Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Look for yourself. I thought it was common knowledge by now. Are you really going to take the time to read pages of citations? I doubt it, because the attention span of American sheep is very short, especially when actual READING is involved. Is it worth my time to try and convince a hardened partisan that his precious president is responsible for the deaths of a lot of civilians, significantly more so than his predecessor? I wager not.
So in other words you don't really have anything. Got it.
So far our studies have shown that drone strikes tend to kill fewer civilians and cause less collateral damage than our other previously used methodologies (such as rockets fired from ships).
You also only need "pages of citations" if your citations aren't very strong. Throw out a couple from well respected thinktank and academic publications / watchdog groups and that is more than enough to provide supporting evidence for a point.
The American teenager in question wasn't "collateral damage".
He was the TARGET.
I can guarantee to you based on statistical data combined from several sources that it is HIGHLY unlikely that 7 bad guys were killed in a drone attack. It was probably 7 15 year old boys in the vicinity of a suspected bad guy. Obama loves murdering kids in Yemen and Pakistan, especially 15 year old Americans. Hail Obama, for those who are about to get droned, salute you.
Let us know when you have evidence of that.
Liberals don't need evidence.
The American teenager in question wasn't "collateral damage".
He was the TARGET.
The American teenager in question wasn't "collateral damage".
He was the TARGET.
That's fine with me.
The American teenager in question wasn't "collateral damage".
He was the TARGET.
That's fine with me.
You're fine with our President naming himself judge, jury and executioner in that he can order a drone attack on an American citizen, in a foreign country, without trial or cause?
Then you voted for the right monarch.
That's fine with me.
You're fine with our President naming himself judge, jury and executioner in that he can order a drone attack on an American citizen, in a foreign country, without trial or cause?
Then you voted for the right monarch.
I'm fine with acceptable levels of collateral damage, especially given qualitative likelihood of Abdulrahman's cooperation with and involvement in AQAP. Many famous jihadis who we ended up killing started their career at 16 (including Harun who worked on the US embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania).
All of that is beside the point though as he wasn't even our main target; he was collateral.
Yemen claims it foiled Al Qaeda plot
Yemen says it foiled major al-Qaeda plot
Yemen's foreign ministry said Wednesday that it thwarted an al-Qaeda plot to blow up oil pipelines and seize some of the country's main ports to disrupt shipping, as more suspected drone strikes struck terrorist targets in the country's south.
Al-Qaeda planned to invade the ports with terrorists dressed as soldiers. The Associated Press reported that Yemen's government said the motive for the planned attacks was retaliation for the killing of senior al-Qaeda figure Said al-Shihri in a November drone strike.
On Wednesday, suspected U.S. drone strikes killed seven people believed to be members of al-Qaeda.
If true, GOOD!
I am truly glad to hear that Yemen is (finally) stepping up
Given my distrust of them, however, I can't help but wonder if they weren't behind it to begin with and only foiled it to shine a more favorable light on them selves.
The American teenager in question wasn't "collateral damage".
He was the TARGET.
That's fine with me.
You're fine with our President naming himself judge, jury and executioner in that he can order a drone attack on an American citizen, in a foreign country, without trial or cause?
Then you voted for the right monarch.
The American teenager in question wasn't "collateral damage".
He was the TARGET.
That's fine with me.
That's fine with me.
You're fine with our President naming himself judge, jury and executioner in that he can order a drone attack on an American citizen, in a foreign country, without trial or cause?
Then you voted for the right monarch.
Actually, I am
An American citizen who has declared war on his own country and is actively involved in attacking it. I equate it to a criminal who is holed up and is attacking police. He does not have to have a trial for the police to fire back
You're fine with our President naming himself judge, jury and executioner in that he can order a drone attack on an American citizen, in a foreign country, without trial or cause?
Then you voted for the right monarch.
Actually, I am
An American citizen who has declared war on his own country and is actively involved in attacking it. I equate it to a criminal who is holed up and is attacking police. He does not have to have a trial for the police to fire back
Has anyone ever said why they think terrorists are not enemy combatants and/or why we should treat them kid gloves?
During the bush regime, we would have been thrilled if he had stopped clearing brush long enough to actually go after a terrorist but now, the rw's seem to want them all to be put up in the finest hotels like Bush did with bin Laden's family.
WTF???
Why should we NOW roll over for them?
You're fine with our President naming himself judge, jury and executioner in that he can order a drone attack on an American citizen, in a foreign country, without trial or cause?
Then you voted for the right monarch.
I'm fine with acceptable levels of collateral damage, especially given qualitative likelihood of Abdulrahman's cooperation with and involvement in AQAP. Many famous jihadis who we ended up killing started their career at 16 (including Harun who worked on the US embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania).
All of that is beside the point though as he wasn't even our main target; he was collateral.
Now, see?
Before I simply thought that you may be full of shit.
Now I realize you're just naive.
Someone with the last name 'al-Awlaki' was an "accident"?
Yea, okay
Yemen says it foiled major al-Qaeda plot
Yemen's foreign ministry said Wednesday that it thwarted an al-Qaeda plot to blow up oil pipelines and seize some of the country's main ports to disrupt shipping, as more suspected drone strikes struck terrorist targets in the country's south.
Al-Qaeda planned to invade the ports with terrorists dressed as soldiers. The Associated Press reported that Yemen's government said the motive for the planned attacks was retaliation for the killing of senior al-Qaeda figure Said al-Shihri in a November drone strike.
On Wednesday, suspected U.S. drone strikes killed seven people believed to be members of al-Qaeda.
If true, GOOD!
I am truly glad to hear that Yemen is (finally) stepping up
Given my distrust of them, however, I can't help but wonder if they weren't behind it to begin with and only foiled it to shine a more favorable light on them selves.
As much as Yemen supports terrorists, they had to act. AlQaeda was going to seize the ports and block off their lifeline.
Good work by US intelligence to disrupt the Al Qaeda plan
Sometimes, the good guys win
The American teenager in question wasn't "collateral damage".
He was the TARGET.
That's fine with me.
You damn liberals are always in favor of killing terrorists.
Shame on you.
Don't you know that we should coddle them.
Admit it: Obama is George Bush on Steroids:Is that the US funded and controlled Al Qaida?
And possibly hundreds of innocent people.On Wednesday, suspected U.S. drone strikes killed seven people believed to be members of al-Qaeda.
possibly millions of innocent people
Not to mention puppies and kittens
Hey you're right, we're NOT funding and controlling Al Qaida! Except of course for those times when we ARE funding and controlling Al Qaida:Is that the US funded and controlled Al Qaida?
And possibly hundreds of innocent people.On Wednesday, suspected U.S. drone strikes killed seven people believed to be members of al-Qaeda.
We don't fund or control Al Qaeda anywhere.
Hey you're right, we're NOT funding and controlling Al Qaida! Except of course for those times when we ARE funding and controlling Al Qaida:
Ron Paul blasts Obama for funding al-Qaeda in Syria | Hang The Bankers | He Who Controls the Money Supply, Controls the World
You're only response can be: "Hey you're right" or "That's not AL QAIDA Al Qaida, it's just AL Qaida". You know, like "it's not rape rape".
