{"id":35601,"date":"2013-10-28T12:00:17","date_gmt":"2013-10-28T12:00:17","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/?p=35601"},"modified":"2015-05-05T22:21:18","modified_gmt":"2015-05-05T21:21:18","slug":"empire-under-obama-part-2-barack-obamas-global-terror-campaign","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/2013\/10\/empire-under-obama-part-2-barack-obamas-global-terror-campaign\/","title":{"rendered":"Empire under Obama (Part 2): Barack Obama\u2019s Global Terror Campaign"},"content":{"rendered":"

Part 1: <\/i>Political Language and the \u2018Mafia Principles\u2019 of International Relations<\/a><\/p>\n

Under the administration of Barack Obama, America is waging a global terror campaign through the use of drones, killing thousands of people, committing endless war crimes, creating fear and terror in a program expected to last several more decades. Welcome to Obama\u2019s War OF Terror. <\/i><\/p>\n

When Obama became President in 2009, he faced a monumental challenge for the extension of American and Western imperial interests. The effects of eight years under the overt ruthless and reckless behaviour of the Bush administration had taken a toll on the world. With two massive ground wars and occupations under way in Iraq and Afghanistan, Western military forces were stretched thin, while the world\u2019s populations had grown increasingly wary and critical of the use of military force, both at home and abroad. Just as Brzezinski had articulated: \u201cwhile the lethality of their military might is greater than ever, their capacity to impose control over the politically awakened masses of the world is at a historic low.\u201d[1]<\/p>\n

When it came to the \u2018War on Terror,\u2019 Obama implemented his electoral visions of \u201chope\u201d and \u201cchange\u201d in the only way he knows: change the rhetoric, not the substance, and hope<\/i> to hell that the Empire can continue extending its influence around the world. As such, Obama quickly implemented a policy change, dropping the term \u201cwar on terror\u201d and replacing it with the equally \u2013 if not more \u2013 meaningless term, \u201coverseas contingency operations.\u201d[2]<\/p>\n

A major facet of Obama\u2019s foreign policy strategy has been the implementation of an unprecedented global terror war with flying killer robots (\u201cdrones\u201d) operated by remote control. By 2011, the Washington Post<\/i> reported that no president in U.S. history \u201chas ever relied so extensively on the secret killing of individuals to advance the nation\u2019s security goals.\u201d[3]<\/p>\n

Every Tuesday, a counterterrorism meeting takes place in the White House Situation Room among two dozen security officials where they decide who \u2013 around the world \u2013 they are going to illegally bomb and kill that week, drawing up the weekly \u201ckill list\u201d (as it is called).[4]<\/p>\n

By October of 2012, Obama\u2019s \u201ckill list\u201d had evolved into a \u201cnext-generation targeting list\u201d now officially referred to as the \u201cdisposition matrix,\u201d in yet another effort to demean the English language.[5] The \u201cdisposition matrix\u201d\/kill list establishes the names of \u201cterror suspects\u201d who the Obama administration wants to \u2018dispose\u2019 of, without trial, beyond the rule of law, in contravention of all established international law, and in blatant war crimes that kill innocent civilians.<\/p>\n

Obama administration officials believe that the use of global drone terror warfare and \u201ckill lists\u201d are likely to last at least another decade, with one top official commenting, \u201cWe can\u2019t possibly kill everyone who wants to harm us\u2026 It\u2019s a necessary part of what we do\u2026 We\u2019re not going to wind up in 10 years in a world of everybody holding hands and saying, \u2018We love America\u2019.\u201d[6] Indeed, quite true. That\u2019s one of the actual repercussions \u2013 believe it or not \u2013 of waging a massive global assassination program against people around the world: they tend to not \u201clove\u201d the country bombing them.<\/p>\n

But the Obama administration warned the world that as of 2012, the U.S. had only reached the \u201cmid-point\u201d in the global war on [read: of<\/i>] terror, with Obama\u2019s assassination program having already killed more than 3,000 people around the world, more than the number of people killed on 9\/11.[7] As Glenn Greenwald noted, this represented \u201cconcerted efforts by the Obama administration to fully institutionalize \u2013 to make officially permanent \u2013 the most extremist powers it has exercised in the name of the war on terror.\u201d[8]<\/p>\n

