Recent Yemeni Drone Strike on Wedding Party of 15 is not CIA's Fault

[xkeyscore89]

The following post is a bit lengthy, but as a 24 year-old interested in covert military affairs, I started a new topic dealing exclusively with the efforts of managing the drone/UAV operations over Yemen and Pakistan that has now been unofficially delegated to two agencies, one which operates in an unconditionally covert capacity, (CIA), and one whose directive is to acknowledge the results of any drone strikes regardless of the results, no matter how disastrous or successful they may be, the Pentagon. At least, that is their expected official mandate which has not yet been officially announced but is clearly already happening.  I know many on these forums, both citizens of the United States and those abroad, have passionate views on drone strikes taking place globally by the U.S. and I would appreciate any responses you might have, both those furthering the discussion and those that strongly disagree with me.  Please, don't hold back.


The 15 people killed in Yemen via a recent U.S. drone strike is a tragic situation, but you must remember that Yemen is a war zone. Its government struggles daily against the possibility of a coup d'état from at least three individual extremist entities.  The place is lawless, comparable to the tribal areas (Waziristan) in Pakistan, except on a larger scale.  AQAP has access to highly-trained soldiers as well as Hezbollah-trained commandos in its arsenal.  These specialized Hezbollah units are small but are experts in guerilla tactics, kidnapping, and full-on intrusion.  They are not the same Hezbollah grunts fighting in Syria. They may even have their own copycat form of extraordinary rendition in executing kidnappings for ransom, which would be useful when capturing the President of Yemen or other political leaders.

That being said, Yemen is no place for a wedding convoy that, at first glance, cannot be distinguished from a militant convoy spotted by a drone flying at 15,000 feet.  It breaks my heart that this happened, but if I was a Yemeni or even an American participating in the convoy, perhaps as a security detail (hypothetically speaking)

 THE LAST THING I WOULD DO IS JOIN A WEDDING CONVOY, LIKELY MOVING AT HIGH SPEEDS WITH HIGH-QUALITY VEHICLES THAT MAY HAVE BEEN RENTED FOR THIS SPECIAL OCCASION (after all, how many people drive in Yemen?) THE PRESENCE OF A CONVOY THAT FITS THESE CRITERIA IS STRIKINGLY SIMILAR TO WHAT THE U.S. WOULD CONSIDER STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE FOR TRANSPORTING AN HVT (high-value target).  

Perhaps, the Pentagon saw this happening and pulled the trigger, thinking that this might be Ibrahim Hassan al-Asiri, the most technically experienced bomb-maker in Al-Qaeda's arsenal.  He is believed to be hiding in Yemen.  I'll explain this in detail further down in this post, but a similarly important target, albeit with a different skill set, was taken out under the same circumstances in Yemen, in a convoy.  However, the latter target was taken out with no collateral damage after extensive confirmation of intelligence while the former attack seems to have been carried out on a whim, with minimal intelligence.  The CIA was responsible for the successful attack, while I believe the Pentagon is responsible for the recent killing of innocent people with no militant threats present among them   .  

One might think, oh, well, if the American's been invited to a Yemeni wedding, this will offer us protection in the convoy as he may have made the U.S. aware of his presence. Unfortunately, if it was established that there was an American in a convoy of Yemenis, he might immediately be considered an American-born terrorist leader. Think, Anwar al-Awlaki, who was an American citizen killed without hesitation in a drone strike in Yemen in a similar convoy.  He was a communications and propaganda expert for Al-Qaeda. The possible illegality of this action is not relevant as CIA had control of this particular drone strike (al-Awlaki’s) IMO, this guy presented an emerging national security threat.  His charismatic personality and his youth, combined with the fact that he spoke perfect English (no accent) as well as fluent Arabic made him one of greatest persuasive speakers Al-Qaeda ever had.  This ability allowed him to subtlety manipulate middle-eastern people, Americans, British and European citizens through twisted interpretations of Islam, compelling them to wage Jihad against the West. The ACLU (an organization that I believe is necessary) must've drank a little too much liquid courage when they vowed to argue that U.S. citizens are exempt from attacks by their home country while abroad.  I'm not sure if the ACLU knew they would eventually be hearing from CIA or not, but they eventually settled down.  
I SAY ALL OF THIS TO PREFACE THE SITUATION AT HAND.

