Comment by ceejayoz
2 years ago
Shades of https://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/world/obamas-leadership-i....
> It is also because Mr. Obama embraced a disputed method for counting civilian casualties that did little to box him in. It in effect counts all military-age males in a strike zone as combatants, according to several administration officials, unless there is explicit intelligence posthumously proving them innocent.
> Counterterrorism officials insist this approach is one of simple logic: people in an area of known terrorist activity, or found with a top Qaeda operative, are probably up to no good. “Al Qaeda is an insular, paranoid organization — innocent neighbors don’t hitchhike rides in the back of trucks headed for the border with guns and bombs,” said one official, who requested anonymity to speak about what is still a classified program.
In the case of Al Qaeda, that might actually have been true? I don't think you can really compare Hamas to Al Qaeda; almost everything meaningful is different.
> In the case of Al Qaeda, that might actually have been true?
Very clearly not, as admitted by the man himself. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/obama-says-u-s-drone-stri...
That doesn't mention Al Qaeda? It just talks about drone strikes against ISIS, which is yet again quite a different organisation than Al Qaeda and Hamas.
3 replies →