen name you’re under the impression that comments are posted alphabetically.
Do you have any examples of the “false statements” you have in mind that you could share?
Thanks in advance,
Sincerely,
Zz
You can’t kill ideas with bombs and soldiers. You have to find for their minds. And you definitely don’t want to start a war with 1.3 billion Muslims. Trump is just creating more terrorists.
I still think someone should put together a photo album of the victims of America’s War on Terror.
If you had photos of all of them, how long would it be? Children, babies, mothers, fathers.
50,000 people? Over 100,000?
The Vietnam war memorial had over 50,000 American soldiers on it.
How would you organize it? By operation? Location? Chronologically?
The 9/11 Memorial arranged theirs by heroes and goats.
One article I read said that since 1945 this country has killed over 1.3 billion people.
That includes the people whose countries it has invaded, the coups which overthrew elected governments and installing brutal dictators who then commit heinous human rights abuses such as torturing and murdering its citizens while this country does nothing as long as those dictators do our bidding. Or from training other country’s military at The School of the Americans who then kill their civilians.
The only thing that this country exports anymore are weapons and deaths.
And both parties are complicit in these actions.
The latest war bill that was passed by congress and will cost over $500 billion had only 43 democrats vote against it.
Just imagine how that money could have been spent on the people in this country and our infrastructure.
ridiculous not more than 990 million tops!
what a bargain
Can you share that article with us?
and our infrastructure.
Infrastructure? Another bizzopp for youknowwho…
The Global War on Terror (GWoT) is a disconnected, disaggregated series of “operations.”
You hear about a wedding or hospital being bombed or an operation like the one in this article. People have become inured to the steady drip drip drip of atrocities. Bringing it all together in one place would make it much easier to comprehend.
We need photos of the victims both before and after and a short summary of what happened.
The AUMF is a document soaked in the blood of innocents.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Military_Force_Against_Terrorists
A Great idea!
The knowledge that our government under the Democrats and Republicans has been committing such atrocities is a major part of what convinced me to join the Green Party back in 2012. But after five years, after seeing both ruling parties use all manner of legal (and otherwise) means to silence our pro-peace message and stifle our attempts to get good human beings into office, I can’t help but feel it’s pointless.
But I’ll keep on fighting. To give up with the knowledge I now possess is to become an accomplice, however unwitting, to these war crimes and corrupt acts.
Iona Craig is a hack of the largest scale. Let me guess… You’re PRO Trump right? You were quite obviously reporting “unbiasedly” on some random events that were somehow brought to your attention, that also just happen to be related to Trump. It couldn’t possibly be that you’re yet another no good Democrat “reporter” with a bruised ego over the Trump win. Oh… And for the record, I’m guessing you must assume that Trump himself has radio control units attached to the Marines and Missiles that infiltrate terrorist villages. He must be controlling everything through his Twitter account. Yeah… Everything’s Trump’s fault. When ISIS has the US in a strangle hold and your lesbian ass over a barrel all because of your anti patriotic propaganda I’ll bet you’ll think twice about your “reporting”.
First time here, eh?
This is what America First looks like: Inhumane!
Arwa Baghdadi was the third AMERICAN citizen to die that night in the raid in that small village in Yemen. Why isn’t she identified as a Saudi-American in the story? If we want to understand the causes of “radicalization” in KSA, it is important to understand the Baghdadi family story of severe abuse by the Saudi Ministry of the Interior and Prince Mohammad bin Nayef. Arwa fled to Yemen with her brother and sons because she and other family members were tortured and radicalized while being abused for years in Saudi prisons.
Eventually the entire family, even their Moroccan maid, was imprisoned without trial after one of Arwa’s brothers was shot dead by Saudi security forces supposedly at a checkpoint. The Saudi MOI did not want any family member to be able to voice questions about his killing, so in the middle of the night they took the entire family to prison; men, women, children, and maids.
The Saudi intellectuals who formed the Saudi ACPRA civil rights group in 2011 during the Arab Spring called for an end to those types of arbitrary detention under the MOI Mohammad bin Nayef. They also requested Arwa Baghdadi be allowed to leave her prison cell for a day to give birth to her second son at a hospital in 2012. US consulate officials visited Arwa in al-Ha’er prison in March 2012 because she was a US citizen detained without charges.
The Saudi ACPRA professors warned that the Saudi regime’s mistreatment of its citizens was leading to hatred of the al-Saud rulers and further radicalization. They called for Saudi political reform including an independent Judiciary to stop the MOI abuse of power, particularly arbitrary detentions and disappearances.
All 12 of the Saudi professors and other intellectuals who formed ACPRA, and asked for peaceful political reform moving to a constitutional monarchy are now also in prison themselves for “harming the reputation of the Kingdom” and “disloyalty to the King” for disclosing to the UN the statistics on the large number of Saudis who were disappeared without trial into the Saudi prison system. Saudi professor and ACPRA human rights activist, Mohammad Fahad al-Qahtani, is in his 4th year of a 10 year sentence. His wife is in the United States with their children.
There are a lot of painful lessons about US military and foreign policy blunders to be learned from this raid, if only we have the objectivity and intelligence to examine them.
Thank you for providing context, so often sorely lacking…
Thank you so much Iona Craig, and the team at the Intercept, for your reporting on Yemen. Please keep the information coming.
“Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.”
And I suspect that it is also true that whatsoever a nation soweth, that shall it also reap.
Isn’t it already doing that, in multiple ways?
if that’s the case, israel might have a serious comuppence, again.
What’s that the OL’T talked about, israelis wipe out the caananites then the ??? wiped out the israelis – and that’s OL’T stuff.
The irony is that some israelis are killing Palestinians and stealing their land because it is written yet who also disbelieve it is written –
I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.Mt:15:24
In the end that is what will happen, for sure.
Ha…ha…ha… devine justice after all. What a joke !
Excellent on the ground reporting.
Well put, well said.
Amazing what you can do with hungry children and ChupaChups.
Amazing a skull cavity sized perineal abscess can write. Now clean up that trail of drooling pus on the floor.
You have no experience with children ?
Hilarious number of quilted panels.
What?
Hey ,, we got rid of the Sioux , the Eskimo , the Etc. It’s ours baby , all ours .
MIGHT MAKES RIGHT, even if there’s nothing left but a barren rock in 3rd orbit around Our Sun God !!
What a joke you underlings are . Vote us out ? LOL !
——The Founding Slave Holders
BTW : History is what we say it is .
Founding:
——The Founding Slave Holders
BTW : History is what we say it is .
Oh! So you’re Jewish are you? And a revisionist as well?! Oy Veysmere! My banker would love to meet you. We have a plan for re-colonizing Greater Israel, and this time, Palestinians and Assad are the Indians.
a few thoughts:
– an amazing piece. glad to see any work discussing actual events and their human cost as opposed to twitter quotes and 60 degrees of separation conspiracy theorizing about “KGB” links.
– the http://english.al-akhbar.com/node/11031 link isn’t working.
– more proof that “special forces” belong in the “special olympics”. fighting from the low ground? cowardly and blindly firing in every direction like a toddler having a meltdown and throwing his toys? getting nothing out of it and then posting a video from years ago as “evidence” the raid was a “success”? feminist female fighters using their children as human shields while firing a 7lb ak-47? not exactly the chuck norris/rambo/jason bourne image the media has cultivated for these heavily armed frat boys.
i expect more “safe” drone strikes as a result.
– the “we were after AQ” excuse seems a bit dubious for reasons mentioned here and many other places. these villagers could indeed be seen as “on the side of the US” but then there’s rivalry between the saudis and the UAE (oil, of course) as well as infighting and shifting allegiance within the random supporters of the previous “government”.
it would be nice to think this would bring neighboring yemenis together in the face of foreign assault but i’m not holding my breath; especially after reading the “houthis tricked the US” theory of one villager. the sunni vs. shia dynamic is just the same old school “hatfields and mccoys” nonsense that’s played out for centuries.
– if by “internationally recognized president-in-exile, Abdu Rabbu Mansour Hadi” you mean saudi stooge, then okay. otherwise there’s a lot of other “international” opinions the salafist pricks need to recognize (e.g. it’s a bit late in the game to still be crucifying and beheading people for “witchcraft” and writing poems).
sorry for the text wall. it’s just rare to see a well thought out piece on these events.
When I use the search Words “USA”, “droner”, “yemen” , “sivile”( the norwegian word for civilians) and “liv”(English :life) there are just two News articles that are suggested from 2017: https://www.nrk.no/urix/faren-til-drept-spesialsoldat-slar-tilbake-mot-trump_-_-ikke-gjem-deg-bak-dodsfallet-til-sonnen-min-1.13399903
And:
https://www.nrk.no/urix/sivile-drept-under-trumps-forste-militaeroperasjon-1.13356009
I got the information about The Intercept News site from a sweedish radio programme. Nrk the norweagian national broadcaster seems to be the only Norwegian news provider interested in what happened in Yemen on the 29th of january this year.
I think I need to take some calls to editorials of Norway News providers.
Iona Craig, can you pls post the sources for this article? Or a link? Thanks
What sources do you want? She talked to these people herself.
The author’s Twitter feed documents that she went to Ghayil village in person.
And another thing that appalls me:
It might be tempting to dismiss this as simply logic full of holes, but this is insulting to the families of those killed in Yemen.
Geez ! Drone bombing is much more civilized . All this cowboy stuff is barbaric !
Hey , a guy needs to make a living ,,right ?
Go Halliburton !
And besides , the kids playing “Wack a Muslim ” at Foggy Bottom never get killed .
The photos included are powerful, and remind us that these are human beings, with hopes, wished and dreams. Something too easy to forget in our age of war at the push of a button. If our soldiers had to face the people they kill in the name of profit I suspect we would live in a very different world. Though, perhaps not.
I do not think it is easy to forget, and I am appalled by the detached, understated tone of your comment.
So offer up your own assessment in the same length of his post, and we’ll see how your sincerity compares.
Another example of brave, wet-behind-the- ears, trigger-happy youngsters in helicopter gunships defending American freedom! Good for you! Remember to paint women and children on the sides of your kill machines. Cowards. You’re fucking sick. Boys don’t forget to tell your family and friends back home how many goats you killed today.