It is my firm belief that CIA was NOT responsible for the latest drone strike.  Any intel gathered for supporting the execution of the latest wedding-convoy attack that killed 15 civilians was either inaccurate or was disregarded by the PENTAGON. Any intel should have been analyzed further by the intelligence officers on-hand or at least shared with CIA.  IMO, CIA would've gathered enough intel to know the schedule of the wedding procession before-hand from assets on the ground.
Drone strikes in Pakistan, while not popular, seem to have considerably more strategic intelligence available to aid these operations.  It is likely the Pakistani equivalent of CIA, the ISI, is working with them to eliminate dangerous targets in tribal areas of Pakistan.  Yes, this is the very same ISI who knew OBL’s location in their country for months if not years beforehand.  Intelligence gained by the U.S. was likely being shared with the ISI and they are an agency who has a long history of reciprocating when dealing with tribal areas like Waziristan, an area they cannot control.  It is an area stuck in a time period comparable to the time of the wild-west in American history, only with much bigger guns and inhabited by people relishing an opportunity to become martyrs using ANFO, Semtex, C4, and sealed artillery shells left over from the failed Soviet invasion in the 1980’s.  These shells make devastating IEDs.  ANFO bombs, as a refresher, were used by Tim McVeigh when he committed the Oklahoma City bombing in, I can't remember exactly, either '94 or '95.  However, a large enough ANFO based IED can penetrate ANY armor in existence today, the limiting factor being only the amount of ANFO produced.  A 200 lb. ANFO IED would disable the tracks on an Abram’s M1, but a 2,000lb IED has successfully penetrated the hull of a British Stryker APC, which was previously thought to be bomb proof.  It killed everyone inside.  
In deciding whether or not a target is an enemy combatant involves making real-time decisions based on evolving intelligence such as the point-of-attack, whether or not the target is on his way to a larger group of militants, his identity and the limiting of collateral damage.
At least, it used to be this way.

Recently, within the last 8-12 months or so, CIA has unofficially and reluctantly begun the transition of the drone strike directorate to the Pentagon (AKA DoD, Department of Defense).  This was not their decision and I’d venture to say they are furious about it. Some of these duties are further delegated to the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), the very same group responsible for orchestrating the successful SEAL Team 6 raid in Abbottabad, Pakistan that eliminated Osama-bin-Laden.  This massive success was made possible by CIA’s intel.  JSOC wouldn’t have any idea of his location otherwise.

It seems to me that that there has been an undeniable trend in the increasing incidence of civilian kills since this transition began; especially the civilian kills in Yemen over the past few months.  The ratio of militant to civilian kills in Yemen this year I'll conservatively estimate at 8.5-1, respectively, including this latest event.  This is an unacceptable rate of collateral damage. Complete figures are hard to come by as the U.S. govt. has until recently, completely denied the existence of any drone strikes conducted due to the fact that CIA was responsible for them and is legally not required to disclose their activities to any of your typical Senate Intelligence Committees, let alone any the American people.  Furthermore, because the Pentagon has not officially taken control of the UAV program, the blame for these reckless attacks is still falling on CIA, even though the Pentagon is the party fucking shit up.

The CIA is protected, which makes them a perfect scapegoat for situations like the most recent blunder. This became a problem as drone strikes in Yemen began to mount In October, when events seemed to indicate that the Pentagon had been in control, unofficially, of the Yemeni drone program.  The results seem to indicate they have taken over the Yemeni program completely without any regard for CIA’s concerns. Almost 70% of the 80 documented kills in the month of October 2013 turned out to be civilians,  roughly 57 innocent people.  The CIA has killed civilians in Pakistan, sure, but on a minimal basis compared to their success rate in taking out HVTs.

