Skip to main content

We are unable, as a nation, to see things from the viewpoint of other countries. We get "news" from state sponsored stations, run by five companies in what is a virtual monopoly since they all have the same agenda.

We get statements from the Administration that present only one side of an issue. We're told everything is being done to keep us safe, that we're going after those who attacked us on 9/11.

We occasionally hear somebody say we're creating new terrorists but we hardly pay any attention to that.

Well, here, beneath the "thing", is why, if we're ever attacked with a suitcase bomb (Bill Maher!) it'll be our own fault

Here's the link

They hate us, folks, not because we love freedom, but for what we're doing there. Some "highlights" in this article, which is about leaders of the Pakistan government meeting with Sec. of State Kerry...

By the way, it really requires some “extraordinary” guts to sit with those—who attack you with drones, violate your sovereignty, kill your soldiers and civilians and have been repeatedly bullying and using you—with big smiles and attire that reflects the master’s culture than our own.
Kerry unequivocally defended the drones’ policy. Without caring for what Pakistan says about this serious breach of country’s sovereignty, he quoted what the US president recently said on drones. Kerry’s message was clear that drones would continue.
It appears that like its predecessors, the Nawaz government would continue to be allured by Washington’s lollipop—dollars. The sounds of expanded trade, more aid and energy cooperation again suppressed the cries of US drone strike and its so-called war on terror.
We are our worst enemy now. We, and I mean those of us here at dKos, know that it only takes a few crazy people to do a lot of damage. I think that if we don't stop this policy we're going to suffer consequences.

Mainly, though, I thought it might be interesting for us to get this very different perspective.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  I think we have been our own worst enemy (7+ / 0-)

    since we decided to expand our aid to the British in both of the great wars.

    We've been on a war footing, really, since the 40's and can't imagine not being in one, because our economy has now come to depend on it.

    We have written our own last chapter. Just wait. We'll do ourselves in before anyone else does.

    I resent that. I demand snark, and overly so -- Markos Moulitsas.

    by commonmass on Thu Aug 01, 2013 at 09:10:03 PM PDT

    •  It was, indeed, in the aftermath of WWII ... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      ... that we established our Overseas Base Empire ... and still have troops in both Japan and Germany, of course.

      A system like that will provoke an enemy if it doesn't have one available.

      Support Lesbian Creative Works with Yuri anime and manga from ALC Publishing

      by BruceMcF on Fri Aug 02, 2013 at 10:10:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Just as the Soviets did, gutting their own economy (0+ / 0-)

      with bad policies (Neo-Hooverian, austerian neoliberalism, in our case), and militarizing society to the point where we become bankrupt, dysfunctional and corrupt. And I say corrupt with all due retrospection...

      "Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob." -- Franklin D. Roosevelt

      by Kombema on Fri Aug 02, 2013 at 11:48:03 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I like this part. (8+ / 0-)

    "By the way, it really requires some “extraordinary” guts to sit with those—who attack you with drones, violate your sovereignty, kill your soldiers and civilians and have been repeatedly bullying and using you—with big smiles and attire that reflects the master’s culture than our own."

    Ya, it only takes a few crazy people to cause a lot of damage.  They're running the government.  

    I hate to say we anymore because I've so disassociated myself from the actions of the U.S. government.  I suppose it's unavoidable in a way, I am an American.  But when it comes to "we kill people with drones", I want out.  

    "America is the Terror State. The Global War OF Terror is a diabolical instrument of Worldwide conquest."

    by BigAlinWashSt on Thu Aug 01, 2013 at 09:44:10 PM PDT

  •  But Shahryar (8+ / 0-)

    it's 'diplomacy' a part of our foreign policy. Kerry is only working for our national interests and der Homeland's  security. Don'tcha know there's an GWOT going on and we need to constantly create more and better enemies in the ME so that we can keep winning the endless war. These people we drone bomb are the extremist militant, jhadists who 'are gonna kill yer family'.

     Even the kids and villagers who we bomb could be radicalized and get on a plane with a bomb in their underwear.  Better to kill them there then have them come to der Homeland to terrorize us all. Kerry may not be as big a bad ass as Hillary was but he is after all a good Skull and Bonesman who knows that diplomacy and droning make us all safe.

    Dear nsa this is snark, just kidding.  


  •  It's kind of naive to base an analysis of (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    how other countries see us based on one article by one journalist in Pakistan who probably lives in the part of Pakistan that is not heavily subject to extremist terror.

    I know nothing about this journalist.  Does he belong to or sympathize with the opposition there and is trying to make the current govt. there look bad or is he independent?  Do you know more about him?

    Furthermore, there are big differences country to country in regards to their view of the U.S. drone strike policy and the Abbottabad raid on Bin Laden.  While they may be unpopular in Pakistan, majorities in countries that have been directly affected by Pakistani-based terrorism, like Afghanistan and India, may be for drone strikes on extremists in the regions of Pakistan that are, more or less, lawless areas.