I am sure the following paragraph was meant to be some sort of objective description. But it presents a point of view which I hope does not imply something about the acceptance of civilian deaths.
Maybe another way to have written that paragraph would have been like (forgive my clumsiness): “Trump’s change in use of force will result in even more civilians killed than killed by Obama and his use of force policies”.
This may have been nothing but an editing artifact under deadline, but something to consider in the implication of telling a story from the perspective of the killers or the victims.
But otherwise, great reporting.
I do not understand. I do not think the paragraph you quoted implies in any way what you say you are hoping it does not.
The writer is comparing policy between Trump and Obama. Obama was trying to limit civilian murders (writer uses word “casualties”–the media establishment word). This rather directly puts a moral patina around Obama’s policy around the murdering of civilians. Are we too take Trump as being worse than Obama because Obama intended to kill less civilians?
In fact, I could argue that the paragraph was a politically gratuitous statement meant to make Trump look bad because unlike Obama, he is not worried about the killing of civilians. So when I tried to re-write the paragraph, I tried to re-write it from perspective of murdered civilians, not from the perspective of those ordering their murders–does it matter than Obama intended to kill less of them?
“does it matter than Obama intended to kill less of them?”
Only if you are attempting to write propaganda.
The carnage the US has launched in the 21st century is every bit as gruesome as this article describes.
Just tack on 6 or 7 orders of magnitude.
So when you wrote that you hope it does not, you meant that it really does. Even more dishonest that I thought. And I would still argue that changing a policy to kill more civilians is even worse.
So the basis of your retort is that you in fact accept the murder of civilians. But in your twisted universe, one gains moral credentials and status for murdering less of them. You in fact, accept the American murder of civilians in Yemen as done by Obama, but wag your moral finger at Trump for killing too many of them. Obama appears to have just murder the right number of civilians to avoid moral censure.
NO, I do not accept the murder of civilians. Yo are misreading what I write.
it’s a bit early to compared numbers of dead civilians but then it’s not really a contest, is it? both presidents have/had horrible policies that lead to said deaths. one death is too much. and no policy matters when the “facts on the ground” depend on the same low rent thugs who turned this “operation” into the dictionary definition of “FUBAR”.
the only way to “limit” civilian deaths is to get the fuck out of their country in the first place. let the apes in robes (aka the saudi royal family) fight their own battles.
The psychpaths from Mordor strike again. With complete impunity, as always…
“psychopaths”
Only nazi-minds can commit an “operation” like this one. Now it is time for the allies of this nazi-governed country(Usa) to speak out- silence and to do nothing against targeted killings of civillians of all ages in Islamic countries are totally UNACCEPTABLE! We need to speak out now before Donald Trumps words(his announced plans to “extinct radical Islam” and to kill even familie members including children in families of suspected terrorists) of “extinction” become even more comparable to Hitlers “final solution”. We dont know how far USA and the Trump administration will go yet but targeted killings of innocent civilians including children- is FASCISM!
tee hee hee tee hee tee he te heee bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
It was Obama’s policy of assisting the Saudi’s in their illegal invasion of Yemen. He chose to help them invade and destroy Yemen. This raid was planned by his Administration. To blame an incoming president for Obama’s wars of choice is foolish.
Luckily Glenn reported on this policy that has been in effect for years:
https://theintercept.com/2016/10/10/u-s-and-u-k-continue-to-actively-participate-in-saudi-war-crimes-targeting-of-yemeni-civilians/
“The Obama administration “has offered to sell $115 billion worth of weapons to Saudi Arabia over its eight years in office, more than any previous U.S. administration”
“As the Saudis continued to recklessly and intentionally bomb civilians, the American and British weapons kept pouring into Riyadh, ensuring that the civilian massacres continued. ”
“as American attention was devoted almost exclusively to Donald Trump, one of the most revolting massacres took place. On Saturday, warplanes attacked a funeral gathering in Sana.”
“the coalition had conducted airstrikes targeting civilians and civilian objects, in violation of international humanitarian law, including camps for internally displaced persons and refugees; civilian gatherings, including weddings; civilian vehicles, including buses; civilian residential areas; medical facilities; schools; mosques; markets, factories and food storage warehouses; and other essential civilian infrastructure.”
This is one of Obama’s six wars currently raging. Trump might bomb Iran or North Korea, but this is an Obama proxy war. Ironic that Obama blamed Bush for eight years, yet his liberal fans want to blame the incoming president for the Obama administration’s wars of choice and arms sales … to a nation that pushes gays off of buildings, promotes a rape culture, and treats women as chattel.
<Do you think that Donald Trump has got other more worthy plans compared to the war actions of the Obama administration?
Jamie: Do you think there are reasons to believe that the Donald Trump administration has got more worthy plans in the “war of terror” compared to the policies of the Barrack Obama government?
Yeah…poor little Donald…Obama made him do it.
They should take pictures of the bodies and the damages and publish it on the web. A photographic archive can be used as evidence to sue for damages under international law as well as prosecution of crimes. Someone should put together a website documenting the victims of U.S. aggression. Photos, maps, timelines and so forth.
Does the authorization for this come from the AUMF of 2001?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Military_Force_Against_Terrorists
That would only be useful if aggressors can be held to account and tried in the International Criminal Court. Unfortunately, the US is not a member of the IC. The US has not ratified the Rome Statute since 2002. I don’t think there is any recourse. Unless, perhaps if soldiers committing war crimes individually can be documented. Sad state of affairs.
Just gosh darn bad luck is all. Good thing they weren’t real humans
+10!
Americans should be very concerned that two Presidents in a row, from different parties, have used Death Squad Six, and the Drone Death Squad, as a means of suppressing foreign populations attempts at ‘life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness’
If not for the deaths, terror, and counterattacks these tactics result in, then for themselves. Because, once things become the bipartisan norm with regards to their use on foreign populations, they tend to start being used on the domestic population.
3.
extra judicial killing by drone has been around for 3 different admins now.
Saying it is to suppress is an abject lie! Stop harboring and breeding terrorist for your death cult.
US support of genocide in israel and of guantanamo has turned the US into a society of ugly self-righteous monsters. A killing here, a killing there, everywhere the killing killing, old mac US had some bombs, gonna need some mo.
i look at that photo above of the village with the boy in the foreground and wonder – this is the monster under the bed that frightens millions of people on the other side of the planet? the largest military apparatus the world has ever seen is devouring itself over this “enemy?” the earth’s largest empire is propping itself up as it sees itself on its last legs with scary stories about stone age invaders….
we are so utterly fucked.
Usa_naziland; will turn on the people in allied nations & even its own nation in an instant if it feels it will benefit from doing so. These americunts in power are pure evil & praise death-culture. Frankly a global embargo should be enforced stopping the american government from visiting & having buildings outside its own boarders as they use them for all manner of fostering/creating/arming terrorist groups. The north-american planned global empire is in ruins & so is its stature which is now clearly a regime of satanic doings.
While the factual details in this article of the attack on the village may be accurate, the historical context presented is woefully misleading on issues such as: (1) when Saudi Arabia began bombing Yemen, (2) Obama’s record on civilian casualties, (3)how Hadi gained power in Yemen, and (4) Saudi Arabia’s relationship with Al Qaeda on the Arabian Peninsula.
(1) On this quote: “Saudi Arabia joined the fray in March 2015, leading a coalition of nations in a military intervention and aerial bombing campaign, supported by the U.S., to push back the Houthis, who the Saudis view as an Iranian proxy force.”
In reality, Saudi Arabia “joined the fray” in November 2009, according to US State Department cables:
(2) On this quote: “Although some details about the mission remain unclear, the account that has emerged suggests the Trump White House is breaking with Obama administration policies that were intended to limit civilian casualties.”
See Jeremey Scahill, the Nation, March 2012
(3) On this quote: “…Yemen’s internationally recognized president-in-exile, Abdu Rabbu Mansour Hadi.”
Hadi is in reality as Saudi-US puppet installed in 2012 after the Arab Spring pro-democracy movement broke out across the Middle East. Gotta love the one-candidate-on-the-ballot “democratic election.” Pfffft.
(4) On this quote: “…local armed militias loyal to the Saudi-led coalition, fighting on the pro-government side of Yemen’s internationally recognized president-in-exile, Abdu Rabbu Mansour Hadi.”
What’s the difference between “local armed militias loyal to the Saudi-led coalition” and Al Qaeda? Not much:
http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2015/09/23/saudi-arabia-and-al-qaeda-unite-in-yemen/
A better context for understanding Yemen is that if Yemen’s Shia (35%) and Sunni (65%) groups were to share power in a democratic parliamentary government, this would create a precedent for the same thing happening in Saudi Arabia; the House of Saud would have to abdicate the monarchy and would be replaced by a parliamentary democracy, and they’re dead set against that, as is the United States, which views the Arab Spring pro-democracy nationalist movement as a threat to its interests in the Middle East and North Africa.
The U.S. in general doesn’t seem to want independent democracies in the region; it wants pliant corrupt dictatorships and client states who follow orders. This is one of those ugly realities that American journalists dutifully hide from the American public, most of the time at least.
Great comment.
always the bigger picture, american hegemoney
I can’t help but think of a scene from Kingdom of Heaven when Guy de Lusignan (Marton Csokas) lets Reynald de Chatillion (Brendan Gleeson) out of prison and says, “Give me war.”
Reynald replies, “It’s what I do.”
Good reference. +1
???? ?????? ???? ??? ???????
There are many cases of child recruitment and the fall of the victims were women and as a result of indiscriminate shelling
Only nazi-minds can commit an “operation” like this one. Now its time for the allies of this nazi-runned country(usa) to speak out- silence and doing nothing against targeted killings of civillians of all ages in Islamic countris are totally unacceptable! We need to speak out now before Donald Trumps words(plans to “extinct radical Islam”- and says he will kill even familie members of suspected terrorists) of “extinction” become even more comparable to Hitlers meanings of it. We dont know how far USA and the Trump administration will go yet but targeted killings of innocent civilians including children- is Fascism!
Obligatory disclaimer: Trump = doubleplus ungood.