This latest event provides some insight into why drone strikes seem to be executed more recklessly.  The CIA resents the fact that they are no longer in control of the drone strike program in Yemen.  The Pentagon (DoD, JSOC) has decided they can handle it all by themselves.   The DoD is likely not cooperating with CIA and CIA likely resents the fact that their duties have been transferred to an agency which has limited experience and capabilities in utilizing drones responsibly and limiting collateral damage, in addition to gathering raw intelligence.  The fact that they’re supposedly shouldering the burden of any failed missions publicly doesn’t affect them in any way, especially given that they won't have to worry about that until the transition is publicly announced.  They are simply too large an agency, protected by CIA and the President.  FISA courts are the only entity that could possibly stifle their incompetence and require that they change.   The CIA, when aided by CIA, operates at a level above all government agencies, including the executive branch, limited only by the FISA court, which decides what capabilities they may or may not utilize, PRIVATELY.  

Congressional outrage over CIA and NSA serve only to distract the American people from the fact of their abysmal performance in all aspects of duties they were elected to perform.  The NSA saves thousands of lives here and abroad every year.  

Like I mentioned in a post previously when PRISM had been leaked, this program is fodder compared to what programs are really in play.  Ed Snowden was only a third-party contractor for CIA, he has no knowledge of what's really happening there.  He's not a hero but I don't think he should be jailed either.  If he really had serious classified data, the plane he took to Russia would've suffered engine failure and crashed, as is a common occurrence there.  Any information he leaks seems to cause a weakening of trust between our allies, but let's be honest here, those countries are only jealous they couldn't gather data to the extent we're able to and, believe me, they've tried to.
  
Sorry for the text-wall, but in summation, the Pentagon and the overgrown bureaucracy they have become is to blame for what happened in Yemen, not CIA nor CIA.  If the Yemeni and Iraqi government were any stronger, this situation would look more like the conflict in Syria.  Maybe CNN would cover it then.  The Arab Spring was the best thing that could have happened for Al-Qaeda post bin-Laden.  If the Syrian government ever falls, it will become just like Iraq and Yemen, with or without U.S. intervention.

If that does happen, Israel will be forced to act and us with them.  That's when you'll witness the true power of Mossad, CIA, and CIA working together in a way which will redefine the way America's and Israel's capabilities are looked at, with fear and awe instead of suspicion.  That's for another time and a new topic, though.

Thanks for reading and if you like what you read, donations are always accepted, no matter how small.

1DJywpQoNDkzmvgrJ3iUk6PvCSsSpKhCFk
  




P.S.  If you're wondering why I didn't preface CIA or NSA with the word "the" ex. "the CIA" it's because when you pray, do you begin by saying, "Dear, the God?"  The Pentagon doesn't deserve this distinction.  

[1715558945]

1715558945

[1715558945]

1715558945

[1715558945]

1715558945

[hilariousandco]

THE LAST THING I WOULD DO IS JOIN A WEDDING CONVOY, LIKELY MOVING AT HIGH SPEEDS WITH HIGH-QUALITY VEHICLES THAT MAY HAVE BEEN RENTED FOR THIS SPECIAL OCCASION (after all, how many people drive in Yemen?) THE PRESENCE OF A CONVOY THAT FITS THESE CRITERIA IS STRIKINGLY SIMILAR TO WHAT THE U.S. WOULD CONSIDER STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE FOR TRANSPORTING AN HVT (high-value target).  

Or the American government can stop being cowards and throwing stones from afar. You can't go around blowing shit up without any solid intel. Oh look there's a convoy of cars, better blow it up is not a tactic; it's murder and a war-crime. What business do America even have in Yemen? They're not at war with them.