But in case you had any moral \u2018qualms\u2019 about bombing and murdering hundreds of innocent children in multiple countries around the world with flying robots, don\u2019t worry: as Joe Klein of Time Magazine<\/i> noted, \u201cthe bottom line in the end is \u2013 whose 4-year-old gets killed? What we\u2019re doing is limiting the possibility that 4-year-olds here will get killed by indiscriminate acts of terror.\u201d[9]<\/p>\n

Quite right. After all, \u201cindiscriminate acts of terror\u201d are only okay when the United States \u2013 or the \u201cinternational community\u201d \u2013 does it. But when the U.S. spreads terror, death and destruction around the world, this is referred to as a \u201cwar on<\/i> terror,\u201d instead of the more accurate \u201cwar of<\/i> terror.\u201d It could be argued that as a rule of thumb, whenever the United States declares a \u201cwar\u201d ON<\/i> something, simply remove the word \u2018on\u2019 and replace it with \u2018of\u2019, and suddenly, everything starts to make more sense. After all, whenever the U.S. declares a war \u201con\u201d something (drugs, poverty, terror), the result is that there is a great deal more of whatever it is being \u2018targeted\u2019, and that U.S. policies themselves facilitate the exponential growth of these so-called \u2018targets.\u2019 Hence, the \u201cwar on terror\u201d is truly more accurately described as a \u201cwar of<\/i> terror,\u201d since that is the result of the actual policies undertaken in the name of such a war.<\/p>\n

A major NYU School of Law and Stanford University Law School research report was published in September of 2012 documenting the civilian terror inflicted by Obama\u2019s global assassination-terror campaign. While the Obama administration has claimed that drones are \u201csurgically precise\u201d and \u201cmakes the US safer,\u201d the report countered that this was completely \u201cfalse.\u201d The report noted that Obama\u2019s drone war often uses the strategy of hitting the same target multiple times, thus killing rescuers and humanitarian workers who go to help the injured.[10]<\/p>\n

This is referred to as a \u201cdouble-tap\u201d strategy, and according to the FBI and Homeland Security, this is a tactic which is regularly used in \u201cterrorist attacks\u201d to target \u201cfirst responders as well as the general population.\u201d Obama\u2019s drones not only target rescuers, but also frequently bomb the funerals of previous drone victims. According to the United Nations, such tactics \u201care a war crime.\u201d[11] Even the NYU\/Stanford Law School report identified the drone program as a terror campaign when it noted that the effects of the drone program are that it \u201cterrorizes men, women, and children.\u201d[12]<\/p>\n

John O. Brennan, who served as Obama\u2019s chief counterterrorism adviser (and is now the director of the CIA), was the main advocate of the drone program inside the Obama administration. In 2011, he reassured the American people that, \u201cin the last year, there hasn\u2019t been a single collateral death because of the exceptional proficiency, [and] precision of the capabilities that we\u2019ve been able to develop,\u201d and added that, \u201cif there are terrorists who are within an area where there are women and children or others, you know, we do not take such action that might put those innocent men, women and children in danger.\u201d[13] That sounds pretty impressive, though unfortunately, it\u2019s an absurd lie.<\/p>\n

The New York Times<\/i> noted that Obama\u2019s method for counting civilian deaths caused by drone strikes was \u201cdisputed\u201d (to say the least), because it \u201ccounts all military-age males in a strike zone as combatants,\u201d thus radically underreporting the level of civilian deaths. The \u201clogic\u201d of this view that that \u201cpeople in an area of known terrorist activity, or found with a top Qaeda operative, are probably up to no good.\u201d This \u201ccounting method,\u201d noted the NYT<\/i>, \u201cmay partly explain the official claims of extraordinarily low collateral deaths.\u201d Some administration officials outside the CIA have complained about this method, referring to it as \u201cguilty by association\u201d which results in \u201cdeceptive\u201d estimates. One official commented, \u201cIt bothers me when they say there were seven guys, so they must all be militants\u2026 They count the corpses and they\u2019re not really sure who they are.\u201d[14]<\/p>\n

