Secret CIA drone base in Saudi Arabia revealed

[BeyondTheNow]

I don't have a thorough enough understanding of the politics involved, nor the specific reasoning as to why a news source--any news source--within the US would publish this type of information.  I have my own thoughts on the subject, but I am not in a place to substantiate them other than the fact that they're simply my opinion.  I don't have education/employment relevant to the subject matter and I'm not a US citizen, which I feel would offer different insight into the matter altogether.  Doesn't information such as this greatly hinder what the US Military/CIA is trying to accomplish in this specific conflict? Is it simply making news because of certain thoughts about drone strikes in general? I don't understand why sensitive information would be made public in a situation like this--I know this isn't the first time and won't be the last, but I struggle with this level of reporting. I'd really enjoy any insight/views others can offer who are more aware of these types of publications than I am.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2013/02/06/cia-saudi.html


NEW
Secret CIA drone base in Saudi Arabia revealed
Location of base first disclosed by New York Times Tuesday night
The Associated Press
Last Updated: Feb 06, 2013 7:08 ET

The construction of the drone base was reported in June 2011 but withheld the exact location at the request of senior administration officials Kirsty Wigglesworth/Associated Press

The CIA conducts lethal drone strikes against al-Qaeda militants inside Yemen from a remote base in Saudi Arabia, including the strike that killed the U.S.-born al-Qaeda operative Anwar al-Awlaki.

The location of the base was first disclosed by The New York Times online Tuesday night.

The Associated Press first reported the construction of the base in June 2011 but withheld the exact location at the request of senior administration officials. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because portions of the military and CIA missions in Yemen are classified.

Any operation by U.S. military or intelligence officials inside Saudi Arabia is politically and religiously sensitive. Al-Qaeda and other militant groups have used the Gulf kingdom's close working relationship with U.S. counterterrorism officials to stir internal dissent against the Saudi regime.
© The Canadian Press 2013

 

[Conz]

Does anyone see a problem with government (non-military) officials conducting attacks without the same training, role, socialization and position as military personnel? Should these exercises remain within the confines of military roles, or should agencies such as the CIA be free to do so?

 

[Remius]

My uneducated guess would be that likely many of these "officials" have had the appropriate training and socialisation similar to military folks.  In fact I'm willing to bet real money that many of them are ex military or even seconded specialists.

But my guess remains uneducated and speculative.  I'll leave it at that.

 

[57Chevy]

"Location of base first disclosed by New York Times Tuesday night"

Secret New York Times marketing method also revealed 

 

[cupper]

AND it is just a mere coincidence that the new Director of the CIA, who was a big proponent of the drone program, and redition programs from the Bush era, has his senate confirmation hearing tomorrow.

Just as it is a coincidence that various human rights groups and the media are calling for the release of docs showing what the current administration has done regarding the drone program, the kill list and rendition programs.

Or am I just being naive? :sarcasm:

 

[cupper]

My uneducated guess would be that likely many of these "officials" have had the appropriate training and socialisation similar to military folks.  In fact I'm willing to bet real money that many of them are ex military or even seconded specialists.

But my guess remains uneducated and speculative.  I'll leave it at that.

Does anyone see a problem with government (non-military) officials conducting attacks without the same training, role, socialization and position as military personnel? Should these exercises remain within the confines of military roles, or should agencies such as the CIA be free to do so?

Not to throw fuel on the fire, but I just heard a discussion indication that there is a movement within the intel and military higher levels to move the CIA out of the killer drone business and turn it back over to the military side with more oversight taking place.

AND it is just a mere coincidence that the new Director of the CIA, who was a big proponent of the drone program, and redition programs from the Bush era, has his senate confirmation hearing tomorrow.

Just as it is a coincidence that various human rights groups and the media are calling for the release of docs showing what the current administration has done regarding the drone program, the kill list and rendition programs.

Or am I just being naive? :sarcasm:

Apparently the administration announced tonight that it will immediately release to select members of congress the official statement and justification memo on the kill list.

 

[BeyondTheNow]

Does anyone see a problem with government (non-military) officials conducting attacks without the same training, role, socialization and position as military personnel? Should these exercises remain within the confines of military roles, or should agencies such as the CIA be free to do so?

