Oops, Another Wedding Party Gets "Droned"

[Shodan]

@NotfooledbyW

There was not a dimes worth of protest against Bush’s military action in Afghanistan.

You do know, don’t you, that this is completely, wildly, false? Cite.

You are not squaring your request with any kind of reality.

This is what is called “irony”.

Regards,
Shodan

[Rhythmdvl]

Next time you’re found
Someone’s head on the ground
There’s a lot who’ve been burned
So look around

But he’s got high drones
He’s got high drones
He’s got high hellfire-armed
In the sky drones

Oops, there goes another wedding party
Oops, there goes another wedding party
Oops, there goes another wedding party now!

[Sinaptics]

@NotfooledbyW

I support Obama in signing off on drone strikes against suspected Taliban or al Qaeda leaders specifically in the lawless region of Pakistan like the Swat Valley and other parts of Africa where there is no government in control. I also support Bush when he did it. So I don’t know the issue there. However I did not support one particular type of drone or manned air strike that was used in Iraq. That is those strikes where drone surveillance caught an IED being planted and then the planters were tracked to a dwelling and the dwelling was targeted and hit. It seemed to me at the time that once the location of the IED was fixed we could have detonated it if the suspected planter could not be killed or captured. Hitting a dwelling they entered after planting IED’s seemed to me to be targeting without regard to civilians.

In my opinion, the double-tap strategy is our most repugnant. For those not familiar with the practice, this is where we squeeze off another missile a few minutes after the inital one to get the people trying to help. All we tend to do in those instances is kill family trying to help and first responders. It’s gotten to the point where people have to stand-by and watch the people die in the street because of the huge risk you’ll be blown up too for trying to help.

[Rhythmdvl]

@Sinaptics

In my opinion, the double-tap strategy is our most repugnant. For those not familiar with the practice, this is where we squeeze off another missile a few minutes after the inital one to get the people trying to help. All we tend to do in those instances is kill family trying to help and first responders. It’s gotten to the point where people have to stand-by and watch the people die in the street because of the huge risk you’ll be blown up too for trying to help.

That’s a pretty horrific claim. Is there a reputable cite for something like that, particularly that it’s part of an intentional ‘strategy’?

[Sinaptics]

@Rhythmdvl

That’s a pretty horrific claim. Is there a reputable cite for something like that, particularly that it’s part of an intentional ‘strategy’?

It’s a widely acknowledged practice.

I’m not sure whom would count as a reputable source, so I’ll avoid just linking some random stuff. Googling “double-tap drones” brought back 104k results with plenty from news outlets.

I do like this article that was linked by don’t ask. It’s well written and sourced, though I didn’t check the sources.

http://www.livingunderdrones.org/living-under-drones/

[Rhythmdvl]

@Sinaptics

It’s a widely acknowledged practice.

I’m not sure whom would count as a reputable source, so I’ll avoid just linking some random stuff. Googling “double-tap drones” brought back 104k results with plenty from news outlets.

I do like this article that was linked by don’t ask. It’s well written and sourced, though I didn’t check the sources.

http://www.livingunderdrones.org/living-under-drones/

Googling “double tap drones” brings up little credibility.

The source you linked to severely undercuts the initial idea that’s it’s a strategy intended to harm civilians and rescue workers:

It defines “double tap” as perhaps causing more harm than necessary, but not as a particular strategy to harm rescue workers:

There is now significant evidence that the US has repeatedly engaged in a practice sometimes referred to as “double tap,” in which a targeted strike site is hit multiple times in relatively quick succession. Evidence also indicates that such secondary strikes have killed and maimed first responders coming to the rescue of those injured in the first strike.

Further, the footnoted source says that it’s

“speculating that the “double tap” strike pattern is actually **less the result of strategy than it is a cover for the less-than-pinpoint-accurate technological capacity **of the missiles used in most drone strikes and noting that “[d]ouble tap means that the military fires two Hellfire missiles at each target in order to ensure that at least one hits the target”); see also Derek Gregory, Lines of Descent, Open Democracy (Nov. 8, 2011)”

Not that this precludes the possibility, but it seems to be reaching into woo territory.

I think the use of drone strikes is, on balance, reprehensible, for a variety of reasons. Adding conspiracy theory-level atrocities serves to undermine sensible discussion.

[Sinaptics]

@Rhythmdvl

Googling “double tap drones” brings up little credibility.

The source you linked to severely undercuts the initial idea that’s it’s a strategy intended to harm civilians and rescue workers:

It defines “double tap” as perhaps causing more harm than necessary, but not as a particular strategy to harm rescue workers:
Further, the footnoted source says that it’s

Not that this precludes the possibility, but it seems to be reaching into woo territory.

I think the use of drone strikes is, on balance, reprehensible, for a variety of reasons. Adding conspiracy theory-level atrocities serves to undermine sensible discussion.

I had never meant to imply that we intended to harm civilians. That is just a frequent side effect of the practice. And who knows, it may be intended to some degree.

I guess it would all depend on the timing of the strikes. They’re either firing them in quick succession which would be ideal if your trying to maximize chances of hitting your target, or there is a span of minutes, which points the other way. I’ll dig through some sources when I have a free half-hour or so to see what evidence there is of the practice.

[Gadarene]

Jeff, I’ve read about the so-called double tap on first responders as an intentional strategy as well. From a cursory Google search on “drone strikes first responders,” here are articles from The Guardian (albeit Glenn Greenwald) and PBS Frontline. Here’s something worthwhile and recent from The Atlantic. And here’s a CNN summary of a study that asserts that such double-tap practices are part of an intentional strategy.

I think calling it conspiracy theory and woo doesn’t give it the credence that it deserves.