In 2011, it was reported that drone strikes in Pakistan had killed 168 children, according to the Bureau of Investigative Journalism.[15] In Afghanistan, officials note that civilians are killed not only by Taliban attacks but also increasingly by drone attacks, with Afghan president Hamid Karzai condemning the attacks which kill women and children as being \u201cagainst all international norms.\u201d[16] Afghanistan was in fact the epicenter of the U.S. drone war, even more so than Pakistan, with the CIA having launched upwards of 333 drone strikes in the country over the course of 2012, the highest total ever.[17] The U.S. strategy in Afghanistan has evolved into \u201ca new and as yet only partially understood doctrine of secret, unaccountable and illegal warfare,\u201d which is \u201cdestroying the West\u2019s reputation,\u201d noted the Telegraph<\/i> in 2012.[18] And considering the already-existing \u201creputation\u201d of the West in the rest of the world, that\u2019s quite an impressive feat.<\/p>\n

From 2004 to 2012, between 2,400 and 3,100 people were reported to have been killed by U.S. drone strikes, including at least 800 innocent civilians (as a low estimate). As Seumas Milne reported in the Guardian<\/i>, the drone strikes \u201care, in reality, summary executions and widely regarded as potential war crimes by international lawyers.\u201d[19]<\/p>\n

The UN warned in June of 2012 that drone strikes may constitute \u201cwar crimes,\u201d and that the use of drone strikes and \u201ctargeted killings\u201d has been found to be \u201cimmensely attractive\u201d to other states in the world, and thus, such practices \u201cweaken the rule of law,\u201d as they \u201cfall outside the scope of accountability.\u201d A Pakistani Ambassador declared that, \u201cWe find the use of drones to be totally counterproductive in terms of succeeding in the war against terror. It leads to greater levels of terror rather than reducing them.\u201d Ian Seiderman, the director of the International Commission of Jurists noted that as a result of the global drone war, \u201cimmense damage was being done to the fabric of international law.\u201d[20]<\/p>\n

Robert Grenier, former head of the CIA\u2019s counter-terrorism center from 2004 to 2006, commented that the United States was \u201ccreating a situation where we are creating more enemies than we are removing from the battlefield,\u201d adding that, \u201cIf you strike them indiscriminately you are running the risk of creating a terrific amount of popular anger,\u201d and that the strikes could even create \u201cterrorist safe havens.\u201d[21]<\/p>\n

In testimony before the U.S. Congress in April of 2013, a Yemeni man who had studied in the United States explained that his community in Yemen \u2013 a small village \u2013 knew about the United States primarily through stories of his own experiences living there (which were positive), but their positive association with America changed following U.S. drone strikes, commenting: \u201cNow\u2026 when they think of America, they think of the fear they feel at the drones over their heads. What the violent militants had failed to achieve, one drone strike accomplished in an instant.\u201d[22]<\/p>\n

U.S. drone bases operate out of multiple countries, including Afghanistan, Djibouti, Turkey, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Ethiopia, the Philippines, Seychelles, and Saudi Arabia. Drones have conducted \u201csurveillance missions\u201d in Libya, Iran, Turkey, Mexico, Colombia, Haiti, and North Korea. Drone strikes have taken place in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, Somalia,[23] and there have even been reports of drone strikes taking place in the Philippines.[24] The U.S. has also considered undertaking drone strikes in the African country of Mali.[25]<\/p>\n

In February of 2013, the United States sent 100 U.S. troops to Mali to set up a drone base for operations in Western Africa.[26] The U.S. began operating drones out of Mali right away, as \u201cnorth and west Africa [were] rapidly emerging as yet another front in the long-running US war against terrorist networks,\u201d giving the Pentagon \u201ca strategic foothold in West Africa,\u201d with Niger bordering Mali, Nigeria and Libya, which was already the target of a French-British-American war in 2011.[27]<\/p>\n

