America's Dangerous Game

America's Dangerous GameAmerica's Dangerous Game, from filmmakers Richard Rowley and Jeremy Scahill, reveals the full scale of the covert war in Yemen and asks the question: Is the US creating more enemies than it can kill or capture?

Last year, the Obama administration celebrated the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki, a leading figure in al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), as the latest military victory in its new counter-terrorism strategy focused on covert kill/capture operations.

In the US, the al-Awlaki strike looked like a clear tactical victory against AQAP, which Washington now considers its most dangerous enemy in the 'war on terror'.

But from a Yemeni perspective, the US' covert military campaign seems to be undermining its own strategic interests.

Critics say that even when they hit their intended targets, US missile strikes and raids just further destabilise the country.

Watch the full documentary now

228
8.31
12345678910
Ratings: 8.31/10 from 13 users.

More great documentaries

Comments and User Reviews

  • Rocky Racoon

    With Jeremy Scahill doing research it has got to be high quality investigative journalism needed to produce a geo-political documentary. Makes reasons for watching all the more valid. It ends in the middle of no where really like they ran out of money or something quick edit and story over.
    RR
    RR

  • Guest

    Here is an other alarm ring on the clock....how many rings before the world wakes up?
    az

  • Jeremy Hughes

    Agreed x 100, the idea that we can do this and not create lifelong enemies is ludicrous.

  • Guest

    It does look like it ended abruptly, may be we are missing part 2.
    az

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mercenarry-ForHire/100000621480223 Mercenarry ForHire

    Our Leaders are Re*arded!
    They wanto keep focus off from the real problems! :D

  • LesterWise

    I did a search on Google but all I found was the same 25 minute video. I guess that's it. I think it was part of a Al Jazeera news report.

  • http://www.facebook.com/daveewer David Ewer

    Agree with folks below on ending. Well worth watching though.

  • http://www.facebook.com/ElmoPutz David Foster

    What's to wake up to, AZ? I'm an American (by geography, not by choice), and I've known this is what America does to the rest of the world since I was in 5th grade (I turn 50 next month). Got a few scars and broken ribs from my occasional attempt to get in the way of business as usual. But I haven't made any notable difference, except to alienate myself here at home. Even the people who might otherwise agree with my politics think I'm insane, because my incessant ranting threatens their illusion of security. THAT'S why we never do anything.. We're all afraid of losing our comfy little existence!

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/4N3VKABVFVMSTVQOMG3VBIHZTU Jason

    your right, no matter how much we tell people how it really is they dont want to hear it because its a bother from their routine, in the end the government is in control of any country and unless americans stand up and strike or something to cutt off resources nothing major will ever change...but that situation will NEVER HAPPEN because most americans have life good and comfy here even if they are poor they live ok compared to third world countries.....we could go on and on...your turning 50...so either join politics or forget the evil things in life that exist and just enjoy with a smile, i know it hurts not to notice, but its just not worth the pure moments of exploring the earth and its people and within yourself. people with power will always be evil big or small....don't let them dictate your life all the way over here....good luck

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Sebastian-Oxley/100000196556146 Sebastian Oxley

    I think we hit snooze then the power went off and we're currently on the phone to work explaining how we might not make it in today.

  • Greg_Mc

    This seems like it could be a good doc, but a few people are saying it just sort of ends. Anyone found out if the way people say it ends is how it was meant to end or is there an error of some sort?

  • Owen Brown

    People & Power is an excellent series by Al Jazeera, I highly recommend watching the other installments on their Youtube page. And about the ending, most of them are like that. The style is meant to be more investigative journalism than a nice tidy documentary wrapped with a bow on top.

  • http://www.facebook.com/ElmoPutz David Foster

    Well, it's only a half hour show. It ended with a picture of a kid waving a flag... that was good enough for me.

  • Guest

    i suppose it ends the way it should....without a solution.
    az

  • Imightberiding

    ... & so it goes on & on & on & on & ...

