Home | About | Donate

Drones and 'What Makes Us Different'


Drones and 'What Makes Us Different'

Joseph Nevins

Seven years ago this month and three days after Barack Obama assumed the presidency on January 20, 2009, the first drone strike of his administration took place--in a small village in the region of Pakistan known as North Waziristan. It targeted the family compound of Faheem Qureshi, fracturing the young teen’s skull and destroying one of his eyes, while killing, among others, two of his uncles and a 21-year-old cousin.


The first thing needed is to call the war on terror what it really is, war on peace, then we can begin to make it better.


BTW folks, Bernie Sanders says he will continue the Drone Program if elected.

And every vote for Sanders will be construed as a ringing endorsement of this program.


What makes us different is: we are the #1 terrorist country in the world! But as long as most Americans continue to be brainwashed by American exceptionalism; the MSM; and apathetic to that truth, nothing will ever change. Like said before, the so-called war on terror is really a war for terror to protect the vested interests of the economic elite and to support their hitmen, the US military. War is just an euphemism for terrorism, wrapped in a pretty flag and on a bigger budget!


"... columnist Charles Blow argues that the “only reason that these killings keep happening is because most of American society tacitly approves or willfully tolerates it. There is no other explanation. If America wanted this to end, it would end.”
If only this were so. In principle, it is, I think true. However, most of our fellow citizens appear disinterested in ending this barbaric practice, and that in part is why drone killings proceed unabated. Perhaps if Americans were being killed by drones, we might object. Otherwise, it's on to the next distraction.


Brandon Bryant is a liar who frequently is dishonest with the public. Tonje Hessen Schei is a documentarian who thinks that objective documentaries are a thing of the past. It's not a good combination for those interested in truth.


Maybe your comments about flushing out Congress are to cover up the real owners of U.S. policy--the Deep State and its muscle: the MIC.


And what viable candidate, pray tell, is doing anything to oppose the Beast?

Is it hero worship that you think one individual, elected President or not, is sufficient to change the direction of decades of war-making, war-planning, base-building, foreign assassinations, and all sorts of bodies buried in all sorts of places?

I find your stated position along with that of Peter Green disingenuous.

Heck, in a perfect world everyone would have medical security, and a living wage, and a good education, and a decent place to live, and clean water to drink, etc.

We are dealing with a monster that has lived in the shadows since the end of W.W. II.

Sanders didn't make the beast and he won't be able to take it down. But he'll chip away at it, talk about what percentage of the U.S. budget goes to militarism, and begin the painful process of re-educating a public LIED to by people in high places, "respected" print media like "the paper of record," The New York Times, by church leaders, and of course, the MIC's very own top brass.

Let those who lead the wars of aggression by fixing cases FOR war and disseminating endless streams of disinformation into all public venues take your wrath, and the first hit... on legal and moral grounds.


I disagree.

First of all, for someone who seems to recognize just how deep the Deep State goes and is aware of its assassination record... and how through these strategic "eliminations" manages to institute policies amenable to its own interests---not the public's... for you to turn around and parrot the "blame Americans" as if all citizens support these disasters is troubling.

I don't think there's any spiritual or educational authority who would hold those who deceive others for horrific ends to the same accounting as those who fell to the deception.

There are the authors of crimes against humanity... and both dupes and those who sought to shift the tide, but were unable to do so.

It's easy for many here to sound glib as they blame fellow citizens for not seeing through all the lies.

Not everyone was born with an incisive intellect. And the reason that advertising works so well is that it speaks to portions of the human psyche that are NOT conscious. That means they are not under logic's (or reason's) control.

I will continue to object to the language frames that turn citizens into nothing more than subsidiaries of the military industrial complex. Many of us do not support wars, do not work inside the war machine, and have spent our lives protesting wars, trying to educate others, etc.

OUR identities are not tied to the military or what it does. And to say it's done in our names is just another lie. It's done so that corporations can exploit regions they wish to exploit. The oldest game since the onset of Patriarchy and its imperial ambitions.

There are specific entities behind the rites of spreading terror and they are NOT all Americans.


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


Yeah... the tag team has to turn this into the issue of the citizenry.

How much of foreign policy is determined by citizens?

How much of domestic?

Has anyone here taken notice of the way the New World Order is setting up not just trade rules, but binding international law that will make ALL citizen protest against the trespasses of corporate overloads effete? (TPP and TIPP and plans for worse--see Nick Buxton piece.)

The Page and Gilens Study proved that very little in the way of what the public wants or wanted has become national policy.

And people are exhausted. Everything is run by or in the hands of sociopaths, or what Bush termed "evil-doers."

People are fighting:

  1. Against fracking
  2. For Black Lives to Matter
  3. For protections for young women on college campuses against rapists
  4. For the off-shore prisons to close
  5. To stop the next generation of nuclear weapons
  6. To stop the oil trains and oil deep sea pillage and plunder
  7. To stop Hispanic families being torn apart and tossed over the border
  8. To alter the draconian drug laws
  9. To reform the prison industrial system
  10. To stop capital punishment
  11. To keep public schools open
  12. To stop standardized tests
  13. To stop Monsanto's dangerous food pouring into what we eat, unlabeled
  14. To stop vacinations that lead to Autism in too many children
  15. To obtain a living wage

This is what comes to mind.