In September of 2011, Anwar al-Awlaki, an American \u201csuspected terrorist\u201d in Yemen had his name added to Obama\u2019s \u201ckill list\u201d and was murdered in a drone bombing, with Obama reportedly saying that making the decision to kill him was \u201can easy one.\u201d[28] Two weeks later, Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, the 16-year-old son of Anwar, also born in America but at the time living in Yemen, was then killed with a drone strike. Obama\u2019s former White House Press Secretary and then-reelection campaign adviser Robert Gibbs was asked how the U.S. justified killing the 16-year-old boy, with the journalist commenting, \u201cIt\u2019s an American citizen that is being targeted without due process, without trial. And, he\u2019s underage. He\u2019s a minor.\u201d Gibbs replied that the boy \u201cshould have [had] a far more responsible father.\u201d Gibbs also noted, \u201cWhen there are people who are trying to harm us, and have pledged to bring terror to these shores, we\u2019ve taken that fight to them.\u201d[29] Pretty simple: America has decided to take the \u201cterror\u201d to \u201cthem.\u201d<\/p>\n

At his first inaugural address as President in 2009, Barack Obama said: \u201cTo the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect.\u201d Less than two-and-a-half years later, favourable views of the United States in the Middle East had \u201cplummeted\u2026 to levels lower than they were during the last year of the Bush administration.\u201d A 2013 Gallup poll found that 92% of Pakistanis disapproved of U.S. leadership, with only 4% approving, \u201cthe lowest approval rating Pakistanis have ever given.\u201d While there was \u201csubstantial affection\u201d for American culture and people in the Muslim world, according to the poll, the problem was U.S. policies. Even a Pentagon study undertaken during the Bush administration noted: \u201cMuslims do not \u2018hate our freedom,\u2019 but rather, they hate our policies,\u201d specifically, \u201cAmerican direct intervention in the Muslim world,\u201d which, the Pentagon noted, \u201cparadoxically elevate[s] stature of and support for Islamic radicals.\u201d[30]<\/p>\n

A June 2012 poll of public opinion sought to gauge the level of support for U.S. drone strikes among 20 countries: the U.S., Britain, Germany, Poland, France, India, Italy, Czech Republic, China, Lebanon, Mexico, Spain, Japan, Brazil, Russia, Tunisia, Turkey, Egypt, Jordan and Greece. The poll found that 17 of the countries had a \u201cclear majority\u201d opposed to drone strikes, while only the U.S. had a \u201cclear majority\u201d (62%) in support.[31]<\/p>\n

In May of 2013, Michael Sheehan, the assistant secretary of defense for special operations and low-intensity conflict testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee where he was asked how long the \u2018war on terrorism\u2019 will last, to which he replied: \u201cAt least 10 to 20 years,\u201d with a Pentagon spokesperson later clarifying that he meant that, \u201cthe conflict is likely to last 10 to 20 more years from today \u2013 atop the 12 years that the conflict has already lasted.\u201d[32] In other words, according to the Pentagon, the world has at least one-to-two more decades of America\u2019s global terror war<\/i> to look forward to.<\/p>\n

So, if America was actually waging a war on <\/i>terror which sought to reduce<\/i> the threat of terror, then why would it be undertaking policies that actively \u2013 and knowingly \u2013 increase<\/i> the threat and levels of terrorism? Well the answer is perhaps shockingly simple: America is not attempting to reduce terror. Quite the contrary, America is not only increasing the threat of terror, but is doing so by waging terror<\/i> against much of the world. So this begs the question: what is the actual<\/i> purpose of Obama\u2019s drone terror campaign?<\/p>\n

Akbar Ahmed, the Islamic Studies chair at American University and former Pakistani high commissioner to Britain, explained in a May 2013 op-ed in the New York Times<\/i> that the drone war in Pakistan was producing \u201cchaos and rage\u201d as it was \u201cdestroying already weak tribal structures and throwing communities into disarray,\u201d threatening the Pakistani government and fueling hatred of America, and that this was also occurring in Afghanistan, Somalia, and Yemen, other major target nations of Obama\u2019s terror campaign.[33]<\/p>\n

Many of these tribal societies had struggled for autonomy under colonial governments (usually run by the British), and then struggled against the central governments left by the British and other colonial powers. These tribal societies have subsequently come under attack by the Taliban and al-Qaeda (whose growth was developed by the US in cooperation with Saudi Arabia and the Pakistani state), and then they continued to suffer under foreign occupations led by the United States, Britain and other NATO powers in Afghanistan and Iraq, destabilizing the entire Middle East and Central Asia.[34]<\/p>\n