But, not uniquely so: see this Feb 2012 Scahill piece on Yemen and Obama.
https://www.thenation.com/article/washingtons-war-yemen-backfires/
Yet for all of his term the majority of Democrats and Republicans and the anti-war movement (with notable exceptions like Code Pink and Medea Benjamin) went silent on Obama’s killing spree.
This does give some credence to the notion that Trump’s election has had the positive effect of mobilizing opposition to psychotic pro-war policies that Obama conducted with little public resistance, doesn’t it?
A fascist is a fascist- even thouht one can probably argue that there are different degrees of fascism. No doubt that both former president Obama and Donald trump support fascist actions. What scares me about Donald Trump is his Words so far: His use of the Word “exctinct”. During the Christmas days og 2016 he announced he has got the plan to “exctinct radical islam and its Networks”. He also announced that he want a policy of killing familiy members og SUSPECTED terrorists. Even the suspected terrorist might be a totally peaceful soul.
They *did* manage to get Awlaki’s 8-year-old daughter, Nawar! Probably what they came all that way to do too. Having whacked the son and father before.
“We” should have spoken out already at Bush II and chosen to become “Against Us”, but, we didn’t. No, “we” became eager accomplices in the many crimes that followed and still, even after the total fiasco in Libya to pad Hillary’s CV for the election, we are kissing Uncle Sams butt, especially Sweden and Denmark who never has an independent thought or policy not approved by the USA first.
This ting with Donald Trump is only Optics, the policies, actions and the outcomes are the same as under Obama, but in fact “we” are mostly concerned about Trump carelessly getting some dirt on our fine tailor-made uniforms ….
Fajensen: to kill 8 year olds seems to be the wanted policy of the US army- Donald Trump has annonced this as å wanted policy. Si What Are your opinion on that policy?
The former and todays Norwegian goverment, (Norway: the country i am from), unfortunatly got just as much responsibility for the fascisme that has been taken place under the”war on terror”. People in western countries also got responsibility to protest when they are vitnesses of assasination policy in war. I have never supported Any of the wars- from Iraq to Yemen. I have tried to engage to å certain level to speak out against the “war on terror”. I hope the awareness of the dark war policies will increse now- children assasinations!
My opinion is:
Barbaric – because this is something the Romans would do, like, 2000 years ago.
Wasteful – because why does a supposedly 1’st world nation, superpower, need to always throw a tantrum over what someone in a 3’rd world place happens to be ranting about?
Counterproductive – because, everyone in those places we attack will be wanting to pay back whatever injustice was visited upon them, and if Al Queda etcetera is offering to help with that …. why not?. Human nature.
Evil – murdering random people is just evil, murder as a policy is something we attribute to Kim Jong Un, Stalin, Hitler …. not exactly who we want to be?
Crazy. To the malignant necrophile deadly force is always the first and the last resort.
It would be GOOD if one of those roaming bands of “Sonderbefehl” got wiped totally out, even for selfish reasons. To stop them coming back and joining the police force where they will keep killing.
Thank you for reporting the voices that the US mainstream media refuses to include. This is so important as Republican and Democrat political elite increase their efforts to dehumanize people in other part of the world.
” The White House and the military have denied that the AQAP leader was the target of the mission, insisting the SEALs were sent in to capture electronic devices and material to be used for intelligence gathering.”
I do not see any electrical lines or telephone poles in any photo. These villages don’t have electricity. How would they operate electronic devices?
Baffling. Conclusion: mission failure. And I think you got played too. Why keep sending Ford Mustangs to race Model Ts? Stop it. The mustang is losing.
I don’t know anyone who is afraid of a Yemenite boogieman or even an ISIS boogieman. I don’t get it; just feel a bit sick that this keeps happening.
Are Seals being abused/misused? As an aside, do you guys know US LEOs are being trained in SERE? Law enforcement is going to have to evade, escape, etc? Who? What? Where? When?
Anyway, If all this shit really is for the US Constitution, that it’s to protect US way of life, I image Uncle Sam as a jealous paranoid bf. Anyone who even looks like they’re looking at the Const. gets blasted. But of course none of this about protecting that document.
IRAQ was destroyed by a reason of terrorism, and now a days yemen ( in Lellah wa ina illeh ragea’on) ?? ??? ???? ???? ??????
Shorter and more historical: “Free fire zones.”
Reinstitute the draft. All-volunteer forces are either socioeconomic draftees or, as in the case of the SEAL killed in this shameful action, gung ho killers who know exactly what they’re doing, signed up to do just that, and do it eagerly and with abandon (and close air support).
1) Drafts do not prevent countries from starting wars.
2) Drafts do not prevent war crimes (WWII-Vietnam)
3) Wealthy individuals usually get what they want including avoiding being drafted.
Do you have any evidence regarding the reasons behind the Navy Seal’s choice to join the military?
1. No, but conscription makes the people of countries that start wars much more attentive to the reasons and the possible consequences of doing so, and it works to share both the risks and the responsibilities more equitably.
2. That’s true, but armies of draftees, when war crimes are committed, help to demonstrate that the Universal Soldier “really is to blame.”
3. We can fix that.
As for your question, it’s the wrong one. The relevant one isn’t why an individual chooses to join the military but why he chooses to train for and spend a career in (the SEAL in question was a PO1 until his posthumous promotion to Chief) special forces units with missions typically similar to the massacre reported above.
Here’s a hint: It’s not because such an individual is reluctantly answering a call of duty to protect his nation from attack (which is a little hard to do in, say, Yemen).
1) Millions of people were opposed to the Vietnam War and Millions of people were opposed to the last Iraq War. Whether it is a volunteer army or not, you might still have strong opposition or strong support
2) We know more about who is responsible for war crimes now thanks to journalists and other soldiers. Whether they are draftees or volunteers, they gain a lot of power with a weapon and they tend to abuse that power. There are soldiers in jail now because other volunteer soldiers reported their war crimes.
3) Good Luck
4) You accuse somebody you obviously do not know of joining the military for the simple reason of committing war crimes. That is not only a weak argument, it is also an ignorant statement. You either do not know anything about what special forces mean or more likely you want to live in your own reality.
Here’s a hint: regular infantry units or Marines are not trained in sophisticated operations, say, rescuing American hostages on the high sea)
“Here’s a hint: regular infantry units or Marines are not trained in sophisticated operations, say, butchering innocent civilians, women and children, for no fucking good reason at all, in remote villages, in countries far away where we have no legitimate security interests at all.”
Fixed it for you.
Conclusion: You have no arguments. You live in your own reality.
Checkmate!
I don’t think so, matey!
Swiss…the epithets and insults are coming next from Mr. Salzman…always happens when he gets boxed in by logic and reason. He will hurl the F-bomb on you and other nice descriptive adjectives, and as usual, the “read our comments” policy will be unenforced. You and I both know why. So good luck with Mr. Salzman.
Actually, you have a problem similar to that of swisscheese. You don’t understand Doug’s arguments; you likely can’t. So you and swiss respond as the intellectually insecure often do.
Thank you for making my point Mona..as usual, resulting to personal attacks and as usual, the Intercept does nothing about it despite stating in their reader and comment policy that they do not tolerate such things. No wonder the Intercept spawned such lovely things as Juan Thompson. You and Doug seem to have the following logic: Because I am so intellectually and morally superior, anyone who disagrees with me just doesn’t get it and therefore MUST BE STUPID. Its why there has been blowback in the form of Donald Trump because people are tired of being shut down. My last comment to you in a separate post thanked you for your civil tone….seems you are unable to continue that trend. By the way, two Bachelors Degree and a Masters degree here. Currently an ICU nurse. I probably use more critical thinking in the first 2 hrs of my shift than you will use in an entire year in these forums.
“I probably use more critical thinking in the first 2 hrs of my shift than you will use in an entire year in these forums.”
I see.
Do you quilt, too?
Failed the class
You don’t even know how pathetic this feeble appeal to your own imagined authority is, do you?
Now, who’s engaging in personal attacks?
Here comes the real attack dog…Mr. Salzman….and again…note the nastiness in the tone that will go completely unnoticed by the intercept. I notice from this and previous posts that you seem to be a spec ops warrior, teacher, economist, politician, immigration expert, preacher, psychologist/psychoanalyst/psychiatrist and probably so much more that I’m not even aware of. You seem to be an expert on everything. Just curious how one gets to be so much more intelligent that everyone else. Were you one of those protégé kids that was reading War and Peace when you were in the third grade?
Intelligence is largely a matter of genetics, with a measure of early environmental factors tossed in. It results mostly from luck or accident, and is nothing to be proud or ashamed of, as the case may be.
Knowledge, on the other hand, while certainly dependent upon intelligence in various ways and to certain degrees, is the result of study and experience.
Not quite that early.
” So you and swiss respond as the intellectually insecure often do.”
-Mona- is launching another personal attack.
While Malinois probably won’t complain as she’s probably off quilting or something, I will take the opportunity to highlight -Mona-‘s never-ending habit of personal attack and discussion of such. From -Mona-‘s link:
Pointing to someone’s mental capacity and then letting “intelligent readers pass judgement” … how high is your nose when you type such tripe?
Oh Mona ,, lay off the ” Brains are Good , Loins are Bad ” crap .
I know some bright folks that have devoted all their brains to making $$ .
It’s an addiction like no other ,,, never enough .
Then there’s the poor slob that ‘s been made to think that if he had a little more $$ his existence would be better ,
What’s the difference ? A matter of brains ?
One of the stupidest cliches I ever heard while growing up was ” If you’re so smart why ain’t you rich ? ”
Then there’s the friggin INTELLECTUAL that thinks Thinking is what it’s all about .
Here’s a question I pose , strictly hypothetically :
Would things , planet-wise , be better if human thought was equal to about that of a dolphin ? ( assuming of course that since we can kill dolphins we are smarter )
‘Special Forces’ are special because they have weeded out only those with a penchant for following orders. And a low or non-existent moral compass.
While I disagree with you about the draft, and I can’t understand the reason for long-winded arguments with swisscheese about things that can be stated far simply, I do agree with your basic argument.
I’ll carry it further.
Anyone who trains for war knows that there will be civilian casualties. And that there is a likelihood that the trainee will inflict them.
