Yesterday I was interviewed by Alan Stahler on KVMR Radio about why I engaged in nonviolent direct action and was arrested at Beale last October. (You can listen to the Podcast below.) In the interview, Alan said, “Using drones must save American lives. What’s your objection to them?” My initial answer: “It may be that using drones save American lives, but there has to be a different way.”
The U.S. Drone Warfare Program is flouting the rule of law, killing thousands, terrorizing whole communities, and making enemies. There has to be a different way, a way that can lead to mutual concern and lasting security for people in the United States and others. There has to be a way that can lead to peace.
U.S. drones have killed thousands of people, mostly civilians, including hundreds of children. Yes, our drones go after alleged terrorists. We have kill lists, made up of individuals who have been approved by the president or the CIA for targeted killings. But our drones do not only go after particular individuals. The majority of U.S. drone attacks are “signature strikes” based on looser criteria. In some areas, any man of military age is considered a militant and a legitimate target.
Drone strikes often result in civilian casualties. Hundreds of children have been killed. Friends of mine who have traveled to regions under fire by drones describe an atmosphere of fear and terror, children having nightmares, people afraid to gather in groups, go to funerals, or send their children to school. Whole communities are being terrorized. We are not only causing great harm to people in the communities we target, but making enemies and creating a cycle of violence that may last for generations.
All of this is taking place outside of both U.S. and international law. The United States is setting an example that other countries will surely follow. Over 75 countries now have drones. Some of these drones have weapons, others are surveillance drones, which can easily be weaponized. The United States is leading the way toward a global drone arms race.
U.S. drone warfare is not making the world more secure, but more dangerous. Those who are directing U.S. policy on drones are acting out of a vision of the future based on an endless War on Terror waged across borders, under cover by the CIA and Joint Special Forces, using whatever advanced technologies are available to dominate the world. Many of us reject this vision, and are working under the influence of faith in a higher vision, the vision of a peaceful, just, and sustainable world.
Drone warfare? There has to be a different way.
Drones Interview with Alan Stahler
For more information about the impact drone strikes are having upon communities, read the transcript of Farea Al-Muslimi’s testimony inthe US Senate. He claims that rather than fighting terrorism, US drone strikes in his country are fueling it.
Farea Al-Muslimi’s testimony
Keep up with Sharon’s blog postings about drones and her court case at http://sharondelgado.org/category/drones-2/
What could be a different way? The Taliban inserts itself into a vilage or town, takes it over and launches attacks from them. Civilian blood is on their hands.
Having lived through the protests over the Viet Nam War, I have often been nonplussed by our country’s acceptance of war over the past twenty years. I think that acceptance has been based upon three things: fear, an unwillingness to entertain a change in our affluent lifestyles, and the lack of a draft. War does not demand much from most people in our society these days. As a result, we seem to be at a loss for visualizing other approaches to outside threats such as terrorism.
In the case of drone warfare, doing nothing is a better alternative. We are fooling ourselves if we think we are reducing the threat of terrorism by drone warfare. So we may kill someone who was on somebody’s terrorist list. We also kill other local people. We fan the flames that lead to more terrorist activity. Taking ourselves out of that situation would do more to cool the cause of terrorism. The strength of Empire only furthers the terrorists cause. Furthermore, the use of drones makes killing easier and in the short run less painful for us – therefore in increases the likelihood of our starting the next war.
On D Day, artillery was sued to open the invasion of infantry. Many of those shells hit French villages, killing hundreds of civilians. Was this an immoral use of artillery?
Sio I read what should not be done. What should be done?
BTW, these are not just “terrorists. They are a foce trying to return Afghanistan to the dark days when woman were forbidden form stepping outside and girls going to school. Those who value freedom wold understand