Now, these tribal societies are being subjected to Obama\u2019s drone campaign of terror, \u201ccausing ferocious backlashes against central governments while destroying any positive image of the United States that may have once existed,\u201d noted Ahmed. In his op-ed, he concluded: \u201cThose at the receiving end of the strikes see them as unjust, immoral and dishonorable \u2013 killing innocent people who have never themselves harmed Americans while the drone operators sit safely halfway across the world, terrorizing and killing by remote control.\u201d[35]<\/p>\n

So why would the United States knowingly do this, and why target these specific groups? The answer may be that the U.S. is simply targeting so-called \u201clawless\u201d and \u201cstateless\u201d regions and peoples. In a world where states, corporations, and international organizations rule the day, with the United States perched atop the global hierarchy, the imperial concept of \u201corder\u201d reigns supreme, where the word \u2018order\u2019 is defined as control<\/i>. In a world experiencing increased unrest, protests, rebellions, revolutions and uprisings, \u201corder\u201d is under threat across the globe.<\/p>\n

For the American \u2018Mafia Godfather\u2019 Empire, control<\/i> must be established, through whatever means necessary. For, as the \u2018Mafia Principles\u2019<\/a> of international relations dictate: if one state, region, or people are able to \u201csuccessfully defy\u201d the Godfather\/Empire, then other states and people might try to do the same. This could potentially set off a \u201cdomino effect\u201d in which the U.S. and its Mafia capo Western allies rapidly lose control of the world. Thus, we have witnessed the United States and the West intimately involved in attempting to manage the \u2018transitions\u2019 taking place as a result of the Arab Spring, desperately seeking to not lose control of the incredibly important strategic region of the Arab world.<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, the technological capacity of American military force has reached new heights, with the global drone warfare as a major example. It allows the U.S. to reduce its use of large military forces being sent into combat, and thus reduces the domestic political pressure against foreign aggression and warfare. The drone program fits perfectly into Zbigniew Brzezinski\u2019s description in 2009 of how the major state powers of the world are at a stage where \u201cthe lethality of their military might is greater than ever.\u201d Yet, as Brzezinski elaborated, and as is evident in the case of the Arab Spring, the monumental political changes in Latin America over the past decade and a half, and the increased unrest of people around the world, the \u201ccapacity to impose control over the politically awakened masses of the world is at a historic low. To put it bluntly: in earlier times, it was easier to control one million people than to physically kill one million people; today, it is infinitely easier to kill one million people than to control one million people\u201d[36]<\/p>\n

Thus, we attempt a logical reasoning as to why the U.S. is targeting stateless tribal societies with its global terror campaign: if you can\u2019t control them, kill them<\/i>. Such a strategy obviously could not be publicly articulated to the population of a self-declared \u201cdemocratic\u201d society which congratulates itself on being a beacon for \u201cfreedom and liberty.\u201d Thus, political language is applied. As George Orwell wrote<\/a>, political language \u201cis designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.\u201d<\/p>\n

When it comes to Obama\u2019s drone terror campaign against stateless tribal societies, the political language is firmly rooted in the \u201cwar on terror.\u201d These people are deemed to be \u201cterror suspects,\u201d and so they are bombed and killed, their families and communities terrorized, and as a result, they become increasingly resentful and hateful toward the United States, thus leading to increased recruitment into terrorist organizations and an increased terror threat to the United States itself. Thus, the policy becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy: in terrorizing and bombing impoverished, stateless, tribal societies in the name of \u201cfighting terror,\u201d the U.S. creates<\/i> the terror threat that it uses to justify continued bombing. And thus, the war of terror <\/i>wages on.<\/p>\n

Some may find my use of the term \u201cterror campaign\u201d to refer to Obama\u2019s drone program as hyperbolic or emotive. But what else are we supposed to call a program that produces \u201cchaos and rage\u201d around the world, creating \u201cmore enemies than we are removing\u201d as it \u201cterrorizes men, women and children,\u201d so that when people think of America, \u201cthey think of the fear they feel at the drones over their heads\u201d? What do you call this when it has been launched against at least seven different countries in the past four years, killing thousands of people \u2013 including hundreds of innocent children \u2013 and targeting first responders, humanitarian workers, and funerals?<\/p>\n