The culpability begins long before the actual event.
There is a draft, just as you mention: economic draft. I’m against a draft. But for alternative ways of participating.
It’s likley the seal joined up cause it’s popular, glorified, blah blah. Doubtful he had the real feeling of someone w/ mental problems — but possible.
Perhaps it is doubtful that he was an eager, wannabe killer when he signed up for training (although I’m doubtful about that), but there’s much less doubt when considering his attitude after a number of years and many missions engaged in similar action.
If you doubt that, I suggest hanging out in bars with lifer special operations troops for a while. If you have a time machine, you can skip back and forth through the decades and the conflicts.
Think about it: about 3-5% of the general population are sociopaths. Among the typical characteristics of sociopathy are aggressiveness (indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults) and reckless disregard for safety of self and/or others. If you were possessed of (or by) a sociopathic personality and wanted a relatively consequence-free environment in which to “express yourself,” what sorts of life and career choices might you make?
Damn that’s dumb. Dumb. Dumb.
Drafts are for the kind of socioeconomic slavedrivers who love to start foreign wars but don’t want to pay the poor schmucks they round up. Seriously, the only possible reason for them is to avoid paying a market wage!
A volunteer military is made up of people who are “gung-ho”, yeah. Does that mean they tolerate violence? Sure, I suppose. But it also means they tolerate orders, and have some kind of internal courage and determination. Drafting people means putting cowards behind the guns – are they going to hold off out of pacifistic principle, or are they going to spray everything in sight when they come under fire???
An unsympathetic person might suggest that is what happened in this case, someone who put self-preservation above not killing civilians who might have been weeded out if elite training had gone the way it perhaps intended. Of course, that’s easy to say when my ass is in a comfy seat, with never a shot flying anywhere near me. And ultimately — if it’s a choice between all our guys dead, al-Qaida parading around triumphantly dragging their corpses and putting their heads on poles, or al-Qaida getting killed and some villagers who knowingly lived beside their operation getting caught in the crossfire — which are we going to pick?
And by the way, excellent job of investigative reporting Ms. Craig, Mr. Scahill and Mr. Cole. This is the type and quality of journalism that makes The Intercept an invaluable voice in a sea of media crap.
Keep up the good work.
the average american robot doesn’t care as long as cable works and pizza delivery is available
Immoral, sad and preventable.
A guess until the American sons, daughters, mothers and fathers start coming home in body bags in much greater numbers this wanton counterproductive slaughter of civilian women, children and old people will continue unabated. And all so the cowardly American people can feel safer from the boogieman living in a stone hut living ten thousand miles away with no statistically meaningful capacity to threaten a single American life on our shores, while Americans die in statistical record numbers from diabetes, cancer and opioid addiction, safe and fat in oversized homes stuffed full of every technological convenience.
How is it that the American people believe they are “exceptional” in any way except in terms of their irrational fear, greed and capacity for violence? I’m pretty sure the vision of the “shining city on the hill” never involved exploding large numbers of human beings all over the globe for the last 50 + years.
“American people can feel safer from the boogieman living in a stone hut living ten thousand miles away with no statistically meaningful capacity to threaten a single American life on our shores,”
Are you referring to AQAP in Yemen? Are you sure it has no meaningful capacity to threaten a single American life on US soil?
This attack just gave them many reasons to attack thw United States and works as a wonderful recruiting tool.
Is a threat to one American life justification for training / equipping seals at millions billions of dollars to go and kill civilians in other countries?
A threat to one American life is a threat to the US Constitution?
Did the Seals go to other countries to kill civilians or civilians died as a result of the confrontation between the seals and the enemy?
If you cannot or will not attempt to understand my question, then we have to agree to disagree and you may just ignore it and scroll down to the next commenter.
“Are you sure it has no meaningful capacity to threaten a single American life on US soil?”
How do you write this shit? A threat to “…a single American life on US soil” is your threshold for going into Yemen, minus an AUMF, and killing women and children?
According to your “reasoning” there isn’t a country in the world that we shouldn’t be attacking. You’re a fool.
“How do you write this shit?”
Because an individual called Abdulmutallab who was a member of Al Qaeda in Yemen, was trained in Yemen attempted to kill hundreds of Americans in 2009.
“A threat to “…a single American life on US soil” is your threshold for going into Yemen, minus an AUMF, and killing women and children?”
1) You are stating they went there for the sole reason of killing women and children not to arrest or kill Al Qaeda members. That is some serious accusations for which you have not presented any evidence. Therefore, this is a reality you have created.
2) AUMF: Public Law 107-40, September 18, 2001, 107th Congress
That the President is authorized to use all
necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations,
or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed,
or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001,
or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent
any future acts of international terrorism against the United States
by such nations, organizations or persons.
AQAP is a branch of Al Qaeda, the organization responsible for 9/11. Feel free to design your reality in which Al Qaeda was not responsible for 9/11, AQAP has nothing with Al Qaeda, or AQAP is not planning and training terrorists against the US even when its leaders keep saying so.
“According to your “reasoning” there isn’t a country in the world that we shouldn’t be attacking.”
The US does not need to attack Spain because Spanish police arrest and judge Al Qaeda members. Indonesian police does the same, Kenyan authorities do the same etc.. Yemen government has publicly stated many times that it is unable to stop AQAP and the tribes supporting it.
“You’re a fool”
Attack the argument, not the commenter.
Well actually, if read for comprehension, for the President to use force against AQAP he would have to establish two things:
1) that AQAP existed prior to or at the time of 9/11 and was comprised of individuals who “planned, authorized, committed, aided or harbored” the 9/11 acts: or
2) that AQAP as existing at present contains individuals who are/were responsible for “planning, authorizing, committing, aiding or harboring” those who were.
If not then AQAP and its members have nothing to do with the 2001 AUMF.
But hey you aren’t the only one that can’t read it for comprehension.
Our of curiosity, in your moral universe, is it “proportional and necessary” to prevent further attacks (assuming AQAP or its existing members had anything to do with 9/11) on America to kill women and children at about a 13 to 1 ratio, in Yemen, to theoretically take possession of a laptop, or kill one nominal “terrorist” who may or may not have been at that location at the time the 13 to 1 kill ratio was effectuated?
Come now, attack the argument not the commenter so we can evaluate your argument and moral worldview.
You are challenging the 2001 AUMF. That is fair enough.
“you aren’t the only one that can’t read it for comprehension”
1) AQAP is just the combination of Al Qaeda in Yemen and Al Qaeda in Saudi Arabia, his founder was Nasir Abdel Karim al-Wuhayshi, an aide to Bin Laden while he was in Afghanistan and his appointment as the leader of AQAP in 2009 was confirmed by Al Qaeda leader Al Zawahiri. (Al Jazeera, 29 Dec 2009)
2) One of those individuals is Sheikh Al Sudani (former Guantanamo prisoner) arrested in 2001 for aiding Al Qaeda. He detailed the training and the planning of 9/11 in the magazine Inspire in May 2016. (Inspire, May 2016 page 20.) He officially acknowledged that he is a member of AQAP.
So, AQAP does meet your two criteria.
is it “proportional and necessary”.
NO. It is not proportionate and necessary. The raid was a mess. That is completely different to accuse the US Seals of going to Yemen for the sole purpose of killing women and children.
Who did that? Not me.
My point is that in an effort to “feel safer” the American people will permit the most horrendous policies, that will necessarily result in both the intended and reckless death of civilians, disproportionate to any actual “risk” or likelihood that a particular “threat” will manifest on our shores and harm a statistically significant number of Americans by comparison to 10s if not 100s of other “threats” we face in our day to day lives, that actually could be meaningfully addressed if the US government wanted to.
Moreover, I don’t have a moral worldview that says as an American, I believe my own life, or that of my family, friends, fellow citizens is worth the lives at a 13 to 1 ratio of women, children and old folks just so my nation can try and stop the theoretical prospective deaths of me and mine from the statistically astronomically insignificant that some foreign national could hurt any American on American soil.
It’s immoral and fucking fundamentally irrational AND immoral to even attempt to make that justification.
That is entirely different from trying, together with other nations, to expend funds and efforts to stop say nuclear or biological weapons proliferation (which America could do by leading the way instead of being the world’s number 1 international arms seller), or working to build up the international institutions, treaties and structures to effectively combat “terrorism” which should be understood as an international criminal problem rather than some hybrid, and go around bombing the fuck out of other nations.
And if you don’t understand those things, I’m really sorry for you, but you are part of the problem. You and people like you fundamentally aid and abet the creation of terrorists and hard feeling against America because you believe your “perceived sense of safety” trumps other human beings right to exist in their own lands, EVEN IF it happens to be the case that some bad people are also residing in those lands theoretically planning to do harm to America or Americans (which relative to 7 + billion people on the planet is another statistically insignificant number if American government statistics to be believed–somewhere between 20,000 and 100,000 transnational “terrorists” globally).
“Who did that? Not me.”
Commenter Doug Salzmann:
“All-volunteer forces are either socioeconomic draftees or, as in the case of the SEAL killed in this shameful action, gung ho killers who know exactly what they’re doing, signed up to do just that, and do it eagerly and with abandon”
Commenter Contisertoli:
A threat to “…a single American life on US soil” is your threshold for going into Yemen, minus an AUMF, and killing women and children?
My first comments that you replied were originally addressed to them.
“You and people like you fundamentally aid and abet the creation of terrorists and hard feeling against America because you believe your “perceived sense of safety” trumps other human beings right to exist in their own lands”
Attack the argument, not the commenter.
What policy do you propose with regards to terrorists training and planning attacks against the US from Yemen?
I did not say the current policy is perfect. I did not say we should disregard civilian casualties. But you so obsessed in attacking the commenter, not the argument you cannot see it. My point is what should the US do considering the current situations in Yemen. I have noticed you are more inclined at stating the US is wrong than actually looking at a rational solution.
I could care less about you, I’m attacking your opinion.
I could care less about the statistically insignificant amount of “terrorists” all over the globe “theoretically planning” terrorist attacks (and since this is your assertion please provide real world verifiable numbers of how many actual human beings that is and where–other than “I trust the whomever the government strikes the government must have had good info saying they are “terrorists” actively planning or carrying out a terrorist attack” because that crap has been debunked long ago).
