Up to 90% of drone killings are NOT the target

[WanderingWinoZ]

This is really droning on. Yesterday, classified documents were leaked that put a harsh spotlight on the US drone program in parts of the Mideast and Africa. The docs were released by The Intercept – whose co-founder was the first to publish Edward Snowden’s leaks. This new leak is coming from a second unknown source. The highlights: that US drone strikes often kill civilians. That – at one point – 90% of the people killed by US drone strikes were not targets. That the military often labels these deaths “enemy killed in action” anyway. The drone program has gotten a lot bigger under the Obama administration, which says it kills terrorists with little risk to US troops. The Intercept says the leaker thinks the drone program is “wrong,” and that US citizens need to know what’s up.


theintercept.com/drone-papers

[Deleted]

Unfortnately, ths is not new info. I remember reading about this issue years ago. It amazes me that more Americans are not against these drone wars. I think they are horrible and most likely only producing more terrorists.

[eclaires]

I hate everything about drones. I think, for me, the most problematic part is how it allows us to disassociate ourselves from war and the risks of war so it's easier to use it without caring about the consequences because the risks are lower for us. I think it makes it easier for our leaders to make a decision to engage and it's almost like a video game and the targets and collateral damage aren't human to them.

I have a brother in the military. For the most part I am pretty pro anything that makes him safer. But I think losing the human element and risk with drones doesn't make him safer. I think it makes it more dangerous for our soldiers actually because I think it creates more enemies.

[WanderingWinoZ]

Oct 16, 2015 6:36:51 GMT -5 eclaires said:

I hate everything about drones. I think, for me, the most problematic part is how it allows us to disassociate ourselves from war and the risks of war so it's easier to use it without caring about the consequences because the risks are lower for us. I think it makes it easier for our leaders to make a decision to engage and it's almost like a video game and the targets and collateral damage aren't human to them.

I have a brother in the military. For the most part I am pretty pro anything that makes him safer. But I think losing the human element and risk with drones doesn't make him safer. I think it makes it more dangerous for our soldiers actually because I think it creates more enemies.

yea, I've read that the psychological damage to these soldiers can almost be the same as actually being there & in combat, especially knowing they are killing (likely) innocent people.  They still report PTSD rates/levels almost the same as combat vets

I'm torn on being safer for us vs. unjust/unfair/inhumane/illegal for our opponent in the war.    Could we put in place more safeguards to make sure our confidence levels are higher & any collateral damage is lower before we are justified in using a drone strike?