By definition, this is terrorism. Obama\u2019s global flying-killer-robot-campaign is the implementation of the most technologically advanced terror campaign in history. The fact that Obama\u2019s terror war can continue holding any<\/i> public support \u2013 let alone a majority<\/i> of public support \u2013 is simply evidence of a public with little knowledge of the reality of the campaign, or the terror being inflicted upon people all over the world in their name.<\/p>\n

If the objective of U.S. policies were to counter or reduce the threat of terror, one would think that the U.S. would then stop participating<\/i> in terror. Obviously, that is not the case. Therefore, the objective is different from that which is articulated. As Orwell noted<\/a>, \u201cpolitical speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible,\u201d and that committing such horrific atrocities \u2013 such as dropping atomic bombs on cities, supporting genocide, civil wars or, in this case, waging a global campaign of terror \u2013 \u201ccan indeed be defended,\u201d added Orwell, \u201cbut only by arguments which are too brutal for most people to face.\u201d Thus, \u201cpolitical language has to consist largely of euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness.\u201d<\/p>\n

As Obama sought to justify his global terror campaign, he claimed that it has \u201csaved lives\u201d (except, presumably, for the thousands of lives it has claimed), that \u201cAmerica\u2019s actions are legal,\u201d and that, \u201cthis is a just war \u2013 a war wage proportionally, in last resort, and in self-defense.\u201d Perhaps the most poignant statement Obama made during his May 2013 speech was thus: \u201cthe decisions that we are making now will define the type of nation \u2013 and world \u2013 that we leave to our children.\u201d[37]<\/p>\n

So the question for Americans then, should be this: do you want to live in a nation \u2013 and world \u2013 which is defined <\/i>by the decision to wage a global campaign of terror upon multiple nations and regions, and tens of thousands of people around the world? Obama clearly has no problem with it, nor does the American foreign policy establishment, nor the media talking heads. But\u2026 do you?<\/i><\/p>\n

NOTES:<\/b><\/p>\n

[1] Zbigniew Brzezinski, \u201cMajor Foreign Policy Challenges for the Next US President,\u201d International Affairs, 85: 1, (2009), page 54.<\/p>\n

[2] Scott Wilson and Al Kamen, \u201c\u2018Global War On Terror\u2019 Is Given New Name,\u201d The Washington Post, 25 March 2009: http:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/wp-dyn\/content\/article\/2009\/03\/24\/AR2009032402818.html <\/a><\/p>\n

[3] Greg Miller, \u201cUnder Obama, an emerging global apparatus for drone killing,\u201d The Washington Post, 27 December 2011: http:\/\/articles.washingtonpost.com\/2011-12-27\/national\/35285416_1_drone-program-drone-campaign-lethal-operations <\/a><\/p>\n

[4] Jo Becker and Scott Shane, \u201cSecret \u2018Kill List\u2019 Proves a Test of Obama\u2019s Principles and Will,\u201d The New York Times, 29 May 2012: http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2012\/05\/29\/world\/obamas-leadership-in-war-on-al-qaeda.html?pagewanted=all <\/a><\/p>\n

[5] Greg Miller, \u201cPlan for hunting terrorists signals U.S. intends to keep adding names to kill lists,\u201d The Washington Post, 23 October 2012: http:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/world\/national-security\/plan-for-hunting-terrorists-signals-us-intends-to-keep-adding-names-to-kill-lists\/2012\/10\/23\/4789b2ae-18b3-11e2-a55c-39408fbe6a4b_story.html <\/a><\/p>\n

[6] Ibid.<\/p>\n

[7] Ibid.<\/p>\n

[8] Glenn Greenwald, \u201cObama moves to make the War on Terror permanent,\u201d The Guardian, 24 October 2012: http:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/commentisfree\/2012\/oct\/24\/obama-terrorism-kill-list <\/a><\/p>\n

[9] Glenn Greenwald, \u201cJoe Klein\u2019s sociopathic defense of drone killings of children,\u201d The Guardian, 23 October 2012: http:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/commentisfree\/2012\/oct\/23\/klein-drones-morning-joe?guni=Article:in%20body%20link <\/a><\/p>\n

[10] Glenn Greenwald, \u201cNew Stanford\/NYU study documents the civilian terror from Obama\u2019s drones,\u201d The Guardian, 25 September 2012: http:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/commentisfree\/2012\/sep\/25\/study-obama-drone-deaths <\/a><\/p>\n

