I don't buy the black-and-white picture, which is trying to sell the US administration, on which the evil Russians want to destroy the world, and brave American heroes,who defense it.
Is the contemporary hero a drone operator sitting behind a desk in San Diego, who with the effectiveness of 1 to 10 hit the terrorist, and then goes home for a dinner.
What is the credibility of the Obama administration, as critic of Russia's actions in Syria after US forces shelled a hospital in Afghanistan, killing dozens of people and making it even more appalling - do not recognize this as a crime.
Did US intelligence, leading American politicians have any right to judge the foreign policy of other countries after famous fake accusations of Iraq about weapons of mass destruction and ties to terrorist Al-Qaeda, which ended in attack on Iraq.
What right to teach others about human rights issues have finally Americans, after the disclosure of investigation methods in Guantanamo?
These are just a few of many examples of how Western leaders often portrayed as defenders of peace and democracy, use methods complying with international law and, above all, true and simple decency. So lets look more deeply at this examples.
1. Drones. In April 2016 at the meeting at University of Chicago Barack Obama was asked: "How are these killings morally and legally justified, and what kind of message does this drone program sends about American values to the world, the American people, and to law students like myself who refuse to put trust in an opaque process " It should be emphasize that this is a question not only to the President of the United States, but also the Nobel Peace Prize Laureate. Barak Obama did not answer this question directly, but facts speak instead of words.
Numerous reports during the Obama Administration describe a pattern in which a missile fired from a U.S. drone hits an area, bystanders rush to the scene to help the wounded, and the drone, still overhead, kills the rescuers. On other occasions, drones have struck at funerals of drone-strike victims. Credible reports of civilian casualties are common Intercept reported. “Between January 2012 and February 2013 U.S. special operations airstrikes killed more than 200 people. Of those, only 35 were the intended targets. During one five-month period of the operation, according to the documents, nearly 90 percent of the people killed in airstrikes were not the intended targets.” That’s one campaign of many in just one country where drone killings happen."
The Guardian in 2014 writes:"A new analysis of the data available to the public about drone strikes, conducted by the human-rights group Reprieve, indicates that even when operators target specific individuals – the most focused effort of what Barack Obama calls “targeted killing” – they kill vastly more people than their targets, often needing to strike multiple times. Attempts to kill 41 men resulted in the deaths of an estimated 1,147 people.
In May 2016 David Kilculen and Andrew Axum wrote in NYT that drone strike in Pakistan "have killed about 14 terrorist leaders. But, according to Pakistani sources, they have also killed some 700 civilians. This is 50 civilians for every militant killed, a hit rate of 2 percent."
2. The raids on civilian targets. The armed forces of the United States October 3, 2015 year in the night for over an hour strafed from the air heavy weapons hospital in the city of Kunduz in Afghanistan, breaking humanitarian standards. During the attack, the Americans had killed at least 42 people - doctors, other staff, patients and their families, adults and children - and wounded 37 people. Hospital building was clearly marked. US forces knew his address and GPS coordinates. During the attack the representatives of Doctors Without Borders has repeatedly informed the American command about ongoing massacre.
In April 2016 years the Pentagon decided that raid on the hospital in Kunduz was not a war crime, but a human error combined with technical problems. Pentagon imposed on 16 officers and soldiers of disciplinary punishment mandatory training, written reprimands, removal from command and the like, while the processes before the UN International Criminal Tribunal in The Hague could result in life imprisonment, and before the American martial court - the death penalty.
3.False Pretenses - President Bush and seven top officials of his administration waged a carefully orchestrated campaign of misinformation about Saddam Hussein's and Iraq.
Before the invasion of Iraq, President George W. Bush and seven members of his cabinet 935 times spoke false statements about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's regime - according to a published report by the Center for Public Integrity.
Center for Public Integrity analyzed the 935 comments of the eight most important people in the country, including the Bush administration, the adviser to the National Security Condoleezza Rice, Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of State Colin Powell. A study entitled "False Pretenses" can be found at www.publicintegrity.org/WarCard/. Almost five years after the US invasion of Iraq exhaustive research archives showed that the statements were part of an organized campaign, which provoked public opinion and ultimately led the country to war induced by false pretexts.
4.Guantanamo prison - because of their nature, and in particular on the continued detention of prisoners without trial and the use of torture during interrogations, there are opinions, mainly community of human rights defenders, that in fact Guantanamo prison meets the definition of a concentration camp.
In 2005 Vice-President Dick Cheney dismissed accusations That the camp was, in the words of one Red Cross report, a place of "Humiliating acts." He said of the prisoners, "They're living in the tropics. They're well fed. They've got everything they could possibly want. There is not any other nation in the world That would treat people who were determined to kill Americans the way we're treating these people. "
Among the methods of torture and humiliation of detainees there were beatings, long-term holding in isolation, sensory deprivation, sleep deprivation or light, prolonged interrogation, baiting dogs, forced prolonged stay in uncomfortable positions, to interfere in prayer and insulting religious objects, like the Koran. The use of torture has also confirmed the FBI report
During his first campaign, Barack Obama has announced the closure of the prison, but for 8 years to exercise their function of President of the United States has not done so.
One might say now, all of the above is true, but it is not the United States who occupy the Crimea and eastern Ukraine. However, the attitude to the world of the two superpowers isn't similar? In the US, public opinion was deeply concerned about the arrest Nadia Savchenko, Russia speaks about tortures in Guantanamo. Russia took Crimea arguing that needs to defend Crimea people, same did Bush about Iraq - he was saving Iraqi people and the Western world from the dictator. The main difference is the actual economic and military potential.
No comments:
Post a Comment