[Peace] [Peace-discuss] Other countries stopping US crimes

[Robert Naiman]

You're deliberately not hearing me. Perhaps that shouldn't be surprising.

I spent a lot of time trying to do something about the drone strike issue.
Lobbied Members and staff. Worked with Kucinich to introduce legislation.
Went around giving talks. Wrote about it. Did alerts. Went on delegations
to Pakistan and Yemen. Tried lots of different things.

The "end the drone war" frame is not helping anything happen in DC right
now. There is zero prospect of banning drones. There are no allies for this
demand who can do anything in Washington. There is no prospect for finding
any at the present juncture.

U.S. drone strikes in Afghanistan are part of the war in Afghanistan. The
most likely way to end U.S. drone strikes in Afghanistan is to end the war
and pull U.S. troops out. That is a million times more likely than ending
drone strikes in Afghanistan on their own.

If we want to end the war in Afghanistan, we need a lot more engagement on
it than we have now. Things are very very quiet. When Trump threatened to
pull U.S. troops out of Syria and drawdown in Afghanistan, McConnell
crammed through an amendment in the Senate against it. There was very
little pushback. We did an alert. Nobody else did, as far as I recall.

People should think about whether they're serious about ending wars or not.
Ending wars requires engagement in the political process. That's how we got
where we are on ending the Saudi war in Yemen. And we're not done yet.

===

Robert Reuel Naiman
Policy Director
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org
naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
(202) 448-2898 x1





On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 4:55 PM Brussel, Morton K via Peace-discuss <
peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:

> The Naimon position on the use of drones is grotesque, patently
> ridiculous.  The U.S. is not at war with the countries it has been
> bombing/droning. It is well documented that innocents have been a large
> component of those killed by drone attacks. The rationale for individual
> attacks has been shown to be more than faulty, grudges of those
> interrogated often the reason, for example. It is murder with no recourse
> to any recognized juridical entity except in the inner sanctum of the
> administration. The comparison to attacks by ballistic missiles is
> laughable; we are making war but are not at war.
>
> That Bob Naimon wants to protect Sanders and Tulsi is understandable, for
> he thinks like a practical politician. Morality has little play here.
>
> —mkb
>
> > On Mar 20, 2019, at 12:16 PM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss <
> peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> https://news.antiwar.com/2019/03/19/german-court-govt-must-question-if-us-drone-strikes-are-legal/
> > _______________________________________________
> > Peace-discuss mailing list
> > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace/attachments/20190320/df9a0dfd/attachment.html>