[11] Glenn Greenwald, \u201cUS drone strikes target rescuers in Pakistan \u2013 and the west stays silent,\u201d The Guardian, 20 August 2012: http:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/commentisfree\/2012\/aug\/20\/us-drones-strikes-target-rescuers-pakistan?guni=Article:in%20body%20link <\/a><\/p>\n

[12] Glenn Greenwald, \u201cNew Stanford\/NYU study documents the civilian terror from Obama\u2019s drones,\u201d The Guardian, 25 September 2012: http:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/commentisfree\/2012\/sep\/25\/study-obama-drone-deaths <\/a><\/p>\n

[13] Glenn Greenwald, \u201cNew study proves falsity of John Brennan\u2019s drone claims,\u201d Salon, 19 July 2011: http:\/\/www.salon.com\/2011\/07\/19\/drones\/<\/a><\/p>\n

[14] Jo Becker and Scott Shane, \u201cSecret \u2018Kill List\u2019 Proves a Test of Obama\u2019s Principles and Will,\u201d The New York Times, 29 May 2012: http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2012\/05\/29\/world\/obamas-leadership-in-war-on-al-qaeda.html?pagewanted=all <\/a><\/p>\n

[15] Rob Crilly, \u201c168 children killed in drone strikes in Pakistan since start of campaign,\u201d The Telegraph, 11 August 2011: http:\/\/www.telegraph.co.uk\/news\/worldnews\/asia\/pakistan\/8695679\/168-children-killed-in-drone-strikes-in-Pakistan-since-start-of-campaign.html <\/a><\/p>\n

[16] Azam Ahmed, \u201cDrone and Taliban Attacks Hit Civilians, Afghans Say,\u201d 8 September 2013: http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2013\/09\/09\/world\/asia\/two-deadly-attacks-in-afghanistan.html <\/a><\/p>\n

[17] Noah Shachtman, \u201cMilitary Stats Reveal Epicenter of U.S. Drone War,\u201d Wired, 9 November 2012: http:\/\/www.wired.com\/dangerroom\/2012\/11\/drones-afghan-air-war\/<\/a><\/p>\n

[18] Peter Osborne, \u201cIt may seem painless, but drone war in Afghanistan is destroying the West\u2019s reputation,\u201d The Telegraph, 30 May 2012: http:\/\/www.telegraph.co.uk\/news\/worldnews\/asia\/afghanistan\/9300187\/It-may-seem-painless-but-drone-war-in-Afghanistan-is-destroying-the-Wests-reputation.html <\/a><\/p>\n

[19] Seumas Milne, \u201cAmerica\u2019s murderous drone campaign is fuelling terror,\u201d The Guardian, 29 May 2012: http:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/commentisfree\/2012\/may\/29\/americas-drone-campaign-terror <\/a><\/p>\n

[20] Owen Bowcott, \u201cDrone strikes threaten 50 years of international law, says UN rapporteur,\u201d The Guardian, 21 June 2012: http:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/world\/2012\/jun\/21\/drone-strikes-international-law-un <\/a><\/p>\n

[21] Paul Harris, \u201cDrone attacks create terrorist safe havens, warns former CIA official,\u201d The Guardian, 5 June 2012: http:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/world\/2012\/jun\/05\/al-qaida-drone-attacks-too-broad <\/a><\/p>\n

[22] Charlie Savage, \u201cDrone Strikes Turn Allies Into Enemies, Yemeni Says,\u201d The New York Times, 23 April 2013: http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2013\/04\/24\/world\/middleeast\/judiciary-panel-hears-testimony-on-use-of-drones.html <\/a><\/p>\n

[23] Elspeth Reeve, \u201cThe Scope of America\u2019s World War Drone,\u201d The Atlantic Wire, 6 February 2013: http:\/\/www.theatlanticwire.com\/politics\/2013\/02\/world-war-drone-map\/61873\/ <\/a><\/p>\n

[24] Akbar Ahmed and Frankie Martin, \u201cDeadly Drone Strike on Muslims in the Southern Philippines,\u201d 5 March 2012: http:\/\/www.brookings.edu\/research\/opinions\/2012\/03\/05-drones-philippines-ahmed <\/a><\/p>\n

