Poll shows Indians support CIA's murderous drone strikes

[Developereo]

The Drone strike question was part of the wider survey, and respondents were the same set of people. So its very important to note that most of these people are in favour of the US led war on terror, but not the drone strikes.

Most people are supportive of killing terrorists -- that has never been an issue. The whole debate in this thread is about the legality of killing random people and brushing it all under the carpet as 'killing militants'.

 

[mjnaushad]

The poll is flawed.

The drone itself is seen as this robot flying around killing people and the human that operates sees it as a video game.

They don't understand the layers of intelligence gathering that occurs, such as spying on the militants, signal intercepts by NSA, identification of the militants, approval process all the way to the President and assessment of collateral damage.

Its not a free for all. This is a carefully managed program and has devastated Al Qaeda and Taliban.

Just look at the terrorist attacks occurring in Pakistan. They have nose dived as soon as the Drone strikes picked up pace.

So for other countries such as Greece whose public is totally against drone strikes. I understand their viewpoint but they were not hit on 9/11, they are not a global superpower and they don't understand the mechanism behind these drone strikes.

Some intelligence they had when they fire hellfire on a peace Jirga killing tens of Pro Govt elders........

No one wants those terrorist to live. Drone does kill them, Happy about it. But they need to understand everyone down there with a gun is not terrorist.

I wonder will US accept acceptable collateral damage for its own citizens..... Because for me a mother in Pakistan loves his son/daughter as much as a mother in US does. But for some people the scale is different.

 

[Windjammer]

stop joking several members here openly support maoists

Last i heard was your country fellows defending Maoists as neither terrorists or separatists.
There is not even AFSPA applied in the Red Corridor. !!
.

 

[TaimiKhan]

stop joking several members here openly support maoists

Maoists fighting for their right is something else compared to killing of innocent Indians or any other one.

I condemn Maoists, Naxals or anyone who kill innocent people for their cause, these issues should be resolved through dialouge, as such issues harm the country.

If i go with your definition, then i see Indian supporting Baluch militants as well as the TTP guys, who have killed thousands of innocent Pakistanis.

In that way, we both are the same. You show happiness, pleasure and liking for the militant groups in Pakistan, Pakistanis in return will do the same, even though may be some from both sides in their hearts don't agree with what they are saying, but since its an ego related issue between Pak and Indian members, they will say stuff like that to annoy each other.

 

[HZR2011]

Drone strikes are eliminating Terrorists in Pakistan,otherwise they would have planned another terrorist attack on India and kill innocent people like 26/11,and i don't want to see innocent people being shot for no reason,so i support drones strikes by USA to save innocents being murdered by Fanatics just because they don't follow their religion

Don't care about Middle-east and EU,they are of no use...Just Bomb those terrorists without mercy...

 

[Caine]

Both of you avoided the question.
Criminals can be judged by court in absentia and sentenced to death. The people being killed in drone strikes are not always designated as terrorists. Once again, the Obama administration arbitrarily classifies every adult male killed as a militant. It is a convenient ex post facto designation used to whitewash the American crime.
By this logic, you can bomb a city block and claim that every adult male who was killed was a militant and, therefore, deserving of death.
Once again, the UN has not authorized NATO to go around bombing any country it feels like and any persons it unilaterally designates as 'militants'. NATO's mandate is strictly limited to Afghanistan's territorial boundaries.

No sir.. I did not avoid the question. You are choosing to not see the answer. You are again treating this as a criminal case where a criminal needs to be sentenced to death and executed. We do not conform to that approach. We see these terrorists as enemy combatants and we treat the scenario as a war. And like in war, we are finding the most optimal ways to kill as many of enemy soldiers as we can. Collateral damage is regrettable, but unavoidable as in most wars.

And Drone strikes in Pakistan have nothing to do with NATO. Its just us.

 

[mjnaushad]

No sir.. I did not avoid the question. You are choosing to not see the answer. You are again treating this as a criminal case where a criminal needs to be sentenced to death and executed. We do not conform to that approach. We see these terrorists as enemy combatants and we treat the scenario as a war. And like in war, we are finding the most optimal ways to kill as many of enemy soldiers as we can. Collateral damage is regrettable, but unavoidable as in most wars.

And Drone strikes in Pakistan have nothing to do with NATO. Its just us.

Will you kill your own citizen to kill few terrorist.... ???? What will be your scale for acceptable loss in that case.

 

[IND151]

^^ you are right

not every Indian member support drone strikes'

majority Indian members must be happy due to the fact that the terrorists hiding in pak are being killed, as we Indians have lost thousands of our brothers/sisters in terrorist attacks

i don't think any Indian will be happy due to deaths of innocents in drone strikes

 

[Caine]

Will you kill your own citizen to kill few terrorist.... ???? What will be your scale for acceptable loss in that case.