  • wald0

    "in the end the government is in control of any country and unless americans stand up and strike or something to cutt off resources nothing major will ever change..."

    And how exactly, assuming people were willing to give up thier "good and comfy" lives of course, do you propose we "stand up and strike"? Any kind of real, physical resistance would be completely futile and senseless, not to mention counter productive, in the end. Protests and activist type work seems to make no real difference any more. Because the system is set up in such a way that every candidate on every side is playing this same game getting involved no longer makes a real difference either. Democrat, Republican, Independant- if they made the ballot inorder that we might advocate for them they are already in the proverbial pocket of the powers that be. Grass root candidates and movements don't work any longer because they can not compete with the millions of dollars spent by traditional candidates and causes. And now we have super pacs, corporations and individuals able to give as much money as they please in support of a candidate without even disclosing who they are. Even when we do managge to elect someone they (coporate interests) disapprove of they have discovered that with holding jobs works real well to get rid of him. Corporations are currently making record profits in the U.S., thats right RECORD PROFITS, but they will not hire. They have massive amounts of capital available to them in a time when this country is in desperate need of investment and expansion, so where are the jobs, why isn't infrastructure being rebuilt and expanded, why are we not investing in the future? Its plain to see that the corporate powers that be and their political side kicks (mostly the repuiblican party) are going to keep this economy shut down until Obama is gone. Then they can return to the policies that secure thier future wealth and power and landed us right here where we are. There is not alot we can do about it really. If we could get enough people on board we might could change this but, take it from someone who has worked in politics on a voluntary basis for years and years- it will take an unbelievable amount of people and convincing them all to agree is almost impossible.

    P.S. Don't miss understand me, Obama plays this American empire game just like all the rest. But, at least he doesn't seem to play the corporate game here at home as much as the others. Which should be evident when you listen to the corporate dogs foaming at the mouth over his policies.

  • john Palermo

    This presumes the system doesn't know its actions are its own cause and effect and perhaps things are just as the system wants.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZMK6YNWJACHQ5CRCJW5TNYFURI KsDevil

    It will end when the leaders of countries are the targets, not the citizens or structures.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_UQIAGPEBHJDQIAXCLSIFIULSIM Hector

    Even though you view is defeatist, to say the least, it is very much the attitude of most people in the U.S.A. I believe. Truth is, that this is exactly how those in power want the people to feel and think because it just makes it so much easier for them to maintain the status. When people start to question and then to not go along with their scheme they really start worrying for the simple reason that they start to lose control. Do I need to tell you what happens then? Just look at history and you'll see that the people are not helpless at all. When that happens it's like a little crack in the dam which gives way and the waters just come rushing out sweeping everything in its path.

  • http://www.facebook.com/ElmoPutz David Foster

    "When that happens, it's like a little crack in the dam which gives way, and... "

    ... the lines on the map move from side to side.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_UOYZ2WM6BTQCJA5UN4WSKZU2YI Plenum

    Win or lose, it's America that is being sacrificed along with its so called "enemies". Profit is being made by multi-nationalists (or even anationalists) at America's expense and they don't give a damn as long as they profit.

  • mbibad

    I have realized something over the years that America has pursued this war strategy against its so called enemies. The American mind set is largely shaped by movies (Hollywood) this may sound funny but it is true. The idea that you can just bomb a people even killing innocents among them and think that as soon as you walk away from the launch pad that's it, victory is achieved, "THE END" is nothing but Hollywood fantasy. People have a conscience, they ask questions, they compare, they reason,and as they continue to with scars they continue to think. This strategy lacks wisdom in all its forms and who ever is behind it (I believe its the defense industrial establishment) lakes serious foresight. there is something called talking to your enemies. you might just learn that you are not a holy as you thought you were and that you have a lot to learn form others. Again our so called way of life is not really the best way to live all facts being put on the table. Or could this be a case of defending evil with evil but for how long?

  • http://www.facebook.com/ElmoPutz David Foster

    Who cares about any of that? We need OIL, dammit!