Some of the answers on this are disgusting:

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/23/q-a-answering-readers-queries-on-drones/?_r=1

The drones themselves are fairly accurate. In other words, they hit what they are trying to hit. But a drone strike is only as good as the intelligence supporting it. If the intelligence leading to a drone strike is bad, then there is a greater chance that a drone strike will kill civilians, or kill someone who posed no threat to the United States. There have also been cases of the C.I.A. and Pentagon carrying out drone strikes on individuals after being fed intelligence by that person’s rivals.

The actual procedures are classified, so it is very difficult to know exactly what takes place before a drone strike is carried out. One particularly controversial aspect of the program is the use of “signature strikes” — when the C.I.A. carries out the strike not based on intelligence about a specific individual but on “patterns of activity” of people at a compound or suspected training camp. .

—MARK MAZZETTI

[xkeyscore89]

Or the American government can stop being cowards and throwing stones from afar. You can't go around blowing shit up without any solid intel. Oh look there's a convoy of cars, better blow it up is not a tactic; it's murder and a war-crime. What business do America even have in Yemen? They're not at war with them.

What I bolded in your quote is my point.  The CIA would never have approved a strike like this and because of the way they've been treated by the Pentagon, why should they help them?  The Pentagon wants to prove that they are tactically capable without the help of anyone else.  The death of 15 innocent people is terrible enough, but it's even worse when not even one militant was present in the convoy.  They could manufacture some kind of pathetic excuse or justification then.  

The other thing is, I believe that the Pentagon thinks that they can blame all of this on the CIA since they officially haven't accepted responsibility for the drone program.  What a bunch of amateurs.  Chuck Hagel was never the right man for the job as Pentagon chief, you didn't see Panetta pulling this shit.

[jinni]

Even HVTs deserve a fair trial. Otherwise it is murder.

One could argue that in war it is different, but war is only justified as a last resort, if it is proportional, if it has a probability of success and if it has been declared. None of these criteria the US "war" on terror fulfill.

The only way to ethically punish terrorists is to try them in a civilian and public court where they have the right to defend themselves.

In fact the only way to win against terrorists is this. By being morally superior. Disproportional responses that kill orders of magnitude more civilians is becoming a worse terrorist than the once that are supposedly to be punished. It is abominable.

[dopey]

I strongly disagree.

If you want to go into a foreign country and start killing its people. Do it face to face like a man and leave the remote control death machines at home.
No one has the right to be judge, jury and executioner.

[xkeyscore89]

No one has the right to be judge, jury and executioner.

In a war, everyone claims that right.  Btw, the Yemeni government allows the drones to operate, just like Pakistan.

[xkeyscore89]

Even HVTs deserve a fair trial. Otherwise it is murder.

One could argue that in war it is different, but war is only justified as a last resort, if it is proportional, if it has a probability of success and if it has been declared. None of these criteria the US "war" on terror fulfill.

The only way to ethically punish terrorists is to try them in a civilian and public court where they have the right to defend themselves.

In fact the only way to win against terrorists is this. By being morally superior. Disproportional responses that kill orders of magnitude more civilians is becoming a worse terrorist than the once that are supposedly to be punished. It is abominable.

I agree with your statement about HVT's.  I'm glad Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has languished in gitmo and will stand trial in New York.  He doesn't deserve the easy way out.

Terrorists are brainwashed to believe they are morally superior to any non-Muslim, Christian or Westerner, period. They are willing to put on a vest with explosives, walk into a crowd, and detonate it to prove the sincerity of their beliefs.  In Iraq, for example, civilians are being killed in car bombings daily by terrorists.  Police and soldiers are secondary targets there.  It's Sunni vs. Shia, an ancient religious conflict exacerbated by the overthrow of Saddam Hussein.  Tell me, how do you convince those who are, quite literally, dying to be martyrs for a meaningless and irrational cause?  I won't deny that civilian kills by drone strikes serve as recruitment tools, but how many people are motivated by the possibility of being killed at any point having accomplished nothing, failing as a martyr.

