Who knew that it would become a regrettable cost of doing business in our new age! The drone wars are on:
The strikes have cast a pall of fear over an area that was once a free zone for Al Qaeda and the Taliban, forcing militants to abandon satellite phones and large gatherings in favor of communicating by courier and moving stealthily in small groups, they said.
The drones, operated by the C.I.A., fly overhead sometimes four at a time, emitting a beelike hum virtually 24 hours a day, observing and tracking targets, then unleashing missiles on their quarry, they said.
Sure, innocent civilians die. But the article gives the context that makes it ok, talking to locals to see the strikes:
Two of the government supporters said they knew of civilians, including friends, who had been killed by being in the wrong place at the wrong time. But, they said, they are prepared to sacrifice the civilians if it means North Waziristan will be rid of the militants, in particular the Arabs.
“On balance, the drones may have killed 100, 200, 500 civilians,” said one of the men. “If you look at the other guys, the Arabs and the kidnappings and the targeted killings, I would go for the drones.”
The soothing balms of hope and change cure even the problem of perhaps 500 dead civilians.
I'm sure that if McCain had won in 2008, and Palin was defending the drone strikes, the Times would have had the same epiphany over the death of civilians in war. Where once they might have pressed for war crime trials, now the Times goes for the drones.