Brennen speaks a little on this towards the end of the article. The article itself is slightly off topic, but thought you may appreciate what it mentions regarding your question. I would have been interested to hear more on his stance.


http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2013/02/07/drone-hearing-john-brennan.html


Drone report to be released ahead of CIA hearing
Senators to receive classified report providing rationale for drone strikes
The Associated Press
Last Updated: Feb 07, 2013 12:14 ET

A memo leaked this week says it is legal for the U.S. government to kill U.S. citizens abroad if it believes they are senior al-Qaeda leaders continually engaged in operations aimed at killing Americans. Eric D. Warren/U.S. Marine Corps/Reuters


White House counterterrorism advisor John Brennan has defended the use of drone strikes but disavowed the harsh interrogation techniques used when he was at the CIA. Kevin Lamarque/Reuters

RELATED PHOTOS

Drone military aircraft around the world

U.S. President Barack Obama's choice to head the Central Intelligence Agency faces a Senate intelligence committee confirmation hearing just hours after lawmakers are expected to receive a classified report providing the rationale for drone strikes targeting Americans working with al-Qaeda overseas.

John Brennan, the White House counterterrorism chief and Obama's nominee to run the nation's spy agency, helped manage the drone program. The confirmation hearing Thursday sets the stage for a public airing of some of the most controversial programs in the covert war on al-Qaeda, from the deadly drone strikes to the CIA's use of interrogation techniques like waterboarding during former president George W. Bush's administration.

Obama directed the Justice Department to provide access to the secret document to members of the Senate and House intelligence committees, an administration official said Wednesday. Democratic California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the Senate committee's chairman, said the legal opinion would be provided to her committee by Thursday morning.

Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden, a committee member who had pressed the administration to provide the opinion, left open the possibility he might still try to block Brennan's nomination. He said turning over the opinion was a good first step.

"I'm committed to making sure that we get all the facts," Wyden said on NBC's Today show. "Early this morning, I'm going to be going in to read the opinion. We'll go from there."

Wyden said "there are still substantial questions" about how the administration justifies and plans drone strikes. "The Founding Fathers thought the president should have significant power in the national security arena. But there have to be checks and balances," Wyden said. "You can't just skirt those checks and balances if you think it's inconvenient."

An unclassified memo leaked this week says it is legal for the government to kill U.S. citizens abroad if it believes they are senior al-Qaeda leaders continually engaged in operations aimed at killing Americans, even if there is no evidence of a specific imminent attack.

That unclassified memo is based on classified advice from the Office of Legal Counsel that is being made available to the intelligence committees' members, the official said. The official was not authorized to speak publicly about the decision and requested anonymity.

Brennan defends strikes

Brennan laid out the administration's policy for targeting al-Qaeda with lethal drone strikes ahead of the hearing, defending the use of such strikes but disavowing the harsh interrogation techniques used when he was at the CIA.

In answers to pre-hearing questions released Wednesday by the Senate Intelligence Committee, Brennan said no further legislation was necessary to conduct operations against al-Qaeda wherever it's operating.

Brennan answered some of his critics who charged him with backing the detention and interrogation policy while he served at the CIA. Those allegations stymied his attempt to head the intelligence agency when the Obama administration began in 2009.

Brennan said in his written answers that he was "aware of the program but did not play a role in its creation, execution, or oversight." He added that he "had significant concerns and personal objections" to the interrogation techniques and voiced those objections to colleagues at the agency privately.

Brennan went on to describe how individuals are targeted for drone strikes, saying whether a suspect is deemed an imminent threat — and therefore appropriate for targeting — is made "on a case-by-case basis through a coordinated interagency process" involving intelligence, military, diplomatic and other agencies.

Human rights and civil liberties groups have decried the methods for targeting terror suspects, especially U.S. citizens.

Brennan says civilian deaths 'exceedingly rare'

Brennan defended the missile strikes by unmanned Predator or Reaper drones as a more humane form of war, but he acknowledged "instances when, regrettably and despite our best efforts, civilians have been killed."

"It is exceedingly rare, and much rarer than many allege," he added.

Aides have portrayed Brennan as cautious in the use of drones, restraining others at the CIA or military who would use them more often, even though as the White House's counterterror adviser, he has presided over an explosion of drone strikes in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia. Fewer than 50 strikes took place during the Bush administration while more than 360 strikes have been launched under Obama, according to the website The Long War Journal, which tracks the operations.

Administration officials say Brennan would further limit the use of drones by the CIA and leave the majority of strikes to the military. Brennan signaled in his written answers that he would not seek to expand the CIA's paramilitary operations.

"While the CIA needs to maintain a paramilitary capability … the CIA should not be used, in my view, to carry out traditional military activities," Brennan wrote, referring to activities like the special operations raid that killed al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.

The CIA's drone strikes primarily focus on al-Qaeda and Taliban targets in the tribal regions of Pakistan, while the military has launched strikes against al-Qaeda targets in Yemen and Somalia.

Brennan said he would work to improve the CIA's intelligence collection and performance across the Arab world after a spate of unanticipated unrest, from the revolts of the Arab Spring to the attack that killed the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans in Benghazi, Libya.
© The Canadian Press 2013

 

[Conz]

BeyondTheNow, thanks for sharing that article. I found it very interesting.