    And then there are voices even in Pakistan, of people who have actually been to the FATA border zone of Pakistan and have conducted surveys there, who have a very different take on things from the author whom you cite:

    analysis: Drone attacks: challenging some fabrications —Farhat Taj

    The people of Waziristan are suffering a brutal kind of occupation under the Taliban and al Qaeda. Therefore, they welcome the drone attacks

    There is a deep abyss between the perceptions of the people of Waziristan, the most drone-hit area and the wider Pakistani society on the other side of the River Indus. For the latter, the US drone attacks on Waziristan are a violation of Pakistani’s sovereignty. Politicians, religious leaders, media analysts and anchorpersons express sensational clamour over the supposed ‘civilian casualties’ in the drone attacks. I have been discussing the issue of drone attacks with hundreds of people of Waziristan. They see the US drone attacks as their liberators from the clutches of the terrorists into which, they say, their state has wilfully thrown them. The purpose of today’s column is, one, to challenge the Pakistani and US media reports about the civilian casualties in the drone attacks and, two, to express the view of the people of Waziristan, who are equally terrified by the Taliban and the intelligence agencies of Pakistan. I personally met these people in the Pakhtunkhwa province, where they live as internally displaced persons (IDPs), and in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA).

    "A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle" - Mohammed Nabbous, R.I.P.

    by Lawrence on Fri Aug 02, 2013 at 01:50:36 AM PDT

    •  While I can see (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Lawrence, Cassiodorus, poligirl

      some of its points, the column that you link works too hard to defend the drone strikes. When the writer excuses the deaths of women and children as being "only" the families of the terrorists, I think she's gone too far pro-drone.

      I am reminded of arguments here on DK, though, that defend drones as causing fewer casualties than traditional air strikes, just as your link implicates the Pakistani military as being far more destructive to people and property.

      •  It's possible that Mrs. Taj has less sympathy than (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        others for the extremists in the FATA due to the fact that she is a researcher on gender issues and likely is well aware of what would happen to her if she lived in territories controlled by the extremists.  Note how the vast majority of those in Pakistan who try and make political capital out of the drone strikes in the FATA are men and, usually, privileged.

        One thing that positively sets Mrs. Faj apart from virtually all others who write about the issue is that she actually had the courage and sensibility to speak to regular people from the areas where the drone strikes are taking place.  She seems to be one of the few who seem to care what the people who are actually affected by the drone strikes thinks.

        I think it is pretty much clear that drone strikes cause less casualties than conventional air strikes and definitely less than artillery strikes. Drones can loiter longer and have more time to verify a target, have better intelligence gathering capabilities, and in the last couple of years have started carrying smaller and less destructive munitions.

        Whether the mechanisms with which they are employed are ethical or not is another matter, which requires more discussion, imo.

        "A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle" - Mohammed Nabbous, R.I.P.

        by Lawrence on Fri Aug 02, 2013 at 06:16:23 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I don't really see where this article counters (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      gooderservice, poligirl

      what the diarist is saying. The article you quote explicitly says that outside of Wazristan, where the vast majority of the Pakistani population is, the drones strikes are viewed negatively.  

      One failed attempt at a shoe bomb and we all take off our shoes at the airport. Thirty-one school shootings since Columbine and no change in our regulation of guns. --- John Oliver

      by voroki on Fri Aug 02, 2013 at 04:55:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Well, the title of the diary is (0+ / 0-)

        "how the U.S. is jeopardizing itself", and the diary's author is portraying the situation in a manner that portrays it as a foregone conclusion that we are jeopardizing ourselves with the drone strikes on extremists in the FATA region.

        I don't think that a definitive conclusion can be made on that one way or the other.

        The drone strikes and the Bin Laden raid obviously are being used to make political hay in the Punjabi-dominated areas of Pakistan, but does that outweigh the positive manner in which those very same drone strikes may be perceived in neighboring countries like India or Afghanistan, or in the FATA region itself?  Does it negate the strong impact that the strikes have had on the leadership of AlQaeda/Haqqani/Taliban extremists?

        And in regards to the Abbottabad raid on Bin Laden, what exactly could have been done differently?  Should we have cooperated with the Pakistanis again, like we did in 2001, and run the very serious risk that Bin Laden would have escaped again?

        "A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle" - Mohammed Nabbous, R.I.P.

        by Lawrence on Fri Aug 02, 2013 at 06:41:13 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Your premise is that there ... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          ... are other areas where those drone strikes are seen in a positive light, which is a quite tenuous "may be", which should be added on the plus side of the balance ... while ignoring that we know for sure that they are a propaganda victory for radical Islamicists throughout the Islamic world.

          Given the size of the Islamic world, making the balance come out to the good seems to require ignoring everywhere that it does us harm outside Pakistan.

          Support Lesbian Creative Works with Yuri anime and manga from ALC Publishing

          by BruceMcF on Fri Aug 02, 2013 at 10:17:58 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Pakistan ramped up production of nuclear warheads (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BruceMcF, poligirl

    in the last few years, and it now has more warheads (110-120 est) than India (90-100 etc) which is 6 times larger in size of population and economy.

    That's what Pakistan has been doing with the billions of tax payer dollars we've been doling out. Speaking of US jeopardizing itself..

    Shouldn't the Obama admin be telling Pakistan to build schools, roads and other civil infrastructure that would help the Pakistani people instead of wasting so much money piling up nukes?

    •  Call me selfish, but I'd rather have our (5+ / 0-)

      taxpayers' dollars used to build schools, roads and other civil infrastructure right here in the U.S.

      •  Both. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        poligirl, gooderservice

        Its neoliberal fantasies designed to foster a culture of public poverty in the midst of private wealth that says we can't "afford" both ... indeed, since most of our so-called "international aid" are bribes to overseas militaries, and most of the rest are indirect subsidies to US-based corporations, we could increase the useful part of our international aid budget 100 times while only putting a small dent in our massive unused productive capacity presently wasted in idle people and equipment.

        Support Lesbian Creative Works with Yuri anime and manga from ALC Publishing

        by BruceMcF on Fri Aug 02, 2013 at 10:14:24 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site