What I do think is that you adequately defend people IN THIS NATION by taking all various reasonable steps to control background screenings, visa status et al.
I’m fundamentally confused how any human being “planning” anything 10s miles away from American shores has any bearing on any American citizen on America shores. People can “plan” anything they like, anywhere they like. It is immoral and illegal to kill them until such time as you have established they are a) capable of carrying out their plan, b) have taken sufficient steps for the plan to manifest in the real world, and c) are close enough in execution that you can either arrest them and charge them in an appropriate venue.
But implicit in your question is the belief that you believe it is permissible to kill other human beings based on their “plans”, “planning” and/or remote temporal capacity to actually carry out their plan.
I’ll say it again, a “reasonable” response to the “threat” of terrorism is to work to build up the governments, economies and international institutions in the few places on the globe that statistically seem to be breeding grounds for terrorism. And more importantly, stop engaging in the actions that kill civilians that turn people otherwise not predisposed to want to commit terrorist acts into terrorists because you kill their civilian family and friends.
You don’t do any of that by counterproductively, and futilely, attempting to preemptively kill every “terrorist” (an impossibility even in the theoretical) and predictably and necessarily end up killing lots of non-terrorists.
You can’t really be this stupid are you? You actually believe bombing people all over the globe in the name of fighting “terrorism” is actually rational?
I think we’re done here if that’s what you believe, because it is contrary to every bit of reason and evidence on the topic going on 40 years.
“I could care less about you, I’m attacking your opinion.” and this
“You can’t really be this stupid are you?”
Attack the argument, not the commenter.
” I could care less about the statistically insignificant amount of “terrorists” all over the globe “theoretically planning” terrorist attacks ”
These are a few terrorist attacks that AQAP itself said they planned and law enforcements agencies said it did:
1) Underwear Bomber, 2009
2) Bomb Packages sent from Yemen to Chicago, 2010
3) Charlie Hebdo Shooting, 2015
Yes, as a free citizen, you have the right not to care about terrorists planning attacks thousands miles away. However, if you are reasonable, then you should understand why passengers in a plane or satirists would have some serious concerns about terrorists in Yemen. And those individuals do have the right to tell their leaders to make sure those terrorists stop coming on their soil to kill them.
“a) capable of carrying out their plan”
See above what they did in 2009, 2010, 2015.
“b) have taken sufficient steps for the plan to manifest in the real world” Seriously you must be living in your own reality.
“c) are close enough in execution that you can either arrest them and charge them in an appropriate venue.”
Fair enough. Now tell us how you would go to Yemen and present them with an arrest warrant considering
1) Yemen government told the world it does not have the capability to apprehend those people. Those well armed tribes said they would not let anybody arrest them.
“remote temporal capacity to actually carry out their plan”
Ask the dead journalists at Charlie Hebdo whether they believe AQAP capacity to carry out its plans is remote. Oops..they are dead!!
Again, I gave the situation. Answer the question:
“What policy do you propose with regards to terrorists training and planning attacks against the US from Yemen?”
It is okay if you do not have an answer.
I’m calling you stupid because you are proving my point about not understanding risk to wit:
In other words two failed plans that targeted America that were stopped and which were stopped not by bombing people in their countries–do you understand that?
The third example is in France, which is the problem of the French, but again was not prevented in any way by bombing people in their own countries.
Reasonable you say–again how is it “reasonable” to translate a legitimate concern, no matter how statistically unlikely and how ridiculously infrequent, into a justification for bombing people in their own countries–that demonstrably did not stop any of the terror plans or attacks you claim are reasonable to fear?
Again, for the dummies, two of the three examples you cited WERE NOT STOPPED BY BOMBING YEMEN. The third example was probably precipitated in part by bombing Muslims all over the world assisted by the French. Ever wonder why certain Muslims are not setting off bombs in places like Mexico City, or Sweden, or Norway, or Japan? Guesses, anyone?
So what, again, did the ridiculously unlikely, statistically infrequent event cause you to spend billions of dollars and bomb everyplace that lightning strikes, or that Americans are harmed by preventable automobile accidents, or hell for that matter legal gun ownership caused guns deaths in America? Of course not, your “examples” or attempted “justification” is proving my point and demonstration you’re either stupid or entirely morally bankrupt to your core.
No actually you are, because every example you could cite, and do cite, proves my point–bombing purported or suspected terrorists in their countries has no demonstrable connection to preventing terrorism anywhere but in the country where they are bombed–if even there since none of the proof of their plans or ability to carry them out is ever made public.
Then do precisely what I said, build the government and international police institutions and treaties sufficient to go in and arrest them if the evidence warrants. Short of that, assist in improving screening processes for immigration, airline and mass transit.
Again, Frances problem. And since they are dead in spite of bombing Yemen how in fuck does that support your nonsensical argument?
I’ve told you three different ways, but you don’t seem to have the intellectual horsepower sufficient to comprehend or the moral willingness.
Again you are proving my point–your worldview is thus succinctly–I believe the US and its allies have the moral right and imperative to kill whomever they want, anywhere they want, based on secret evidence that they are “planning to do bad things”, secret evidence that they never make public, and that quite obviously hasn’t stopped terrorists from attacking anybody at least not as a function of bombing in the nations we claim are terrorist havens.
And it’s okay if I repeat that you’re a morally bankrupt moron who couldn’t possibly understand proof smacking him in the face, or how to construct a well supported argument that doesn’t prove the other guys point.
Thank you. You’ve just demonstrated my point(s) in as many ways as you possibly could. And I hope you are not my fellow citizen because you sicken me with your pathetic cowardice and moral bankruptcy.
“And it’s okay if I repeat that you’re a morally bankrupt moron who couldn’t possibly understand proof smacking him in the face, or how to construct a well supported argument that doesn’t prove the other guys point.”
Attack the argument, not the commenter.
We have to agree to disagree. My opinion is that you live in another reality. You are more concerned at blaming the US than providing solutions because you do not have any. For instance, this
1) “Then do precisely what I said, build the government and international police institutions and treaties sufficient to go in and arrest them if the evidence warrants”
That means you have absolutely no understanding of what is going on in Yemen. How do you build a government in Yemen? Do you go there and impose stability? The Yemenis themselves cannot get along.
In order to build a government in Yemen, you will have to take sides. Which side are you going to take? Which tribes? Which Sects? The Houthis? As soon as you start supporting the current government, then you become the enemy of the powerful Houthis and pro Al Qaeda tribes. As soon as you start supporting the Houthis, then you become the enemy of the powerful Sunnis and other tribes. Treaties? Every single member of the UN consider AQAP a terrorist organization and its members must be stopped.
However you look at it, force will have to be used and civilians will die.
That one also showed how pathetic your argument is:
“The third example was probably precipitated in part by bombing Muslims all over the world assisted by the French”
They did it because the journalists committed “blasphemy” . That is what they said before they did it and after they did.
“Ever wonder why certain Muslims are not setting off bombs in places like Mexico City, or Sweden, or Norway, or Japan? Guesses, anyone?”
1) In 2010 Islamist terrorists Muhammad Rashidin and Abdulaif arrested in Norway for planning to bomb a newspaper and kill a cartoonist
2) In 2010, Terrorist Abdulwahab al-Abdaly exploded a bomb downtown Stockholm
3) In 2016 terrorist Aydin Sevigin arrested for planning terrorist attack in Sweden
“Again, Frances problem”
You fail to understand the point. If they can go downtown Paris and kill so many people, that means AQAP does have the capacity to carry out its plans 10,000 miles away. That contradicts your argument.
“And since they are dead in spite of bombing Yemen how in fuck does that support your nonsensical argument?”
OMG. That is the most ridiculous perspective I have ever encountered.
The reason why they are unable to kill more people is because their leadership, their training facilities, their equipment has been bombed over and over. Are you saying bombing Al Qaeda does not make it harder for its members to kill more people in the US?
If you were running for president I would definitely vote for you. Since you would not bomb AQAP I would love to see how you would stop them after you let them have better equipment, better training, better financing while their continuously tell you they intend to kill as many US citizens as they can.
if you are reasonable?
if you are reasonable, you should understand why those living in remote Yemeni villages on the other side of the world would have some concern about terrorist attacks by drone or special ops forces. and those individuals do have the right to arm themselves and retaliate when their families are randomly, repeatedly murdered in broad daylight and for all the world to see.
now tell us you’d present the American embassy with an extradition order, or call them before an international court to account for their crimes. let us know how far you’d get.
or just ask the children in that village.
oops…!
Let’s get a common ground:
If we could go to Yemen and arrest the terrorists without any military operations, then we all agree that civilian casualties would be next to none. Right? That is what happens in countries like Spain or Indonesia.
So, tell us how you would advise the US government in going to Yemen and arrest those individuals with the proper arrest warrants.
Let’s get a common ground:
If we could go to Yemen and arrest the terrorists without any military operations, then we all agree that civilian casualties would be next to none. Right? That is what happens in countries like Spain or Indonesia.
So, tell us how you would advise the US government in going to Yemen and arrest those individuals with the proper arrest warrants.
that isn’t common ground.
that’s a refusal to acknowledge the fact that you’re invoking one set of rules, one moral standard, selectively and ducking the question when it comes time to apply that same standard uniformly.
I guess we agree to disagree. Have a nice day for now.
and yet, it just keeps happening. it keeps happening with such regularity that it’s become predictable. one might even say, expected, even.
so, not really accidental, is it.
So, your argument is the US just sends the military in Yemen to kill whatever moves right?
my *observation* is that it isn’t an accident if it’s repeated and predictable.
which is what i typed.
Yes, I got it. It is not an accident. The US government send soldiers in Yemen to kill civilians. That is your argument. I disagree.
if you have to append someone else’s statements for them, even after careful clarification, that reflects rather poorly on both your argument as well as your sense of intellectual or personal integrity.
even if we think strictly in terms of scoring rhetorical points, your purpose would be better served by simply conceding the point than shooting yourself in the foot in this manner.
“my *observation* is that it isn’t an accident if it’s repeated and predictable.”
