2009 Nobel Peace Prize winner, President Barack Obama, has been credited with ending American wars both in Iraq and Afghanistan. Much to the delight of the war-weary American voters, Obama campaigned on the promise to end such "senseless wars." Politics aside, the 2008 election was not only beautifully historic, but the promises made by Obama to focus on seriously neglected domestic issues such as immigration and healthcare reform also instilled a sense of optimism and hope within the psyche of the American public.
As promised, Obama was able to pass comprehensive healthcare reform and he is well on his way to address the "broken" immigration system via executive action much to the dismay of his naysayers. But has President Obama really ended wars, as promised? President Bush will be forever known as a "war-time" President for his role in leading the nation to wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. President Obama, on the other hand, is credited with ENDING wars but should he instead be considered a war-time president?
Only a year into his presidency, Obama won the prestigious Nobel Peace Prize "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples." Already viewed as an absolute "rock star" by the Democratic party, Obama seemed well on his way to an amazing run to "fundamentally change" America. A lot has changed since 2009, including Obama's approval rating. Critics of his policies and actions have multiplied and one of the most recent critiques comes from a surprising source. The most recent recipient of the Nobel Peace Price, Malala Yousafzai, has criticized Obama for "arming the world." Instead of "sending teachers," he sends troops. Malala Yousafzai is well-known for her undying efforts for education activism; she nearly lost her life for the cause in 2012 when a Taliban militant shot her three times. Why does Yousafzai feel the need to criticize a fellow Nobel Peace Prize winner? The answer if pretty simple: violence.
President Obama, according to journalists Mark Helperin and John Heilemann, once told White House aides the he is "good at killing people" while discussing drone strikes. If true, such actions are a far-cry from the ambitions of a Nobel Peace Prize winner. Is President Barack Obama really "good at killing people?" The facts may absolutely shock you.
The United States has used military operations to kill thousands of "suspected terrorists" under the guise of "national security" since 9/11. The United States refuses to operate under its own premise that suspects are "innocent" until proven "guilty" when it comes to citizens from other countries. And the results are utterly devastating. Imagine your wedding day being destroyed by a drone strike, killing 10 members of your wedding party. Imagine your brothers and sisters being killed while walking alongside a road as a drone strike takes out three vehicles as well as several innocent bystanders in its path. Well, this is simply reality for citizens of Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia. And it's disgusting, sad, and simply unbelievable.
Since 2008, Obama has ordered 351 drone strikes, killing between 2,387 and 3,865 people, including up to 957 civilians. Over 150 children have been killed and up to 1,698 citizens have been injured.
Since 2002, between 71 and 83 confirmed drone strikes have been ordered by the U.S. Government killing up to 531 people. 83 civilians and 7 children have been killed by the aforementioned drone strikes and another 196 have been injured.
Since 2007, up to 9 drone strikes have been ordered in Somalia. These drone strikes are responsible for 30 deaths and 3 injuries.
In November 2014 alone, 31 people have been killed by American drone strikes in Yemen and Pakistan.
Obama has authorized the bombing of 7 countries since he took office. The next time that you hear that President Obama has ended two major wars, remember how many people have been killed under his authorization of inhumane drone strikes. President Obama IS a war-time President much to the ignorance of the average American. His efforts are just much more covert than his predecessors. People responsible for thousands of deaths are usually considered war criminals, not Nobel Peace Prize winners. Maybe Malala Yousafzai acknowledges something the rest of the world chooses to ignore.