“We kill people based on metadata” and other metadata things

Post by lupire » Wed, Aug 24, 2022, 11:59 PM UTC

trasz wrote: post #227

googlryas wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, that sounds like a great idea. But, it needs to be a two way street. Convince terrorists planning terror attacks to not murder people on the other side of the world, then I'm sure America would drastically cut down on the number of people it killed on the other side of the world. > what would you do if Russia, lawfully (according to Russian laws) executed people in US? Because that’s exactly what US is doing to…

Number of victims of terrorist attacks on the other side of the world is orders of magnitude lower than number of victims of American invasions. Even 9/11 was a minor episode compared to the invasion it served as an excuse for. Essentially, you’re assuming US are always the good guys. And the easiest way to explain this is the foundation of all US politics: racism. Having said that, US _arr_ the good guys at the mome…

Post by mike00632 » Thu, Aug 25, 2022, 12:21 AM UTC

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #166

mandmandam wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ha, it almost seems like you're saying that since the US doesn't keep good track of how many civilians they've murdered with "signature strikes", no one can claim that "lots of innocent people are dying". Even when many reports and groups say that lots of innocent people are dying, including the article you're quoting. That would by psychotic though, so I'm surely misinterpreting what your actual point is. Care to cl…

Quantify how many "lots" are. The parent said the CIA killed "lots" of the wrong people. That is really the only word I take issue with.

Post by tiagod » Thu, Aug 25, 2022, 12:59 AM UTC

de6u99er wrote: post #9

Imagine having a number similar to the one of a terrorist's burner phone and getting called by mistake by his handler.

Post by stjohnswarts » Thu, Aug 25, 2022, 1:03 AM UTC

chasd00 wrote: post #37

mikece wrote: post #8

"Signature strikes" -- the target has a signature (movement, data, use of a satellite phone or specific cellular number, entourage, etc) that matches that of an HVT (high value taget) that is authorized for termination by drone strike. The CIA has killed lots of the wrong people because "signature strikes" don't require second source intelligence to verify who the target is (eg: is the person using the satellite phon…

Don’t forget American citizens are on the table too, no due process required! EDIT: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki Thank you Jaywalk for the correct link

Post by darawk » Thu, Aug 25, 2022, 1:08 AM UTC

g8oz wrote: post #234

darawk wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are actually easy things to look up. 910-2,200 civilians killed by drone strikes[1]. More than that were killed on 9/11 alone [2]. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualties_from_U.S._... 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks

From your first link: The "estimates of civilian casualties are hampered methodologically and practically";[5] civilian casualty estimates "are largely compiled by interpreting news reports relying on anonymous officials or accounts from local media, whose credibility may vary." So let's not speak with too much certainty. Drone operators have harrowing stories of false positives that were never reported as such. A fa…