List of children who have been killed by U.S. drones

[Guest American Woman]

Apparently, 1 out of 4 of them were civilians.

How would the list differ if those attacks had been carried out by conventional military aircraft?

According the International Committee of the Red Cross the civilian-to-soldier death ratio in wars fought since the mid-20th century has been 10:1, meaning ten civilian deaths for every soldier death. http://en.wikipedia...._casualty_ratio

So the claim is that drones kill 1:4 compared to the average of 10 :1.

[DogOnPorch]

This is not correct, and ignores the CIA's separate utilization of "drone" aircraft for recon, strike, and fire support. Modern drones can be traced to development in the 1980's, but the concept of a remotely piloted vehicle dates back decades to refitted military aircraft (Full Scale Aerial Targets) used for training and weapons qualifications, fully capable of firing missiles.

The first remotely piloted machines were from WW1...not very reliable....primitive servos and timers. The Germans during WW2 got it aced first if I recall...with the Mistel, etc.

[DogOnPorch]

First of all, I question a 19 year old male being listed as a child, as that's military age. Secondly, odd that drone attacks, with the exception of 2, only killed males in Pakistan - and mostly between the ages of 14 - 19. I would wager that these children weren't killed in their homes, but at training camps; how else would all of the females in their households escaped death?

See the vid I posted 'what's a civilian'.

[bush_cheney2004]

The first remotely piloted machines were from WW1...not very reliable....primitive servos and timers. The Germans during WW2 got it aced first if I recall...with the Mistel, etc.

Cool...so much for "rules of engagement" not permitting armed "drones". Ditto for V-1 buzz bombs and V-2 rockets.

[bush_cheney2004]

According the International Committee of the Red Cross the civilian-to-soldier death ratio in wars fought since the mid-20th century has been 10:1, meaning ten civilian deaths for every soldier death. http://en.wikipedia...._casualty_ratio

So the claim is that drones kill 1:4 compared to the average of 10 :1.

Right....the civilian death toll has been greatly reduced with better precision, intel, and tactics. Blowing up entire cities is no longer required.

Edited January 25, 2013 by bush_cheney2004

[DogOnPorch]

Cool...so much for "rules of engagement" not permitting armed "drones". Ditto for V-1 buzz bombs and V-2 rockets.

First rule of war: Rules are subjective.

[DogOnPorch]

Right....the civilian death toll has been greatly reduced with better precision, intel, and tactics. Blowing up entire cities is no longer required.

Also, as I've seen in numerous videos over the years...IED techs often blow themselves and everybody around them...up!

[GostHacked]

Obama sure cares about children.

[Shady]

Obama sure cares about children.

I think it's how he got his Nobel peace prize!

[DogOnPorch]

Obama sure cares about children.

As do the Taliban and crew. What is clear is that they show NO moral dilemma when it comes to using children for warfare...nor do the children for that matter who are more than not happy co-conspirators. Seriously, if your uncle is planning a Jihad operation against the hated NATO crusaders, why wouldn't you wish to join in?

[GostHacked]

As do the Taliban and crew. What is clear is that they show NO moral dilemma when it comes to using children for warfare...nor do the children for that matter who are more than not happy co-conspirators. Seriously, if your uncle is planning a Jihad operation against the hated NATO crusaders, why wouldn't you wish to join in?

So how do we differentiate us from the terrorists if we are doing much of the same that they are? But as we have seen recently in Libya, Egypt and others is that NATO has through subversive means have brought down those regimes only to be replaced by the same people we are trying to fight against, but help at the same time. Quite the dilemma. How does one reconcile that?

[DogOnPorch]

So how do we differentiate us from the terrorists if we are doing much of the same that they are? But as we have seen recently in Libya, Egypt and others is that NATO has through subversive means have brought down those regimes only to be replaced by the same people we are trying to fight against, but help at the same time. Quite the dilemma. How does one reconcile that?

Generally, drone operators do not involve their children in operations. When Seal 6 took out Osama, they left their kids @ home.

[DogOnPorch]

How does one reconcile that?

Oh...about 3mt should do. But more if needed...

(I keeed I keeeeeed)

[GostHacked]

Generally, drone operators do not involve their children in operations. When Seal 6 took out Osama, they left their kids @ home.

The people who brought down the towers left their kids at home too.