If it is not an accident, then what is it?
Please, do not redefine the word “accident”. If the civilian casualties were not “accident” , that means the US military killed them intentionally. The Seals went there to kill them.
When Johnny gets drunk and kill someone while driving, then it is an ACCIDENT. An unacceptable accident for which he will severely be punished because the accident is the result of crime (DWI). If Johnny is sober and decide to drive his truck towards the people celebrating NYE, then it is not accident. It is a crime.
“if you have to append someone else’s statements for them, even after careful clarification”
Yes, you did clarify it. You stated it is not an accident. That means it was intentional. Take responsibility for your own position.
you’re welcome to keep stepping on your own dick, but that’s your foot, not mine.
the point about intention isn’t one you or i can answer with certainty, which is why i limit my statement to what is observable. you are welcome to speculate but aside from being uncertain speculation, it’s largely irrelevant for the reason i’ve repeatedly outlined.
when you have repeatedly demonstrated that the outcome of a particular course of action, or set of actions, will result in civilian deaths then you can’t then claim ignorance or accident when you repeat the action with the same result.
to kill those people unexpectedly or without sufficient forethought to predict their deaths is reckless and negligent homicide. to repeat the action unquestionably makes it deliberate. this is something anyone can observe. “intention” in this context is a red herring since you can simply say that you don’t care about the dead civilians, that they are merely a side effect or a means to an end.
the invocation of “intention” in this case, to hide behind that notion, is merely a declaration of the meaninglessness of those civilian lives – to you. they don’t matter – to you. even when the declared “intention” isn’t fulfilled by the action that resulted in those deaths. those lives are a means to an end – an end that isn’t even achieved!
we have to think about concepts such as intention and will in this context as we would for a corporation or other form of bureaucracy to which people have become accustomed to imputing human attributes. this is a trap, as these artificial constructs are frequently designed specifically to thwart human conscience and moral or legal accountability.
a diffuse and impersonal decision-making process doesn’t mean no one is responsible – it means they’re all responsible.
“to repeat the action unquestionably makes it deliberate.”
Do you know what a deliberate action is? A deliberate action is done with preconceived INTENTION.
then this
“the invocation of “intention” in this case, to hide behind that notion, is merely a declaration of the meaninglessness of those civilian lives – to you”
Contradictory statements. You are using “intention” with different words!
If the Seals’ actions were “deliberate” with regards to civilian deaths, that means their preconceived intention was to go to that village without any regards to civilian lives. So, killing civilians was not an accident: they knew they would kill civilians, but they did not care. It is a crime even in their own military justice code.
This is a free world. You have the right to believe it. I also have the right to disagree with your belief.
you’re doing the same thing Trump did, and all the other presidents before him. it’s the same ethical shell game i referred to earlier, referring to a part of the apparatus as if it were independent, and then hiding behind that part.
this is a reliable tactic in the eyes of many people, which is why it gets used so frequently by politicians attempting to package and sell wars. but at this particular juncture, it’s more than a little threadbare.
I asked you earlier for your solution. When terrorists are planning and training attacks against the US from Germany, then the US government asks the German government to arrest them and judge them. That is exactly what the German, Spanish, Indonesian governments do.
How do you arrest terrorists in Yemen who are training and planning attacks against you considering the Yemen government says it cannot stop them? An considering they have proved you they can go thousand miles away from Yemen to kill people.
No drones. No troops. No economic sanctions as all of these strategies would result in civilian casualties.
Provide your solution so all the military assets in Yemen withdraw.
and you asked that question instead of answering one about how the justification you invoke on behalf of the American government and US Forces can’t be applied to the Yemenis, or any number of other populations in the ME.
reasonable? really?
why isn’t it reasonable then for Yemenis to take up arms against those who launch indiscriminate terrorist attacks against their FUCKING CHILDREN?
should we just write those deaths off as the cost of war?
Exactly what I expected. YOU DO NOT HAVE A SOLUTION.
The answer to your question is very simple.
1) If your kids die because of a US drone attack then you will hate the Americans and the terrorists (many of them not even Yemenis) who came to your neighbourhood to bring that war here. TI reporters will report the first part where they want to kill Americans because their children died. The same reporters will not report on those fathers and mothers in Yemen or Pakistan blaming foreigners (Al Qaeda) who brought the war to their village. So YES IF MY KIDS DIED FROM A US DRONE STRIKES THEN I WILL WANT TO KILL THE AMERICANS TOO. Duh????
2) If you knew anything about Yemen and Islamic terrorism then you would be aware that their main recruitment tool is economic incentives and religious beliefs. Civilians deaths propaganda plays a minimal and non sustainable role in their recruitment process. News Flash: the Intercept reporters are not the only people who go to areas in Yemen, Pakistan, to investigate the “blowback” argument. How many journalists or analysts have actually entered the areas in Pakistan where drone strikes are active? You don’t know. Do you? Well, Prof Aqil Shah from the Uni of Oklahoma and reporter Rob Crilly went to those areas in Pakistan. Find out what they discovered.
You can choose to be simple minded and pick 10 suicide bombers who tell you they do it because of drone strikes, or you can be like Prof. Swift and go where drone strikes are active in Yemen and ask the people on the ground whether civilian casualties are the main recruitment tool.
Again I propose we stop drone strikes, boots on the ground, economic sanctions because all of them will result in civilians deaths. The only condition is for you to provide a solution on how to arrest terrorists in Yemen who are planning and training whomever make fun of their prophet thousand miles away. Considering the local government says it cannot arrest them and the terrorists proved you they can actually kill those who make fun of their prophet thousand miles away. As soon as you provide the solution the debate is over because we will not have to worry about civilian deaths.
this is why humans kill each other, no one can remember who started it so the more bellicose on each side keep upping the ante. your proposition that i must solve your riddle is one that i reject outright in that it presupposes the role of the US as World Police.
that’s how we got into this mess in the first place.
for one thing, peace is not a state achieved because all scores have been settled. but perhaps more important for Americans and the West is the rather obvious point that there is no high ground (which would be required if one makes the claim of World Police) so long as we’re found to be interfering for one side or another in factional disputes that are none of our concern and certainly not within our purview. every invasion, every CIA operation, every violation of sovereignty has been based on a lie. we’ve killed to secure natural resources, we’ve provided weapons to one side, or both sides, and frequently we just seem to be killing people because of sheer ineptitude.
and none of it can actually be shown to increase the safety of US citizens. if safety were the real priority, we’d have a very different conception of foreign policy. killing women and children in Yemen doesn’t serve that end.
stop.
World police? Riddle?….
You are definitely in a corner. Let me unpack it for you again.
1) Terrorists went to Paris and killed journalists because they made fun of their prophet
2) A terrorist went in a plane and tried to blow it up because he said the US killed too many Muslims.
Those attacks were planned by top terrorists in Yemen. Do you agree that those who planned, helped, financed those attacks should be prosecuted?
If your answer is no. Then, fine our discussion is over.
If your answer is yes. Then how do you arrest them in Yemen considering the fact that the Yemen government says it cannot arrest them. Remember this:
1) NO DRONE STRIKES ALLOWED. NO BOOTS ON THE GROUND. NO ECONOMIC SANCTIONS.
2) I will make it easier for you. NO US TROOPS, NO INTELLIGENCE AGENTS, NO US DIPLOMATS ALLOWED 100 MILES FROM YEMEN.
“killing women and children in Yemen doesn’t serve that end.”
Correct. That is exactly why you have condition 2) above. But apparently you have no idea how to tell journalists how you are going to arrest those who killed their colleagues and who are told them they will kill them soon.
one of the most important, and complicated, issues that is raised by an on-going policy of war crimes is culpability and complicity; it isn’t an individual or singular act so just how far does culpability extend? it would seem that there are levels of complicity.
in the case of the present admin, Trump made a definitive decision upon taking office to continue the assassination program of his predecessors. now it’s his. when Spicer stands up and defends it, that’s a choice he’s made. those lies are his now. those are examples that don’t seem very complicated. then there’s the whole chain of command, from those that issue the orders to those who are “just following orders.”
but what about us? these people are acting in our name even if we have no ability to stop them. but still, it’s our taxes that finance the crimes, our participation in society, collectively, facilitates them. that seems a lot more complicated.
wherever we, individually, fall within these shades of grey, we still make a decision. if we accept the lies, and then repeat them, we make them our own.
“When Johnny gets drunk and kill someone while driving, then it is an ACCIDENT. ”
Depraved indifference is not accidental. Johnny chooses to drink to excess.
Driving along and your foot hits the gas instead of the brake; that is an accident.
Since Johnny did not plan or say ” I am going to hit this guy with my car and kill him” , then under the law, Johnny killed him accidentally and will be charged for reckless homicide. That was not Johnny’s intention to kill anybody.
but he didn’t really care either. he knows what is going to happen the second time, the third and fourth . . . that isn’t reckless homicide. that is a decision to kill.
“he knows what is going to happen the second time, the third and fourth”
NO. How do you know he knew? You have to prove the court that he knew he WOULD kill somebody. Otherwise, the court will only punish him because he should have known he MIGHT kill somebody.
In warfare, the court must know whether the armed forces did everything they could to prevent or minimize civilian casualties. Not a single local, federal, international or global court expects wars without civilian casualties.
“that isn’t reckless homicide. that is a decision to kill.”
Therefore, not an accident, but premeditated murder. Again, you have the right to believe that the Seals went to Yemen to commit premeditated murder. I have the right to disagree because I believe your argument is not strong enough.
if we know it’s going to happen, as we do because we’re aware of the repeated examples in the past, on what basis would you claim that the people planning and executing these actions could be unaware?
were they drunk at the time?
while there are reports and documentation suggesting violations of the ROI by Seal teams and team members, this specific claim is irrelevant and unnecessary to the argument i’ve made. you are free to re-introduce it, of course, but that makes it your argument instead of mine.
my point stands: these attacks are made with the understanding that multiple civilian deaths including women and children are likely, and more likely to occur in higher numbers apparently, than those of combatants.
You may believe “Your point stands” You may believe your argument is actually very strong. Again it is a free world.