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_F3VB6OQ6SK7P234XBW5RG7BQRY harry nutzack

    the film industry as a whole has "pushed" minds since the days of the silent film. the current american animosity to islam has been greatly influenced by 4 decades of filmcraft that pretty much started with the productions related to the black september attack during the munich olympics. since that time, positive portrayals of muslims in film released here in america are virtually non-existant, while negative portrayals were released almost annually in one way or another (ranging from "midnight express" to such schlock as "navy seals" and a litany of golan globus productions). i once read a piece on the portrayed attitude of aliens (ET variety, not the "dreaded illegal") in modern filmcraft(since the 50s)as related to political saber rattling in us politics which pointed out that as we grow more hawkish we get such fare as "independence day" (incredibly malignant aliens), while during times of dovish leadership we got such characters as "ET" (sickeningly sweet/adorable). at the height of the cold war animosity, almost every alien portrayal was one of subjigation/invasion, with the noted exception of "this island earth"(of "klatu barada necto" fame) which cast micheal remy as the benevolent alien invader, though that production was peppered VERY liberally with "red buzzwords" that had rightwing poly sci professors claiming it was communist conspiracy inspired propaganda until the 90s (i actually almost busted a gut when a coworker who was a poly-sci student in the early 90s let me in on that little morsel). spike lee was quoted as saying the reason he got into film was it's ability to shape the attitudes and perceptions of the viewer, assuming a storyline that resonated with them. of note is the fact that the first oscar was issued to "wings" a load of patriotic claptrap focused on the exploits of ace fighter pilots during ww1, while such feel-good kapra vehicles as "meet john doe" and "it's a wonderful life" were huge hits during the depression. in the leadup to involvement in ww2 such films as "flying tigers" (the exploits of chennaults mercenary pilots hired by the chinese nationalist government), hitchcock's "the 39 steps" (evil german spies in britain) and "british intelligence" (same format with karloff as the spymaster double agent) were released here in the states, while during the opening days of vietnam, we were treated to "the manchurian candidate", but as the war came to a close we got "coming home" (voight, "hanoi jane" fonda, and bruce dern). bread and circuses keep the peasants happy, but the type of circus provided can do an excellent job of fine tuning the populace for upcoming agendas

  • mbibad

    Unfortunately that culture is now a perfect vehicle for evil agendas and ill intentions. The question is who is behind this massaging effect? and what are the motives, then one does not need to look far to see the answer. look at the excuses for war at the slightest turn of events and see who they are directed to, then look at the hypocrisy displayed when when elements considered friends have similar or worse situations. You really wonder do people expect any healing after this? Hell is nowhere under our feet right here is hell.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/QI3MIQKWBCROZVKHQ4XOOO5SVA Michael Elvin

    It would appear to me that our style of picking fights with little guys for no clear reason is no mistake. It has an entirely purposeful effect: to create a constant supply of fresh enemies. Such a strategy requires that the government perpetually uses our tax dollars to purchase more and more weapons of "defense". Because, bottom line, we've done it for so long that by now, we really do have some enemies out there to justify our actions. And the point is to see that the money gets spent.

    If the supply of new enemies ever threatens to dry up, we have another egregious incident, a fresh Pearl Harbor or a Tonkin Gulf, or a Battleship Maine, or a USS Pueblo, that stokes the public's fear and makes it possible to push through insanely expensive Homeland Security measures-- and ill-advised invasions of nations that have no intent or ability to truly threaten us. Such cheap tactics trigger our panic response, raising irrational fears of imminent invasion by such mighty adversaries as the Somalis or the Yemenis-- fears requiring our immediate surrender of yet more civil liberties, and our acceptance of the need to pay for an armed presence around the planet that the rest of the world finds onerous, and we're finding unaffordable.

