Today’s Pakistan Drone Strike Targeted Khost Blast Key Figure in CIA Revenge Killing
The latest CIA drone strike in North Waziristan is described by Reuters as having killed the number two figure in the Pakistan Taliban group known as the TTP. This strike was a first on many fronts. It was the first since the election of a new government in Pakistan, with new Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif slated to take office next week, the first since President Barack Obama’s drone rules speech and the first strike in Pakistan since the Peshawar High Court ruled that US drone strikes in Pakistan are war crimes.
Despite public pronouncements by both the caretaker interim government and the incoming Prime Minister that they oppose CIA drone strikes, this strike is likely to produce less official backlash since the TTP has a long history of attacking both military and civilian targets inside Pakistan. But the CIA had their own reason to target this particular figure. From the State Department’s Rewards for Justice program, we have this description of Wali Ur Rehman (pdf):
Wali Ur Rehman, is second in command and chief military strategist of Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). He commands TTP members in South Waziristan. He has participated in cross-border attacks in Afghanistan against U.S. and NATO personnel, and is wanted in connection with his involvement in the murder of seven American citizens on December 30, 2009, at Forward Operating Base Chapman in Khost, Afghanistan.
Shortly after the devastating attack in Khost, the CIA vowed revenge:
The CIA yesterday vowed to avenge the deaths of seven of its agents who were killed in a suicide bombing on Wednesday in Afghanistan, as it emerged that the bomber may have been invited on to the base as a potential informant according to two former US officials.
“This attack will be avenged through successful, aggressive counterterrorism operations,” a US intelligence official said on condition of anonymity.
It would appear that the CIA has now exacted that revenge, subject, of course, to the usual caveats that key figures targeted in drone strikes often have a way of popping up later unharmed. Gosh, I wonder if that was Mr. Moral Rectitude himself who gave that anonymous quote about revenge to the Guardian back when he was an “intelligence official” inside the White House instead of his current job running the CIA.
Update: I have been reminded on Twitter and elsewhere that in his speech last week, Obama said “America does not take strikes to punish individuals“. That seems to run in direct opposition to the vow from the CIA to avenge Khost and Ur Rheman’s accused role in that attack resulting in today’s attack.
Not sure how State calls the killing of 7 CIA people involved in drone killing “murder.”
It’s high time for the narrative on the Khost attack to change. If CIA is going to be killing people, it becomes a legitimate target.
And vengeance as a motive for killing more people isn’t going to help. It’s more likely to keep the cycle going.
When did lack of thought become a requirement for government appointments?
We take losses.
The Taliban (even though a religio-political movement), now has a martyr to admire and build religious anger. Not a loss, really. More like a gain in terms of giving a reason to use for recruitment.
I am awaiting the “effective strategy” of drones to be explained. As of now, we take out key figures as well as innocent casualties, (splash zone casualties.) Both strike results create “righteous anger” based justification for the cohorts of those killed. This is a very strong driver to continue to plot against the United States.
So again, what is the strategy?
Keeping the cycle going is the whole point. Getting the American sheeple inured to the routine crimes of ‘our’ government, now institutionalized as the world’s sole remaining Supercriminal … above the law around the world. But, ‘sniff, sniff’, agonized over its Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde legal dissonance.
The united states government has torn up our US Constitution and is an illegitimate rogue state. And a murderous one. No one is safe.
It was not only “murder”, but a “war crime” when Omar Khadr did it.
According to the Washington Post’s story (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/pakistan-officials-us-drone-kills-4-militants-near-afghan-border-first-strike-after-election/2013/05/29/24ef335a-c834-11e2-9245-773c0123c027_story.html):
“Three children were reportedly hurt in Wednesday’s attack, which was the first known targeted strike on Pakistani soil in six weeks.”
So much for this part of Obama’s recent address (http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/05/23/remarks-president-national-defense-university):
“And before any strike is taken, there must be near-certainty that no civilians will be killed or injured — the highest standard we can set.”
Hasn’t it been thus since 2001? Their thugs against ours. Ours just happen to be better at selling themselves as the more virtuous ones. No word, presumably, on the number of collaterals taken out in the process?
@Snoopdido: Obama may only have been talking about “above board” drone strikes. The super secret drone strikes MO may not have changed. War toy manifesto, if we have it we use it. The statistical significance of signature strikes and “near certainty” that no civilians will be killed or injured is no doubt completely lost on most of those in the command and decision train.
That thought assumes the operations are more sophisticated than the helicopter audio video that sliced and diced Reuters reporters and civilians as revealed from wikileaks and Bradley Manning.
All they have to do is redefine the people killed, and voila! No civilians died.
He’s wearing Rohrabacher’s hat!
@ess emm: I was hoping someone would notice the resemblance. That photo looks so much like the old dress-up photos of Dana that I did a double-take the first time I saw it.
Interesting. I wonder if this is it or if there are others they are still hunting. Zero Dark Thirty dedicates a significant amount of time to the Khost incident, and they talk about it in HBO’s documentary, Manhunt, too. As others have mentioned, this kind of revenge killing could go back and forth for many years. It’s been 4 years since Khost.
@P J Evans: Right. Vengeance is a vicious circle of “I hurt you because you hurt me, and you hurt me because I hurt you.”. Lather, rinse, repeat. Someone has to stop in order for it to stop. (Sounds stupid, but it’s the truth.)
The CIA and Joint Chiefs are supposed to serve in an advisory capacity, not as the final word on foreign policy decisions. The US has a civilian head of state for a reason. A civilian executive has many tools at his disposal and some advisers lean toward diplomatic solutions while others rely on force. For too long the US has relied on force that can be understood due to the desire for vengeance following 9/11, but that was a long time ago and cooler heads must prevail. It is time to stop giving an unknown enemy the cover of jihad when the reality is there are psychopaths among us who are nothing more than murderous criminals. There is nothing holy about murdering unarmed civilians, no matter which side is doing the killing.
U.S. drone kills Pakistan Taliban Number two: security officials
The Great Poobah, Barack the Nobel Peace Prize Laureate and Serial Killer Obama, to Pakistan and the world :
I tend to describe it as ‘your granddaddy killed my daddy, so now I’m gonna kill you’. Or, an example closer to home, the Hatfields and the McCoys.