However, I disagree because US forces have used technology for the last 60 years that has specifically reduced civilian casualties. But again let’s forget about drone strikes, boots on the ground and economic sanctions because all of them will result in civilian casualties no matter how careful you are. Better yet let’s withdraw all military assets in Yemen.
Tell us how you would arrest those who planned the Charlie Hebdo attack. You know where they are ( Yemen). And they tell you they will not stop. The Yemeni government says it cannot arrest them.
you arrest them, what has that got to do with me?
tell me that you WILL arrest those responsible for the civilian deaths in Yemen or Pakistan. get the key players in every admin since Bush II, every person of rank who gave the order, every thug with a weapon and a uniform who went off the reservation over the last 15 years and bring them before an international war crimes court to account for their actions.
no? you have no solution?
“you arrest them, what has that got to do with me?”
Exactly what I expected. You have no solution. You completely destroy your argument.
“tell me that you WILL arrest those responsible for the civilian deaths…”
“no? you have no solution?”
Of course there is a solution. If you believe the US committed war crimes
1) Go to the court and prove it, so the perpetrators can be arrested and judged
2) If you do not believe the courts, then go on the streets and start demonstrating. Convince the other citizens they did commit war crimes
3) If 1) and 2) do not work, then you start a revolution. (Make sure you do not commit war crimes yourself during your revolution).
So, there is a solution to your question. You will not accept it because if the courts disagree with you, then you will say the court is biased. If you are unable to convince the other citizens you will say there are propagandized. You basically live in your own reality.
if you had, just once, shown an ability or willingness to recognize my “argument” rather than deliberately distorting it, you might comment on it now.
whatever standard you choose, apply it uniformly. if you feel that Yemeni citizens should be subject to arrest and judgment, the US government and its forces are the last people on the planet with the legal or moral authority to do so. you only care to recognize the crimes of everyone else and amplify what has been shown over and over to be lies.
that’s your choice, to make those lies your own.
“shown an ability or willingness to recognize my “argument”…”
You just have poor argumentative skills.
1) Contradictory statements. It was not an accident. It was a deliberate act. If it was not an accident, then it was intentional. You called it a “deliberate” act, which is exactly an intentional act.
2) Evasion by running away from questions you cannot answer.
How do you arrest and prosecute US war criminals? I gave you the answer above.
Then finally this
How do you arrest terrorists in Yemen considering the Yemen government said it cannot arrest them?
“if you feel that Yemeni citizens should be subject to arrest and judgment, the US government and its forces are the last people on the planet with the legal or moral authority to do so. you only care to recognize the crimes of everyone else”
1) This is not what I feel. This is what Yemeni citizens located in Yemen told the whole world. They planned and helped the CH attack, the underwear bomber and many other attacks. They said they will do it again. The UN and hundreds of journalists just repeated what they said. So, it is not about what I feel.
2) Fine, the US cannot arrest them. So, tell us how somebody, anybody besides the US should arrest those responsible for the CH attacks and the underwear bomber attack considering the Yemeni government said it cannot arrest them. Remember again, no drone strikes, no boots on the ground, no economic sanctions.
let me explain it yet another way:
Johnny has a little drinking problem. he goes out to a bar or a party and gets shitfaced, then gets in his car and drives home. the first time he gets into an accident and kills someone, it’s criminally irresponsible.
he can only use that excuse once.
Congratulations! You just invalidated the entire reasoning by the Obama administration for use of military force in every new conflict since 2009.
When do the war crime trials begin?
It takes a fool to come up with your “argument”. You’ll be okay, kitten.
Here is what we can be sure of. Every time we go to some village of goat herders and kill innocent people we create what we’re trying to eradicate.
Shit, even your hero BO had to change the definition of “enemy combatant” to include anyone of fighting age just so he could continue on with his double-tapping drone program (creating more enemies of the US BTW). When does 15 years of failyure become enough for dopes like you to question the effectiveness?
And did you really just suggest that the planners of 9/11 were in that fucking village and that an AUMF given seven days after that event 15 years ago should even be relevant today? Here’s a hint, the planners are/were in Saudi Arabia. Why aren’t we there?
“It takes a fool to come up with your “argument”. You’ll be okay, kitten.”
Attack the argument, not the commenter
“Here is what we can be sure of. Every time we go to some village of goat herders and kill innocent people we create what we’re trying to eradicate.”
That was not part of my argument.
“Shit, even your hero BO had …..When does 15 years of failure become enough for dopes like you to question the effectiveness?”
1) Barack Obama is not my hero. I could not vote for him anyway.
2) That was not part of my argument neither. But how do you measure effectiveness against terrorism?
“And did you really just suggest that the planners of 9/11 were in that fucking village and that an AUMF given seven days after that event 15 years ago should even be relevant today? Here’s a hint, the planners are/were in Saudi Arabia. Why aren’t we there?”
Members of Al Qaeda who supported or aided Bin Laden are still Yemen and part of AQAP. I understand in your own reality they are not even if they themselves keep saying they are in Yemen!
And one more thing. It takes one heartless bastard to look at those pictures, read that story, and then try to justify what happened there. Congrats.
“It takes one heartless bastard to look at those pictures, read that story, and then try to justify what happened there.”
Attack the argument, not the commenter.
Fuck you, I did. Your argument is heartless and you’re a bastard for proposing it.
Fuck you, I did. Your argument is heartless and you’re a bastard for proposing it.
It is not necessary to attack the witless argument of the fool or the imbecile; dismissing them as such suffices. That serves the useful function of signaling to other intelligent readers that the witless commenter can be dealt with summarily rather than waste time on their drivel.
Do you know what the phrase “no statistically meaningful capacity” means?
It means, by comparison to the statistically meaningful capacity (or better still statistically meaningful likelihood, or both) of dying from a bee sting, slip and fall in your own bathtub, car accident, preventable medical death, risk of being roofer in America, lightning strikes, . . . (I could go on, but won’t) that the actual risk of anyone in Yemen or any other country we are bombing for that matter coming to America and harming Americans on America soil is a statistical non-issue. And in no way sufficient justification given that real world statistical risk for spending 100s of billions of dollars and taking civilian lives all over the globe to not actually make us statistically meaningfully “more safe.” In fact, if our own government statistics are to be believed, we have increased the number of purported identifiable “terrorists” as a function of our “global war on terror”.
If you don’t understand those simple concepts without me spelling them out, or drawing it in crayon, then there is no point in having any discussion with you on any topic because you aren’t capable of comprehending simple statistical risk analysis, opportunity cost and/or morality.
With swisscheese i’m sincerely undecided whether he’s purposely tendentious, not that smart, or both. His promiscuous declarations that his opponents lack various intellectual skills, that he’s “check-mated” them, and more recently, attempts to get the opponent to move on– this is all, as I’m sure you know — especially when it’s so constant — the hallmark of the insecure.
You are among many commenters here who live in their own reality in which they are extremely intelligent and everybody else is incapable of understanding anything.
This is your sentence:
“living ten thousand miles away with no statistically meaningful capacity to threaten a single American life on our shores”
In other words, the capacity of a terrorist in Yemen to threaten a single American on its soil is low.
There is a huge difference between the CAPACITY to THREATEN the life of an American of her soil and the CAPACITY to KILL an American of her soil. I asked the question to clarify, but you are more interested at attacking the commenter than his argument.
Diabetes obviously has a higher capacity to KILL Americans on their soil than a terrorist in Yemen. But the Yemeni terrorist capacity to THREATEN the life Americans on their soil might be as great as diabetes. Since you were probably not a passenger of Northwest Airlines Flight 253, it is unlikely you would take that terrorist threat seriously.
Let’s say the capacity of a disease to kill Americans is 99.9%. And the capacity of a terrorist to kill Americans is .1%. Are we supposed to ignore the terrorist because he is unlikely to succeed in killing Americans? There is an argument to invest more against that disease, there is not a rational argument to ignore the terrorist.
You might be an expert in statistics. I concede I am not. So, please provide us with your own “government statistics” that establish a correlation between the increase of the number of purported identifiable “terrorists” and your government “global war on terror”.
First of all get your comparative statistics right when it comes to the “threat” (i.e. likelihood of that threat manifesting) of being a victim of a terrorist attack on US soil by any national of the countries we are bombing or have bombed.
Here are lightning strikes, and since the weak Intercept comments can’t handle two links in one comment I’ll reply to my own below with “terrorism”.
http://www.lightningsafety.noaa.gov/odds.shtml
Now there are many good statistical pieces on likelihood of terrorist attack on US shores by foreign national (refugee, visa holder, green card, undocumented) so this one as good as the next but I could cite 10 in 3 minutes if you aren’t prepared to do your own research but I won’t because I expect you, assuming you are engaging me in good faith, to do your own research.
http://bigthink.com/paul-ratner/what-are-the-chances-of-being-killed-by-a-terrorist-attack-on-us-soil
So you ask this question:
But it is either a purposeful red herring, a straw man, or demonstrating you don’t have the intellectual horsepower to understand the issue.
Nobody has ever argued we should “ignore terrorism”, but many of us have argued to combat it reasonable, proportionally and as a function of its actual “risk” i.e. “statistical likelihood of actually manifesting against a US citizen on American soil”).
But in exactly the same way nobody is saying we should keep data about lightning strikes, or employ reasonable means like loudspeakers, weather reports or radio addresses to warn people to steer clear or vacate riskier locations when lightning is likely to strike given particular confluences of weather conditions and terrain, nobody is suggesting reasonable steps (and reasonable expenditures of money) should not be undertaken.
But you also don’t see the US government spending 100s of billions of dollars a year, mass killing innocent human beings, and doing it 10s of thousands of miles away from where the risk of lightning striking an American on American soil is most likely to happen.
It’s both immoral and a fundamental misunderstanding of “opportunity cost” as a function of allocating resources assuming the US government was actually interested in making America and Americans “on balance statistically safer” from the “threats” that actually have a chance to harm them.
Please tell me you are just being contrarian and attempting to engage me re: any semantic lack of clarity I may have expressed in my statement which I could forgive, as opposed to being purposefully obtuse, acting in bad faith or not being able to comprehend basic “risk analysis” concepts, concepts of reason and/or concept of “opportunity cost” in allocating government expenditures.
