I'm sure a lot of people have a very strong opinion about the drone program being utilized by the United States in the Middle East.
It is probably a very negative one.
I personally have felt that using drones in and of themselves may not necessarily be a bad thing, but there have certainly been a lot of bad things that have come to light about the program and its legality, its impact on civilians, etc.
But what I just read, I think, trumps all of it
Via MSNBC, the CIA is re-ramping up the drone strike program in Pakistan, in spite of the devastating floods in the region.
Say what?
The U.S. government was building substantial good will inside Pakistan by rushing food and helicopters and pledging $150 million — more than any other country — to assist with flood relief, one senior Pakistani official told NBC.
That sounds good! We should be helping all peoples in desperate need in a time of national disaster. Yeah Pakistan harbors militants, but there are a lot of people there who we would consider civilian allies. They should be assisted.
But "all that could go down the drain" if the agency continues with aggressive air strikes right now, said the official who asked not to be quoted criticizing the U.S. "It’s one thing if they were getting some high value targets. But there are many in Pakistan, particularly in the religious parties, who are going to look at this and say, ‘here we have the worst national calamity in the history of our country and the U.S. is responding by conducting’ " lethal military attacks.
The sharp drop off in the CIA pilotless drone attacks this month was never publicly confirmed by U.S officials mainly because the program — considered by Obama administration officials as their most effective counter-terrorism weapon — remains officially classified.
Emphasis mine. So our out-in-the-open-but-totally-a-secret drone program, dubbed the "most effective" counter-terrorism weapon, was not being utilized for a period of time in a country due to a natural disaster. But we don't confirm or deny that. Secrecy and all that.
The attacks took place in an area of Pakistan — north Wazirstan — that is not directly impacted by the floods and a U.S. official familiar with the operations said that there is no reason the humanitarian crisis elsewhere in the country should cause any abatement in the U.S. government’s counter-terrorism operations.
"The United States is focused both on humanitarian relief and on counterterrorism. Those aren’t competing priorities," said the official. "When nothing was flying in Pakistan, nothing flew. But that rather brief period is past, and during that time, the terrorists weren’t doing much on the ground. They weren’t out and about. The key is that our aggressive counterterrorism operations continue."
Again, I added emphasis. I actually agree with this. But the way the government is going about this is so damn tone-deaf and frankly, disturbing, that I cannot believe there are people who either don't realize that or just don't care.
You want to continue to conduct counter-terror operations in a country where civilians are suffering? Okay, fine. Terrorists are still plotting our deaths, so do what needs to be done.
But did nobody really think for more than half a second about the international optics of unmanned vehicles raining down death and destruction in a country that just had death and destruction rained down upon it by...rain, courtesy of Mother Nature?
Black Ops or other on-the-ground sort of stuff? Sure, go for it. Whatever. That sort of targeted campaign won't make headlines (unless you botch the shit out of it) the way a missile strike that kills civilians would.
But still.
I would like to think that our country is a little better than that.
I guess I am wrong, in this instance.
This diary here has a compendium of linkage on how to help those in Pakistan who need it. They should not be ignored.