That will depend on the situation. But if possibility of US citizens getting killed is involved, the acceptable threshold of collateral damage will be significantly lower. As it should be.

 

[mjnaushad]

That will depend on the situation. But if possibility of US citizens getting killed is involved, the acceptable threshold of collateral damage will be significantly lower. As it should be.

Why??? Do people in US love their children more than Pakistan....?? Or they are superior race than the one getting killed right now??

 

[Developereo]

No sir.. I did not avoid the question. You are choosing to not see the answer. You are again treating this as a criminal case where a criminal needs to be sentenced to death and executed. We do not conform to that approach. We see these terrorists as enemy combatants and we treat the scenario as a war. And like in war, we are finding the most optimal ways to kill as many of enemy soldiers as we can. Collateral damage is regrettable, but unavoidable as in most wars.

And Drone strikes in Pakistan have nothing to do with NATO. Its just us.

Once again, the UN mandate does not extend outside Afghanistan. Therefore, the US cannot consider Pakistan as a war zone unless it officially declares war on Pakistan. Until then, these are extrajudicial killings outside a declared war zone.

That will depend on the situation. But if possibility of US citizens getting killed is involved, the acceptable threshold of collateral damage will be significantly lower. As it should be.

Wrong. Janet Reno was raked over the coals for Waco.

 

[Contrarian]

Yeah, we do and condemn it also.

Anyway, Indians will love anything bad which happens to or in Pakistan. Its natural.

Im sorry but you form a tiny minority who do.

The Indians also see the MASSIVE rallies of difa e Pakistan and jamaat with people cheering on the Jehad on India and ghazwa e hind.

So do forgive the Indians...we have been suffering on account of Pakistani non state actors for decades now.

 

[Caine]

Once again, the UN mandate does not extend outside Afghanistan. Therefore, the US cannot consider Pakistan as a war zone unless it officially declares war on Pakistan. Until then, these are extrajudicial killings outside a declared war zone.

Really?? Do you see any one in Pakistan complaining to UN ? Why?

And declared or undeclared, its a war that US is pursuing in the area. Pakistan wants to question the legality of that, sure, be my guest and sue..

Wrong. Janet Reno was raked over the coals for Waco

And ???

 

[GoodBoy]

I support drone strikes, someone has to clean the terrorist safe heavens, Pakistan does not have the capacity.

Neither the will... they were doing treaties few years ago with extremist groups untill US forced to act against before those extremists could take over Pak.

Why are Indians being singled out? 25% Chinese also approve of Drone strikes, no comments about that?
Its good to see majority of the Indians don't really give a hoot about this issue, not our mess not our concern.

Actually only 55% Chinese oppose drone strikes in Pakistan. Seems that countries like Mexico, Spain and Greece have a better appreciation of Pakistani concerns than China.

Wow one out of four Chinis support drone attacks on a brotherly country. At 25% approval they are just a tad below India. Boy, that's gotta hurt, so much for all weather friendship.

Such surveys are just tiny reflection of the overall perception.. They only target few thousands and talk about millions and billions..

India has to be singled out since it makes their day and hide their own faults.

25% means about 330 million Chinese and it's really strange since China is the BIGGEST ALLY of Pak today and supposed to be supporting it 100%.

But these surveys may not be a true picture always so no use of trusting them blindly.Anyway US/India seems to have the biggest problem regarding terrorism originating from Pak so no wonder if the stats show US/India voting for OBL kinda raids.

Exactly and people need to be asked, why in the first place drone strike had to happen?

But no one will talk about it. Nobody questions when terrorists targets innocent people but when they are gunned down people care all about them and their families..

That's what Pakistanis dont want to discuss about.Why created monsters and still supporting in the name of good/bad terrorists? When US wants to kill them they cry about sovereignty and human rights.

It's similar when there trash is rotting at home and risking health(to home and neighbourhood) but the home people dont wanna clean it but when some neighbour tries to clean it then blame tresspassing and intereference.

 

[Developereo]

Really?? Do you see any one in Pakistan complaining to UN ? Why?

And declared or undeclared, its a war that US is pursuing in the area. Pakistan wants to question the legality of that, sure, be my guest and sue..

Actually, some people are taking the case to US courts and to the UN. But it won't amount to much because the strikes are occurring outside US soil on non-US citizens, so the US Constitutional restrictions do not apply. The US administration will simply cite 'national security' as a prerogative to unilaterally justify its actions.

Might makes right; when you are a superpower, you can do what you want regardless of legal 'technicalities'.

And ???

That was to refute your claim that collateral damage will be tolerated if US lives are at stake. There is no instance where US courts have authorized indiscriminate aerial raids on US citizens.