“But it is either a purposeful red herring, a straw man, or demonstrating you don’t have the intellectual horsepower to understand the issue.”
Again, you are more interested in attacking the commenter, not the argument.
You do not want to ignore terrorism, so what exactly is your solution to this situation:
1) Terrorists in Yemen are planning and training attacks on Americans on their soil
2) Yemen is in chaos, the government states it does not have the capability to stop those terrorists
3) Those terrorists showed you how serious they are about killing Americans (underwear bomber)
So, provide your solution to your government. Remember the military cannot guarantee no civilians deaths.
Did you read this:
“You might be an expert in statistics. I concede I am not. So, please provide us with your own “government statistics” that establish a correlation between the increase of the number of purported identifiable “terrorists” and your government “global war on terror”.
You need to back up your statement with data. Specially after attacking the commenter about statistics. You provided data about foreigners committing terrorism in America. Law enforcements in America have stated many times that foreigners rarely commit terrorist acts. That is a well known fact.
Seriously you can’t be this irrational:
So what? Has there been a single incidence of any Yemeni, or person planning or training in Yemen actually successfully carrying out an attack? No of course not, and that’s why you have no proof of such a “threat”.
Stop them from what, planning and training? Again, so what. Until they can demonstrate a capacity to actually travel 10,000 miles and implement their plan without getting caught and arrested, bombing them preemptively is both counterproductive and immoral. How do you not understand that idea?
Thank you for making my point. The “underwear bomber” was a statistically insignificant threat, who wasn’t “stopped” by preemptively bombing him and killing civilians in the process. The only reason he got as far as he did was lax airline security, and he was ultimately stopped by some combination of his fellow citizens and/or airline security.
So again, how is that any sort of evidence or argument for continued bombing of a statistically insignificant threat that necessarily entails killing of innocent civilians in the hundreds, thousands, and tens of thousands depending on which country we are talking about?
This is a serious question. Have you done any research on AQAP? You keep making statements and asking questions that based on public information. First, your challenge about AUMF 2001 was weird as AQAP was founded by the same individuals who have been literally next to been laden for years and current members of the group still report openly to Al Zawahiri.
Second, you wrote this
“Has there been a single incidence of any Yemeni, or person planning or training in Yemen actually successfully carrying out an attack?”
You cannot be serious. Are you saying because criminals did not succeed in their attempts to kill others, then they do not represent a threat?
1) Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, killed private William Long in a recruiting office in Arkansas in 2009. He told a judge he was a soldier of AQAP and he obtained help from them while he was in Yemen
2) The Underwear Bomber attempted to kill 290 people. He was trained in Yemen
3) Charlie Hebdo Shooting. Said Kouachi was trained in Yemen. 12 people killed
“Until they can demonstrate a capacity to actually travel 10,000 miles and implement their plan without getting caught and arrested”
You mean like the underwear bomber and the Charlie Hebdo shooter?
“Thank you for making my point. The “underwear bomber” was a statistically insignificant threat, who wasn’t “stopped” by preemptively bombing him and killing civilians in the process.”
I am not making your point. Your argument is completely illogical. You are destroying your own point.
IF HE MANAGED TO GET INTO A PLANE AND ALMOST BLEW IT UP IN AMERICA THAT MEANS AQAP DOES HAVE THE CAPACITY TO TRAVEL 10,000 MILES AND CARRY OUT THEIR PLANS.
He was caught because the passengers were lucky and the bomb did not work! He had already switched it on!!
Is that your argument:
I know you are planning to kill many of my citizens. I know you have done it before in other countries miles away from your location (France). I know you are training and sending individuals to kill many on my citizens (underwear bomber, bombs in UPS planes). But since your country is in chaos and has no government, so I will not do anything to you.
Is that your argument?
“I know you are planning to kill many of my citizens. I know you have done it before in other countries miles away from your location (France). I know you are training and sending individuals to kill many on my citizens (underwear bomber, bombs in UPS planes). But since your country is in chaos and has no government, so I will not do anything to you.”
Apply your twisted logic to the but insert Saudi Arabia and then answer why aren’t we there killing them? Dick.
Do you have any difficulty understanding that for every AQAP member you might kill you’re creating many more terrorists because of the enormous numbers of civilians killed?
If you were Yemeni and your son was killed i guess you would be thinking: “well, i have to understand…it was just bad luck..just raise my head and carry on living”…
“Do you have any difficulty understanding that for every AQAP member you might kill you’re creating many more terrorists because of the enormous numbers of civilians killed?”
1) That argument has not been fully proven.
2) Economic enticements, religious beliefs are the main tools used by terrorist organizations to recruit. They do not sustain propaganda based on civilians deaths.
“If you were Yemeni and your son was killed”
I would probably hate America and the Navy Seal.
What do you propose? Let’s stop all drone strikes and boots on the ground. How would you stop the terrorists who are training and planning attacks against you? The local government says it cannot stop them.
Economic sanctions? If you were Yemeni and your son was killed because of sanctions, how would you feel?
Take a risk and let Yemen be a safe heaven for AQAP?
As much as I think Trump is disgusting, this decision to
willfully slaughter
under the phony guise of “intelligence” and “security”
is hardly unique to Trump.
This sort of vicious abuse is TYPICAL of every administration
over the past numerous decades.
The intent of this article is degraded when you try to make
the horror mainly about Trump.
Trump has a way to go before he creates as big a pile
of rotting corpses as has Obama or any other administration
from recent decades.
The idea for this disgusting slaughter was manufactured by
the Pentagon and the “intelligence” criminals – even though some
of those predators are now criticizing it for their own
deviant partisanship.
This action was planned by Pentagonal predators and Trump
signed on to it – just like the lousy crap which Obama and other
perverse predatory presidents have done.
The Pentagon NEEDS to be restrained, restricted, and REDUCED,
but that is the last thing you might ever see happen as long as
the democrats and the republicans have any power.
There is also the fact that without the support for the
atrocities committed by Saudi Arabia in Yemen from both
democrats and republicans in Wall Street’s Washington
(including the faker Bernie Sanders) the under-reported
carnage (of which this story is but a small part) would not
be ripping Yemen to shreds.
Blaming this mainly on Trump is lousy reporting because it
implies that this horror is unique when,
in fact,
this is typical of the faking U$A’s main economic investment,
the sacred sadistic Pentagon.
If you’ve consumed anything from Glenn and people associated with him, you’ll know that he has made your point consistently. I’m thinking he coined the term “Deep State” because I’ve never heard it described that way to capture the animal within. “Deep State” outlasts presidents but when, yet, another president carries out their insanity, someone needs to point it out. The rest of the media has been asleep on purppse.
*The rest of the media have been asleep on purpose.
“Trump noted that Owens died “a warrior and a hero,” leading to a standing ovation for the Navy SEAL’s widow, Carryn Owens.
Trump has made no mention of the relatives of the women and children who died that night”
And the media cheered that the despot now looks ‘presidential’!
In utmost urgency, and in every country around the world, it is becoming imperative for every government to bring these women and children, victims of US butchery around the globe, to parliament sittings and officially condemn the endless atrocities being committed by US criminals and mercenaries.
A step further, bring the charred corpses to the forefront, in parliaments and on the front pages of every news outlet.
Someone needs to start. Enough is Enough!
Thank you for this article, this “war’ is very confusing. Is this a village, or a base ? It seems to me the military would have at least 20 operational plans for this site depending on their desired outcome. It also seems the media continues to repeat how this was Obama’s plan, and were waiting for a moonless night to execute. Yet, I imagine the military produced thousands of operational plans during Obama’s watch, being brought to him as military necessity demands. I guess I am thinking i don’t buy it, the investigation should focus on “why here, why now, who ordered what”. I am thinking Bannon wanted a banging opener for his circus.
I feel so ashamed to be part of this country sometimes. Who are we fighting for?
To the people of Yemen, I am so sorry that “THE DOG TRUMP” is continuing to escalate war that the USA has no business being in.
IF I had my way everyone of you would be brought to the USA and put up at the Mar A Lago in Florida. It is time that the people around the world get a chance to live like the hippo in charge, that can’t even take charge of his diet, so how he think he can handle a world as the worlds first class loser dictator? Trump is an embarrassment to the outhouse pigs he supports. Notice how all these wealthy billionaires are so FAT? That is why they are called fat cats. They are worse than a piranha, they are the devil in drag. They are fat due to their laziness to get off their asses and do something, besides play golf. IF nobody has said it yet let me be the first! THE US GOVERNMENT SUCKS BIG TIME! We the People are completely F**KED by these jerk offs!
Keep apologizing to the world for our government corruption and failure; not only to the world, but mainly to its own people. Why do we even need a government, they do nothing but fleece the taxpayers for their own greed and expect us to pay them for their corruption? F**K them!
Nice try pulling on my heart strings. Next time be more factual. Rather than emotional. But I will say idk if this raid was necessary or that it was done rightly
This article is the very model of “factual.” If those fact don’t “pull on your heartstrings,” that would indicate a serious anti-social personality disorder.
You don’t know if it was necessary? It’s ridiculous to even suppose that it is. A basic question: Why is this senseless “war on terror” still going even though no one involved in 9/11 is still at large, and even though it’s pretty clear by now that the brute force approach makes things worse?
“the brute force approach makes things worse”
Worse means more Americans are drying of Islamist terrorism?
If that’s true (American civilians on US soil dying from “islamic terror”) then the idea of a militia needs to be reinstated.
If America experiences the eagles of death metal style of attack ( a dismounted shoot and move squad style attack ) then a militia, body of civilians trained to arms is appropiate to repel those types of attacks.
extra-judicial killings and the bodies piling up as a result is too emotional for you?
get a hold of yourself, ol’ boy.
they were wise to go after your heart seeing as your brain wasn’t available. i guess being on the ground talking to actual villagers and taking pictures of the actual site as opposed to copy and pasting pentagon press releases is considered “non-factual” and “emotional”? jesus christ.
i love that, even when presented with ACTUAL victims of ACTUAL tragedies, westerners still go straight for the persecution complex. this wasn’t written to give a voice to the victims of US policy…no…it was written just to make YOU feel bad.