By Robin Hensel and Coleen Rowley
International Peace Movement
New information about drone operations contradicts
the Sept. 23 op-ed piece by Col. Scott A. St. Sauver, commander of Camp
Ripley. In his essay, written to deflect public criticism of so-called
unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), Col. St. Sauver claimed that UAS may
“be used to increase efficiency, save money, enhance safety and even
save lives.” But as worldwide drone attacks escalate, more and more
citizens are questioning the ethics and legality of the drone program,
and realizing just how counterproductive it is in the long run.
St. Sauver denied that National Guard members are trained to operate
armed Predator drones for offensive purposes at Camp Ripley. However, he
did not deny that his base’s smaller surveillance drones take part in
lethal missions on the “battlefield” – which now encompasses at least
six countries.
Although the program is shrouded in secrecy, it is known that drone
strikes are highly collaborative efforts involving teams of people at
various bases across the world. In fact, hundreds of personnel,
including high-paid Blackwater (or whatever the company is now called)
mercenaries, may be involved in a single strike, undercutting the
argument that the program is inexpensive.
Click here for the continuation of this article from November 17, 2012
