UN investigator warns US on use of drones (targeted executions may violate international law)

AP on Yahoo ^ | 10/27/09 | Edith M. Lederer - ap

[NormsRevenge]

UNITED NATIONS – A U.N. human rights investigator warned the United States Tuesday that its use of unmanned warplanes to carry out targeted executions may violate international law.

Philip Alston said that unless the Obama administration explains the legal basis for targeting particular individuals and the measures it is taking to comply with international humanitarian law which prohibits arbitrary executions, "it will increasingly be perceived as carrying out indiscriminate killings in violation of international law."

Alston, the U.N. Human Rights Council's investigator on extrajudicial, summary and arbitrary executions, raised the issue of U.S. Predator drones in a report to the General Assembly's human rights committee and at a news conference afterwards, saying he has become increasingly concerned at the dramatic increase in their use, especially in Afghanistan and Pakistan, since June.

He said the U.S. response — that the Geneva-based council and the General Assembly have no role in relation to killings during an armed conflict — "is simply untenable."

[americanophile]

"it will increasingly be perceived as carrying out indiscriminate killings in violation of international law."

Meanwhile open genocide occurs in Sudan with nary a word from the U.N.

[americanophile]

...I like the quote, do you have a reference?

[TheCornerOffice]

Headlines we’ll never see...

“UN investigator warns Taliban on use of brainwashed, walking dead suicide drones.”

[Rutles4Ever]

The UN only approves of manned combat aircraft, for example, United Airlines Flight 93 and American Airlines Flight 11.

[Ben Ficklin]

"At least GW would have said":

These attacks fall under the category of pre-emption(Bush Doctrine) and the the US's legal right to use pre-emption was settled long ago. That legal right is found in the UN Charter.

[Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!]

I am beyond disgusted.

[dfwgator]

Or what, they will send us an angry letter?

[Ultra Sonic 007]

Maybe they just have a different thought about Terminator?

But in all seriousness UN...come on.

[WOBBLY BOB]

So it’s ok to shoot Taliban in the face with a shotgun ,but a hellfire from a drone is extra naughty?

..makes sense.

[lentulusgracchus]

The UN only approves of manned combat aircraft, for example, United Airlines Flight 93 and American Airlines Flight 11.

Yeah, you'd think they guy they'd want to interview is Dipshit up there in his cave with his buddy Loudmouth.

But no, the U.S. is the easy beef, isn't it?

[magellan]

As far as I know, targeted killings are allowed in war. Prohibitions against political assassinations generally apply in peacetime. Political and military leaders are legitimate targets in wartime, and targeted killings/political assassinations ("decapitation" strikes) are legit in conventional war if they are necessary to accomplish military objectives, and do not prevent the enemy from surrendering and therefore potentially cause the war to continue longer than necessary.

See Operation Vengeance in WW II.

[SoldierDad]

The U.S. needs to warn the U.N. to STFU and mind their own affairs or we’ll start targeting the U.N.

[Riley]

Philip Alston said that unless the Obama administration explains the legal basis for targeting particular individuals and the measures it is taking to comply with international humanitarian law which prohibits arbitrary executions, "it will increasingly be perceived as carrying out indiscriminate killings in violation of international law."

So 'targeting particular individuals' equals 'indiscriminate killings'.

These people are so backward, they can't even get their bullshit straight.

Fine Phil, since you're making an issue of it, why don't we go back to World War Two-style carpet-bombing. Would that be okay with you?

Alternately, if you really just have some issue with us taking out some seriously nasty people- then why don't you just say that?

[pillut48]

Is it just me, or is there a big hunk of irony here??

[The Pack Knight]

It’s absurd. We should just say we’re targeting their cars and cell-phones. Material assets are always legitimate targets.

[TChris]

This is a nice "rock and a hard place" sort of situation they're trying to put us in:

1) You kill too indiscriminately! Civilians are dying! Be more selective in whom you kill during a war!

2) You kill to selectively! That's "targeted execution"!

It's WAY past time for the UN to pack up and go home. Like the League of Nations before it, the United Nations is an abysmal failure.

[TChris]

Gaaah!

"to selectively" = "too selectively"

*sheesh*

[Wisconsinlady]

I wish the UN building was the next one taken down.

[444Flyer]

I carry a Drone because I can't carry a Sniper.

[Red in Blue PA]

Perhaps we can modify the drones to drop candy and a stern message to the terrorists?