Drone Spy Wars: Militants in Pakistan Film Confessions and Death

In remote areas of Pakistan, Al Qaeda and Taliban-supported death squads accuse local tribesmen of collaborating with the United States, and often force them to confess on video before executing them.

Related article: http://nyti.ms/YYXsnh
Please visit http://nyti.ms/Vi7ESb in order to embed this video
Watch more videos at http://nytimes.com/video
Follow on Twitter: http://twitter.com/nytimesvideo

• Category

  News & Politics

[Bander1]

LOL, well he got caught. Anyways US money is very good. Money talks. heck we raise it to 1000 bucks, will make the informant the riches man in the village.

[Highollow]

Actually, the 2% you refer to are the presumed 'high-level' militant leaders, and does not include sub-alternative militants. Most (independent) studies seem to conclude that at least a majority of the victims are, in fact, militants, despite local beliefs and despite the negative backlash in public perception this gives to the US.

[jetacewaqas]

And statistics show that only 2% of those killed in drone strikes are militants. So if we kill 100 people, 98 would be civilians. And for the 2 militants we do kill, at least 1 of their family members will become a militant. Obviously, the family members of the 98 innocent civilians will also be enraged, there's not telling how many of them will join the insurgents. Drones are counter-productive and a fool's toy. They are dangerously bolstering the insurgency, not mitigating it any way.

[SBCBears]

Still, Americans should keep in mind Churchill's admonition: "An exaggerated code of honor leading to the performance of utterly vain and unreasonable deeds should not be defended however fine it might look."

[SBCBears]

You missed my point. Of course, nuking them is not reasonable. What I am saying that the US use of drones is not disproportionate. The Taliban and, it seems, especially al Queda kill many more civilians than the drones. We don't know how close we are to eradicating this particular form of terrorism, but we have little choice. Their aim is to institute Sharia law across the globe and to do it violently, if necessary. It's unfortunate that this plays into the hands of domestic hawks. (see next)

[jetacewaqas]

Nuking just might get them to stop, but unfortunately the problem that persists here is that the nuking option is off the table. Why? Because this time they (the Pakistanis) also have nukes. If we nuke them, they will nuke us. And nowadays, you don't need an ICBM to get a nuke halfway across the world.

After 11 years of war, how close are we to eradicating extremism? The fact of the matter is, this is going to be yet another Vietnam. Just wait and see. 

[jetacewaqas]

In addition, the Soviets resorted to gunship raids on villages suspected of supporting the Mujas. They wiped out entire villages by bombing/strafing them, not distinguishing between innocent/guilty. They also had this mentality that you seem to support. "want us to stop? lay down your weapons". I'm sure they said the same thing.

It has been proven Mr. Bunyard, that advanced technology is largely ineffective against an insurgency. This war is un-winnable, sorry.

[jetacewaqas]

So advanced technology will help you win the war? The Soviets also had the best technology of their time, and they were fighting the same people we are today. Did their technology help them win in Afghanistan? No. Do you seriously think we're winning? Is militancy coming to an end in the region? For every militant we're killing at least 3 or 4 more are being created (usually family members of innocent people killed due to collateral damage), and let's not talk how many innocent we're killing.