[jinni]

Tell me, how do you convince those who are, quite literally, dying to be martyrs for a meaningless and irrational cause?

You prove them wrong. When bin Laden launched the 9/11 attacks the argument was that the US was "the great Satan". And what happens afterwards? The US proves him right by showing the ugliest side of itself not seen since the Vietnam war. The civilian casualties caused by American belligerence following 9/11 can be counted in six figures. That is simply wrong.

If you want to "win" over terrorists a propaganda war is needed. The world was on Americas side directly after 9/11, people grieved over the atrocity. Now people hate the US for it's response which is much more horrible than anything Al-Qaeda could ever achieve. If instead the US had pleaded for help, and listened to other countries (as well as experts) views on what needed to be done to prevent it from happening they would have realized that it was an image problem caused by past deeds. 9/11 was a great chance for the US to transform its image into a more benevolent and pluralistic power.

Besides, if it really is so (as Bush said) that "they hate us for our freedom" (I don't believe it is so), then the answer is not to have less of it, but to bear the costs of it. And the costs of freedom is less security, meaning anyone living in a truly free society is of course at risk that someone might go postal and kill a bunch of people. But the chance of that happening is less than dying in a traffic accident or falling down from a latter.

[Nik1ab]

I think the US government kills civilians on purpose.
They always declared eastern people as "terrorists". It wouldn't be surprising if CIA employees actually believe this.
Besides these drone attacks hit about 80% official targets. Even Americans can't be that stupid to miss that much.

[Puppet]

TLDR, Its not the CIA's fault because...

Yemen is no place for a wedding convoy

You cant be serious.

[jinni]

I think the US government kills civilians on purpose.

If this is true (I hope it is not, but it might be), then the mot likely reason for why it is done is to create conflict in general. This conflict benefits the US military industrial complex, there might be an axis between the military industry in the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia that simply benefit from conflict.

It explains how the US backs Saudi Arabia even though the financing of a lot of terrorism comes from there, and how the US also backs Israel whose conflict with Palestine is exasperated by Saudi Arabian Wahabbist support. Saudi Arabia again benefits from more conflict and hence higher oil prices. Israel benefits from being able to fragment Palestinian society and avoid making concessions through a peace deal. The US military industry benefits by selling weapons. In addition the US government benefits by its population being afraid and hence easier to control so that they can do whatever they want.

[jinni]

I'm glad Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has languished in gitmo and will stand trial in New York.

I'm also glad that a civilian court will be involved, but since his arrest in 2003, and for about 10 years he has been illegally detained. This is a breach of habeas corpus, an important principle that ensures that one has to be convicted by evidence before one is put in jail. Besides, Guantanamo is not a jail, it is a torture chamber, and where Sheikh Mohammed after he was arrested (but before he was transferred to Gitmo) has been, nobody knows, but it was surely a horrible place not fit for human dignity and completely free from any oversight so he could have been tortured daily for years and probably has been. That is abhorrent.

[xkeyscore89]

TLDR, Its not the CIA's fault because...

Yemen is no place for a wedding convoy

You cant be serious.

That's not at all what I said. Read the whole post before making a stupid TLDR post that includes quotes to create a manufactured statement.  

If you had read what I posted, I said it was the Pentagon's fault, not the CIA's. The snippet about the wedding convoy was an example of a similar convoy containing Anwar al-Awlaki that was assessed before it was destroyed.

[bryant.coleman]

I think the US government kills civilians on purpose.

I don't think they do that on purpose. But it is true that the American military does not value human life outside the US as much as they do inside their home nation.

[hilariousandco]

I think the US government kills civilians on purpose.

I don't think they do that on purpose. But it is true that the American military does not value human life outside the US as much as they do inside their home nation.

That's what rampant brainwashing with nationalism and patriotism does to people, add in to that the repeated media mantra of Muslim = Terrorist and they hate out freedoms etc and you've got a recipe for hatred or at least apathy of a lot of people.