Battles are also exhausting. And every time a battle is won, the corporate overlords send it back to the courts to be fought for all over again. Women's reproductive rights is one example, Black voting rights is another.

The system is corrupt.

Thousands camped out in many cities during OWS and police basically strong-armed them away.

Millions marched against the initial run-up to the Middle East Wars, but the bastards had their plans on the drawing board, their Project for a New American Century, and their false flag launched and were rearing to go.

To think that Democracy is what it's about this late in Capitalism's end game is a dangerous fiction. The oligarchs have gained control of food systems, banking systems, media systems, medicine access, and WEAPONS (not to mention the soldiers trained to use them).

As I have said 100X here... people are held to account at their various levels of agency, belief, understanding, access, power, intelligence, motive, opportunity, etc.

It ain't about WE... in any one size fits all generic sense. And THAT is how it's used and it's a fallacy.

I think women get this much more than men since men are conditioned to identify with the armed forces or otherwise with the "team on the field." Those frames are part of patriarchy and lots of people, perhaps mostly women, don't identify with this frame. It is not OURS!


In his speech at the Oslo City Hall upon accepting the prize on December 10, 2009, Obama insisted that “the United States of America must remain a standard bearer in the conduct of war,” suggesting that U.S. war-waging is somehow superior, more ethical, than those of the country’s adversaries. “That is what makes us different from those whom we fight,” he proclaimed. “That is a source of our strength.”

???????? "...remain a standard bearer in the conduct of war,..." ???????

The US, on the basis of highly-refuted lies about Iraq, illegally invaded, occupied, and destroyed that functioning state. Thousands were killed, and several million more were made refugees, their soil was contaminated with toxins (ala Viet Nam) and that unfortunate region was prodded into civil war and is now becoming a vast wilderness of destruction (see Tom Dispatch today.) If the US has indeed set the modern standard then humanity is completely fucked.


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


Thanks for your reply. My posts are not meant to be pejorative to the average U.S. citizen but to what has been done to them. Hell, I cannot talk because I was one of the brainwashed myself! A long time ago until I got on the net in 1995. I love my fellow citizens, but I detest what has been done to them by our Government and their corporate shills.


Harry Truman ordered the atom bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and as far as I can tell, never had any remorse or apologized to the Japanese people. The only way that could happen is if one was a psycho sociopath! The MSM canard that it ended the second world war is like everything else in a military dictatorship that has posed as a democracy....TOTAL BS!


as Chomsky once said, it's up to each of us to cultivate our own intellectual self defense. like you, a few years back, I was oblivious and naive--insulated. I'm sure I still am, just not to the same degree as then. it takes awareness and effort to cast off the deep layers and levels of indoctrination, but it's worth it. :slightly_smiling:


If I could, I'd arrest Obama and drag him before the World Criminal Court, along with all the other war criminals in this and past administrations, I would not exclude members of military, CIA, DIA, or any others either, since following orders is no defense. Murder is a crime, colored by a war of aggression or not, with that type war being the gravest of all war crimes. These criminals can pretend to be whatever they like and with a media that only follows their lead, this isn't hard to to do, but it's only pretend when they try and appear as something other than murderers and war criminals. One might expect such atrocities were Joe Stalin in charge, and the longer the U.S. behaves like the rogue nation it's become, the more the rest of the world will view us like another Stalin. Sadly, such isn't far from the truth.


Obviously, making and selling weapons is too powerful a business in the USA. And that is why there are too many gun-related deaths in the USA and the country is always at war in foreign countries. Clearly, the USA did not give honest chances to diplomacy in Iraq and Syria.

However, a black young man shot 16 times to kill him by a policeman is not comparable to the drone attacks in Pakistan or Afghanistan. The first case is a crime by any reasonable standard; clearly, even if he posed a threat to the policeman, there was no justification to shoot him after he was incapacitated. On the other hand, the second case is a smart way to try to defeat the terrorists without having any American young man (as soldier) getting killed.

It is not bad when out 200 people killed 35 were intended targets. All military operations have collateral casualties. In cases where the terrorists are given sanctuary by civilians, if the terrorists were to be targeted, civilian casualties would likely be higher. So, the world should either give up killing terrorists or tolerate killing civilians who allow terrorists to operate from their homes and neighborhoods.

If you get out of the box of loving or condemning the West, you would actually know that the West is not the worst sufferer of Islamic terrorism; the worst sufferers of Islamic hatred and atrocities/terrorism are innocent, weak and nonviolent non-Muslims in most Muslim-majority nations. It is wrong to think that the West made terrorists out of the Muslims in most parts of the world. So, as a matter of principle/morality you might actually realize that fighting Islamic terrorism is not a bad thing.


I agree.

I also like the way General Smedley Butler put it:

"WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives."

And -

"I spent thirty-three years and four months in active military service as a member of this country's most agile military force, the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from Second Lieutenant to Major-General. And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high class muscle-man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism."


I respectfully disagree. there is a growing body of research that encourages a broader perspective about the issue. though the second link puts the spotlight on the US military, and for good reason, the larger reality is that the transnational cabal orchestrates, coordinates and implements terrorism. if you're inclined, here are but a couple of resources to consider. regards-