[DogOnPorch]

The people who brought down the towers left their kids at home too.

Did they? How many were married w/ children?

[Guest American Woman]

The people who brought down the towers left their kids at home too.

Can't help but wonder if they left their kids* at home during their al queada training. We already know that Khadr didn't.

*And by kids, I mean sons - as the list of the children killed by drones in Pakistan is comprised of males, but for two females.

[DogOnPorch]

Can't help but wonder if they left their kids* at home during their al queada training. We already know that Khadr didn't.

*And by kids, I mean sons - as the list of the children killed by drones in Pakistan is comprised of males, but for two females.

As far as I can tell, they did not have children. But it makes for a good GH post.

[Guest American Woman]

As far as I can tell, they did not have children. But it makes for a good GH post.

Actually, some did. "Over a quarter were married, and over half had children."

Interesting read - Profiling the 9-11 terrorists: http://faculty.mckendree.edu/brian_frederking/columns/profiling_the_911_terrorists.htm

[WIP]

Oh...about 3mt should do. But more if needed...

(I keeed I keeeeeed)

Shouldn't you have Triumph The Insult Dog's permission to use him as your mascot for imperial ventures abroad?

[DogOnPorch]

Actually, some did. "Over a quarter were married, and over half had children."

Interesting read - Profiling the 9-11 terrorists: http://faculty.mcken..._terrorists.htm

That's what I thought, too...but I'm not finding any direct mention of these apparent families left behind...other than cryptic articles like yours. Lots of stuff from the parents, mind you.

[DogOnPorch]

Shouldn't you have Triumph The Insult Dog's permission to use him as your mascot for imperial ventures abroad?

Why not give him a shout and see if you can get him to have me remove it.

[WIP]

So how do we differentiate us from the terrorists if we are doing much of the same that they are? But as we have seen recently in Libya, Egypt and others is that NATO has through subversive means have brought down those regimes only to be replaced by the same people we are trying to fight against, but help at the same time. Quite the dilemma. How does one reconcile that?

Any word yet on why Anwar Al Awlaki's 16 year old son was targeted with a drone assassination?

Has this UN investigation been mentioned yet here?

UN inquiry into US drone strikes prompts cautious optimism

I hope there's a reason to be optimistic, but the UN is a toothless tiger. This Global War On Terror has been a scam right from the outset -- a smokescreen cover for resource wars, and drone warfare is a tactic that feeds its own fire for building more and more of these robot destructo toys, since the use of them creates more hostility and motivation for revenge attacks such as terrorist bombings. They have their own built-in excuse to be used!

Drone strikes kill, maim and traumatize too many civilians, U.S. study says

[bush_cheney2004]

Too bad....if some groups want to have a global jihad....then global jihad it shall be, complete with remote controlled killing machines, with Obama flipping the switch. As someone here once said, sometimes the reigning superpower(s) just need to stop playing so nice.

[WIP]

Why not give him a shout and see if you can get him to have me remove it.

Life is short and time is too precious to devote to such trivial matters....but, not too trivial for greedy, avaricious entertainment conglomerates and copyright holders! So, I would suspect that you would hear from NBC long before you hear from Robert Smigel himself....although his politics, based on Triumph's appearances on the Conan Obrien Show would indicate that he is on the radical left or liberal side of aisle, and not likely to be a friend to the belligerent use of military force for economic gain.

I should add that the reason why conservatives, libertarians and assorted rightwingers have to go to the left side of the aisle for comedy and musical inspiration is because the few musicians and comedians who are on the right - totally suck at what they do! And they can only find work at crappy right wing events like the annual Conservative Political Action Conference. With all the money their billionaire backers have, the entertainment provided is only useful as bad highlight reel material to laugh at in youtube videos.

Edited January 25, 2013 by WIP

[DogOnPorch]

Life is short and time is too precious to devote to such trivial matters....but, not too trivial for greedy, avaricious entertainment conglomerates and copyright holders! So, I would suspect that you would hear from NBC long before you hear from Robert Smigel himself....although his politics, based on Triumph's appearances on the Conan Obrien Show would indicate that he is on the radical left or liberal side of aisle, and not likely to be a friend to the belligerent use of military force for economic gain.

Uh...Triumph is now Team CoCo...we'll see.