[Puppet]

That's not at all what I said. Read the whole post before making a stupid TLDR post that includes quotes to create a manufactured statement.  

You did, and should think about the implications. First of all, a yemenite doesnt distinguish between CIA, FBI, NSA, military or whatever. Its all the same to them (at to a large extend, to me too). Secondly, if they are unable to celebrate weddings or travel in groups, do anything some uniformed kid in a bunker on the other side of the planet may find suspicious, if they constantly have to live with the fear of being bombed by an invisible drone, duck for cover every time something flies over them, then they are being terrorized. I dont use that word lightly, its exactly what it is. If my country was constantly being bombed that way, innocent civilians being massacred indiscriminately, my children traumatized,  I would resist as well. And you'd call me a terrorist for resisting, Id say you are the terrorist.

[jinni]

That's not at all what I said. Read the whole post before making a stupid TLDR post that includes quotes to create a manufactured statement.  

You did, and should think about the implications. First of all, a yemenite doesnt distinguish between CIA, FBI, NSA, military or whatever. Its all the same to them (at to a large extend, to me too). Secondly, if they are unable to celebrate weddings or travel in groups, do anything some uniformed kid in a bunker on the other side of the planet may find suspicious, if they constantly have to live with the fear of being bombed by an invisible drone, duck for cover every time something flies over them, then they are being terrorized. I dont use that word lightly, its exactly what it is. If my country was constantly being bombed that way, innocent civilians being massacred indiscriminately, my children traumatized,  I would resist as well. And you'd call me a terrorist for resisting, Id say you are the terrorist.

+1

[j68r]

That's not at all what I said. Read the whole post before making a stupid TLDR post that includes quotes to create a manufactured statement.  

You did, and should think about the implications. First of all, a yemenite doesnt distinguish between CIA, FBI, NSA, military or whatever. Its all the same to them (at to a large extend, to me too). Secondly, if they are unable to celebrate weddings or travel in groups, do anything some uniformed kid in a bunker on the other side of the planet may find suspicious, if they constantly have to live with the fear of being bombed by an invisible drone, duck for cover every time something flies over them, then they are being terrorized. I dont use that word lightly, its exactly what it is. If my country was constantly being bombed that way, innocent civilians being massacred indiscriminately, my children traumatized,  I would resist as well. And you'd call me a terrorist for resisting, Id say you are the terrorist.

QFT

[Puppet]

Anyone defending these drone strikes, take some time to read this study:

http://www.livingunderdrones.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Stanford-NYU-Living-Under-Drones.pdf

Or at least the executive summary. Let me pick just one paragraph from that executive summary that addresses the point I was making earlier, the terrorizing effect:

Second, US drone strike policies cause considerable and under-accounted-for harm to the daily lives of ordinary civilians, beyond death and physical injury. Drones hover twenty-four hours a day over communities in northwest Pakistan, striking homes, vehicles, and public spaces without warning. Their presence terrorizes men, women, and children, giving rise to anxiety and psychological trauma among civilian communities. Those living under drones have to face the constant worry that a deadly strike may be fired at any moment, and the knowledge that they are powerless to protect themselves. These fears have affected behavior. The US practice of striking one area multiple times, and evidence that it has killed rescuers, makes both community members and humanitarian workers afraid or unwilling to assist injured victims. Some community members shy away from gathering in groups, including important tribal dispute-resolution bodies, out of fear that they may attract the attention of drone operators. Some parents choose to keep their children home, and children injured or traumatized by strikes have dropped out of school. Waziris told our researchers that the strikes have undermined cultural and religious practices related to burial, and made family members afraid to attend funerals. In addition, families who lost loved ones or their homes in drone strikes now struggle to support themselves.

15 innocent civilians getting killed is bad. But probably nowhere near as bad as the effect those drones have on millions of innocent civilians every frigging day.

[dopey]

I fully agree man, the drones are one of the most terrorizing and cowardly innovations ever released on mankind.