アメリカ合衆国は、特殊部隊を敵国に派遣し、テロリスト容疑者を暗殺するかわりに、遠隔無線殺人飛行機のdronesを飛して,容疑者を暗殺する。パキスタンでは無線殺人飛行機でやく3000人が暗殺される。容疑者以外の無知の市民も含む。
ANÁLISIS
Las trampas de la guerra contra el terrorismo
El uso de 'drones' como alternativa a la invasión de un país y el envío de comandos especiales
Antonio Caño Washington 7 FEB 2013 - 18:57 CET
ANALYSIS
Traps of the war on terrorism
The use of 'drones' as an alternative to the invasion of a country and sending special commands
Antonio Cano Washington 7 FEB 2013 - 18:57 CET
The offensive against Al Qaeda launched after the attacks of September 11, 2001 has put the U.S. on several pitfalls that have undermined its reputation and undermined its rule of law. Guantanamo, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, kidnappings of suspects, torture, secret prisons and the role assumed by the CIA in military operations are direct consequences of a format war and outstanding features.
Barack Obama tried to eliminate those traps, and partially succeeded, though Guantanamo still exists and the militarization of the CIA has not diminished, but fell into another equally dangerous: the use of drones (unmanned aircraft) to eliminate the top leaders terrorists, which entails the use of selective executions without judicial supervision and the deaths of innocent actions that, by their nature, are huge risk of causing what is known as collateral damage. It is estimated that more than 3,000 people have died in Pakistan only drone attacks, obviously not all of them members of Al Qaeda.
Now, despite the criticism unleashed against these methods, it is not easy to get out of that trap. If the U.S. intends to continue acting against members of an organization with clear intention to harm American interests, only three ways: with the invasion of the country in which they are, by sending commands to kill or arrest suspects -although the arrest is complicated because there are no roads for processing in U.S. territory, or the use of drones.
The first is an option ruled out by the current administration. For the other two, a command was the method chosen to kill Osama bin Laden, an occasion that prevailed will certify that the victim was actually the founder of Al Qaeda, which would not have been possible with a bombardment. But the intervention of a command assumes the risk of loss of life among some of its members or errors or unforeseen circumstances that trigger more complex military situations.
Despite criticism unleashed against these methods, it is not easy to get out of the trap.
In the case of drones, the U.S. risk is minimal. All that can happen is that the device is thrown and the secrets of their technology falling into enemy hands. The danger of drones is a moral and legal. Moral as limiting the chances of Barack Obama to act internationally as a promoter of peace and opens a new concept of war facing a future in which many more countries, including China, have such weapons.
Since the U.S. is not going to give up fight Al Qaeda, is imposed as clearly mark the limits possible for the use of drones and intervention in the process of Congress and the courts, something that existing channels could be used.
0 件のコメント:
コメントを投稿