The Predictable and Inevitable Blowback
Friday 14 May 2010
by: David Sirota, t r u t h o u t | Op-Ed
Imagine, if you can, an alternate universe.
Imagine that in this alternate universe, a foreign military power begins flying remote-controlled warplanes over your town, using on-board missiles to kill hundreds of your innocent neighbors.
Now imagine that when you read the newspaper about this ongoing bloodbath, you learn that the foreign nation's top general is nonchalantly telling reporters that his troops are also killing "an amazing number" of your cultural brethren in an adjacent country. Imagine further learning that this foreign power is expanding the drone attacks on your community despite the attacks' well-known record of killing innocents. And finally, imagine that when you turn on your television, you see the perpetrator nation's tuxedo-clad leader cracking stand-up comedy jokes about drone strikes -- jokes that prompt guffaws from an audience of that nation's elite.
Ask yourself: How would you and your fellow citizens respond? Would you call homegrown militias mounting a defense "patriots" or would you call them "terrorists"? Would you agree with your leaders when they angrily tell reporters that violent defiance should be expected?
Fortunately, most Americans don't have to worry about these queries in their own lives. But how we answer them in a hypothetical thought experiment provides us insight into how Pakistanis are likely feeling right now. Why? Because thanks to our continued drone assaults on their country, Pakistanis now confront these issues every day. And if they answer these questions as many of us undoubtedly would in a similar situation -- well, that should trouble every American in this age of asymmetrical warfare.
Though we don't like to call it mass murder, the U.S. government's undeclared drone war in Pakistan is devolving into just that. As noted by a former counterinsurgency adviser to Gen. David Petraeus and a former Army officer in Afghanistan, the operation has become a haphazard massacre.
"Press reports suggest that over the last three years drone strikes have killed about 14 terrorist leaders," David Kilcullen and Andrew Exum wrote in 2009. "But, according to Pakistani sources, they have also killed some 700 civilians. This is 50 civilians for every militant killed."
Making matters worse, Gen. Stanley McChrystal has, indeed, told journalists that in Afghanistan, U.S. troops have "shot an amazing number of people" and "none has proven to have been a real threat." Meanwhile, President Obama used his internationally televised speech at the White House Correspondents Dinner to jest about drone warfare -- and the assembled Washington glitterati did, in fact, reward him with approving laughs.
By eerie coincidence, that latter display of monstrous insouciance occurred on the same night as the failed effort to raze Times Square. Though America reacted to that despicable terrorism attempt with its routine spasms of cartoonish shock (why do they hate us?!), the assailant's motive was anything but baffling. As "This is a blowback," said Pakistan's foreign minister, Shah Mehmood Qureshi. "This is a reaction. And you could expect that ... let's not be naive."
Obviously, regardless of rationale, a "reaction" that involves trying to incinerate civilians in Manhattan is abhorrent and unacceptable. But so is Obama's move to intensify drone assaults that we know are regularly incinerating innocent civilians in Pakistan. And while Qureshi's statement about "expecting" blowback seems radical, he's merely echoing the CIA's reminder that "possibilities of blowback" arise when we conduct martial operations abroad.
We might remember that somehow-forgotten warning come the next terrorist assault. No matter how surprised we may feel after that inevitable (and inevitably deplorable) attack, the fact remains that until we halt our own indiscriminately violent actions, we ought to expect equally indiscriminate and equally violent reactions.
David Sirota is the author of the best-selling books "Hostile Takeover" and "The Uprising." He hosts the morning show on AM760 in Colorado and blogs at OpenLeft.com. E-mail him at ds@davidsirota.com or follow him on Twitter @davidsirota.
Copyright 2010 Creators.com
All republished content that appears on Truthout has been obtained by permission or license.



Comments
This forum is moderated by software. Please allow up to 15 minutes for your comments to go live and avoid posting the same comment multiple times.
Americans CANNOT see
Fri, 05/14/2010 - 10:04 — Anonarcmous (not verified)Americans CANNOT see themselves as the badguys. Granted a few times, we have been the goodguys, but that does not make us goodguys forevermore.USGOHOME.As a ture corporation, the US has figured we can absorb the terrorism & continue on for profits, sorta like the FordPinto analogy.
It's time for a new
Fri, 05/14/2010 - 13:27 — radline9 (not verified)It's time for a new conspiracy theory. We are creating terrorists on purpose because terrorism makes so much goddamn money for the rich in this country. Your right, that is not a new theory.
I get a little tired of t
Fri, 05/14/2010 - 17:59 — Anonymous (not verified)I get a little tired of t his type of article. Who's this "we, white man?" the people who opposed the invasions of Afghanistan & Iraq from the beginning? Who predicted Iraq would not be, as Wolfowitz testified, a "cakewalk" (or was it Perle?) but thought it would be a quagmire?
Yes, this was predictable. Yes, some Americans saw it coming and yes, some of us understand what blowback, and tried to say, no, no, let's not go there, did say, but who in power cared? And we did so even without the wonderful authority (maybe the CIA could take its own advice?) of the CIA and a Pakistani leader telling us so. Let's see, the Pakistanis are the nation w/the scientist who sold nuclear secrets to just about anyone, isn't it?
No one's blameless. But I continue to wonder just what it is I'm supposed to do. Protest the invasion of Iraq? Did it. Continued to write & called my elected representatives re: Iraq, Afghanistan, destroying the Constitution, destroying the environment and why was the US building huge permanent bases in Iraq? Yep, did lots of good. Not in favor of Obama's caandidacy because I don't think Harvard law is the be all & end all of the legal profession or anything else, in addition anyone from Chicago politics (or Cook county) bears a burden of implied corruption & association w/machine politics that person carries, imo, the burden of proof t odemonstrate tha the/she is not a part of that. Obama did not do so as far as I was concerned--and now it seems that he's well hooked into the oligarchic financial elite--he has his chance to accomplish something i.e., something in return for those TARP funds, and he didn't.
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss, maybe a tad bit more environmentally oriented but otherwise, same same, it's ok to imprison someone indefinitely w/no fair trial, et. OK to kowtow to the financial elite, socialize the losses, privatize the gains.
So, just what are people supposed to do? Be so struck by the "exciting new truths" of this article & rush out & change the world? The US? Great, tell us how.
I share the same frustration
Mon, 05/17/2010 - 10:24 — Anonymous (not verified)I share the same frustration as "I get a little tired," and I think that poster has his/her heart in the right place, doing many of the things a good citizen should. But I think articles like this are in the right direction and welcome them, and there are plenty of more things that poster can do, such as continuing to spread the word and links to articles such as this, sending more money to honest organizations that poster deems worthwhile, and even giving time to the activities of such organizations. This is a difficult fight, and we may not even be successful, but it's well worth the effort, hopefully for us, and for generations to come.
Not aware of Obama's joking
Sat, 07/24/2010 - 21:11 — Anonymous (not verified)Not aware of Obama's joking about this totally diabolical weapon system, still repelled by his continuing to develop larger and more effective versions. A truthout article I can no longer find told of multi-bombs capable of tracking many victims trying to escape--while an unknown technician succeeds in murdering these UNTRIED "enemies" with a few clicks. I see it as capable of assassinating the leaders of any or all countries that hold resources wanted by our oligarchs--why have there been no efforts to have its use outlawed by the United Nations?