[25] Raf Sanchez, \u201cUS \u2018to deploy drones to launch air strikes against al-Qaeda in Mali\u2019,\u201d The Telegraph, 2 October 2012: http:\/\/www.telegraph.co.uk\/news\/worldnews\/africaandindianocean\/mali\/9582612\/US-to-deploy-drones-to-launch-air-strikes-against-al-Qaeda-in-Mali.html <\/a><\/p>\n

[26] Craig Whitlock, \u201cU.S. troops arrive in Niger to set up drone base,\u201d The Washington Post, 22 February 2013: http:\/\/articles.washingtonpost.com\/2013-02-22\/world\/37233792_1_drone-base-drone-flights-qaeda <\/a><\/p>\n

[27] Craig Whitlock, \u201cDrone warfare: Niger becomes latest frontline in US war on terror,\u201d The Guardian, 26 March 2013: http:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/world\/2013\/mar\/26\/niger-africa-drones-us-terror <\/a><\/p>\n

[28] Jo Becker and Scott Shane, \u201cSecret \u2018Kill List\u2019 Proves a Test of Obama\u2019s Principles and Will,\u201d The New York Times, 29 May 2012: http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2012\/05\/29\/world\/obamas-leadership-in-war-on-al-qaeda.html?pagewanted=all <\/a><\/p>\n

[29] Conor Friedersdorf, \u201cHow Team Obama Justifies the Killing of a 16-Year-Old American,\u201d The Atlantic, 24 October 2012: http:\/\/www.theatlantic.com\/politics\/archive\/2012\/10\/how-team-obama-justifies-the-killing-of-a-16-year-old-american\/264028\/ <\/a><\/p>\n

[30] Glenn Greenwald, \u201cObama, the US and the Muslim world: the animosity deepens,\u201d The Guardian, 15 February 2013: http:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/commentisfree\/2013\/feb\/15\/us-obama-muslims-animosity-deepens <\/a><\/p>\n

[31] Glenn Greenwald, \u201cObama, the US and the Muslim world: the animosity deepens,\u201d The Guardian, 15 February 2013: http:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/commentisfree\/2013\/feb\/15\/us-obama-muslims-animosity-deepens <\/a><\/p>\n

[32] Glenn Greenwald, \u201cWashington gets explicit: its \u2018war on terror\u2019 is permanent,\u201d The Guardian, 17 May 2013: http:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/commentisfree\/2013\/may\/17\/endless-war-on-terror-obama <\/a><\/p>\n

[33] Akbar Ahmed, \u201cThe Drone War Is Far From Over,\u201d The New York Times, 30 may 2013: http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2013\/05\/31\/opinion\/the-drone-war-is-far-from-over.html <\/a><\/p>\n

[34] Ibid.<\/p>\n

[35] Ibid.<\/p>\n

[36] Zbigniew Brzezinski, \u201cMajor Foreign Policy Challenges for the Next US President,\u201d International Affairs, 85: 1, (2009), page 54.<\/p>\n

[37] Barack Obama, \u201cAs Delivered: Obama\u2019s Speech on Terrorism,\u201d The Wall Street Journal\u2019s Washington Wire, 23 May 2013: http:\/\/blogs.wsj.com\/washwire\/2013\/05\/23\/prepared-text-obamas-speech-on-terrorism\/ <\/a><\/p>\n

__________________________<\/i><\/p>\n

Andrew Gavin Marshall is a 26-year old researcher and writer based in Montreal, Canada. He is Project Manager of The People\u2019s Book Project, chair of the Geopolitics Division of The Hampton Institute, research director for Occupy.com\u2019s Global Power Project, and hosts a weekly podcast show with BoilingFrogsPost. <\/i><\/p>\n

Go to Original \u2013 andrewgavinmarshall.com<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Under the administration of Barack Obama, America is waging a global terror campaign through the use of drones, killing thousands of people, committing endless war crimes, creating fear and terror in a program expected to last several more decades. Welcome to Obama\u2019s War OF Terror.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[50],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-35601","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-analysis"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/35601","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=35601"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/35601\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=35601"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=35601"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=35601"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}