Skip to main content

View Diary: The Mythology of Capture vs. Kill (16 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I am not suggesting that (5+ / 0-)

    US officials martyr themselves.

    The fact that at least more than 6 times the number of suspects have been droned rather than captured suggests that the capture over kill preference fails to dominate in most cases.

    My book, TRAITOR: THE WHISTLEBLOWER & THE "AMERICAN TALIBAN," is Amazon's #1 Best Seller in Human Rights Books for February 2012.

    by Jesselyn Radack on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 06:57:12 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  I'm not suggesting that you suggested (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Orinoco

      that any US official martyr themselves.  I am suggesting that you think it is okay to martyr US troops.

      What the capture/kill ratios also suggest is that the suspects are very well organized and have employed lethal techniques that avoid capture and also kill those attempting to capture them.

      Nek Mohammed was Pashtun.  He was also talking to reporters on a Sat phone, he has some access to funding and tech.  He also ran an Al Qaeda training camp.  The Pakistani Army did attempt to "get him", huge fight, the Army suffered sever casualties too.  But a deal was born and agreement made that broke down that did involve giving Nek Mohammed enough money to pay his debts to Al Qaeda.  When the deal breaks down, I'm guessing the war is on again and Nek Mohammed did fight for and train for Al Qaeda.

      •  Amazing that criticism of a policy (4+ / 0-)

        of assassination without due process yields an accusation that I believe it is OK to martyr US troops.

        For the record, I do not, and nothing in my diary suggests otherwise.

        My book, TRAITOR: THE WHISTLEBLOWER & THE "AMERICAN TALIBAN," is Amazon's #1 Best Seller in Human Rights Books for February 2012.

        by Jesselyn Radack on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 07:21:13 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Due process in a war (0+ / 0-)

          Is not due process inside the United States when someone can be safely apprehended.  And honestly, if a criminal suspect inside this country shot at our law enforcement and posed the same risks to our law enforcement, lethal force would be used inside of this country against that suspect.

          Because the world is not ours though, when someone who we have no jurisdiction over endangers the well being of our citizens then rules of war begin to apply.  But I do not expect our troops to die by a suspects suicide vest though simply so we can say that we went in 100% determined to capture this suspect.  No suspect inside the United States would be given such a pass to place law enforcement at risk either.

        •  I am not comfortable though (0+ / 0-)

          With the due process applied to making drone use decisions either.  Who could be?  Too much secrecy, nobody can even know what the oversight consists of, or if there even is any.

          I know that the military does have some oversight in place even though classified that does not currently exist with the CIA being in charge of drone use.  I think that the military taking it over for that reason is more desirable.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site