    So the next time someone laments to you, "Too bad we had bad intelligence over in Iraq", you migh stop to consider that the folks who ordered up this intel weren't quite that iggorant after all. And that people with billions of bucks at their disposal tend to make no blundering mistakes, ever. What they do, they do with a purpose.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_F3VB6OQ6SK7P234XBW5RG7BQRY harry nutzack

    since ww2, hollywood and the military have been VERY cozy. there are floods and ebbs in the relationship due to public receptivity, but the relationship is undeniable. kapra shot most of the deathcamp footage, john ford was his commanding officer (please dont read that as holocaust denial, but i have no doubt that both did their best to make the coverage as horrible as possible, just so viewers could get the true "flavor" of the horrors they were documenting). howard hughes ran republic pictures, and also was a contractor providing aircraft, as well as working hand in hand with the CIA. that multilayered relationship alone provides a bit of insight into the coziness. one also must admit the average american is much less likely to plunk down dough to view a film about an accountant auditing the books of a roller rink, than say an action packed war movie or spy thriller. the success of jerry bruckheimer in modern filmcraft illustates gratuitous explosions draw more crowds than 4 guys debating the meaning of existance will. it makes the industry a perfect vehicle for "steering" hawkish mindset in the populace. a case can be made for the resurgence of street gangs/thuggery being at least partially an effect of hollywoods influence, as before such film work as "boyz in the hood", the musical genre of rap had a much more gil scott heron accent, while afterwards the genre became a vehicle of glorification of gangdom, though one cant deny the fact that the fledgling rap industry also provided a perfect vehicle for the legitimization of funds garnered through drug sales and other less socially acceptable revenue sources. it's a very complex dynamic. i think if one could open the books of actual uses of "black ops funding" in the intelligence budget here in the US, it might well show a "money trail" that explains much of this relationship. post "big studio era" production schemes rely heavily on finding funding to make a script into an actual film, so an influx of cash to support scripts with "the right message" will have a huge effect on what actually makes it to screens in the modern industry. it might be interesting to examine actual funding of previous films of a hawkish nature, and actually see WHO ponied up the dough that brought them into being.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_F3VB6OQ6SK7P234XBW5RG7BQRY harry nutzack

    the power structure is by design very hard to shake, let alone topple. examine the current political infighting here in the US. the populace is being herded in vastly divergent camps, by manipulating long standing divisions, and propagandizing positions. "occupy" and "teaparty" camps actually object to the same thing, though they see it through different eyes, and thus lay blame at different feet. by manipulating those perceptions, debate, and thus unity, is stifled. if both camps could bring together discussion of a civilized nature, and lay out coherent points to one another, they could see the reality. so, those in power, and their various media lapdogs engineer division. if as a "teaparty" leaning individual i scream "filthy hippies, get a job!!", while as an "occupy" leaning individual i scream "teabagger fascists, learn to see!!" there can never be debate, discourse, and a peek at the viewpoint of the other, thus unification of purpose is impossible.divided people cannot revolt, as illustrated by the spanish civil war. if the attempt is made, you get lebanon in the 80s/90s. you get somalia. a complete collapse of civility and infighting between divergent groups, allowing the powerful to manipulate a "solution" that ends up being worse than the original problem. by demonizing all that dont see the world through exactly the same lens as myself, i balkanize myself. that is the "magic" being worked now. we have "fox news" propagandizing for the right, portraying simplistic overviews of problems and demonizing any other viewpoint. simple minds find simple portrayals of problem and solution almost irresistable. by labeling those of differing view with buzzwords that have been programmed to elicit contempt, the divergent point of view is demonized. then we have the pundits of "the left" using propaganda techniques that illustrate the right as "war mongering fascist dogs", cherrypicking sound and video bites to show them as unreasonable xenophobic unthinking rabble, selectively using the propaganda of the opposite camp to illustrate the illusion of middleground being impossible to find, and also stacking buzzwords designed and conditioned to portray the divergent camp as beneath contempt, we get the same demonization. the campaign has gone on for decades, slowly, insidiously. neither side can see that their "mainstream champions" in politics are no more than 2 sides of the same coin. obama is the same as bush, mccain is the same as gore. one side represents crap on rye, the other crap on whole wheat. either choice is a crap sandwich. but, by instilling "crap sandwich pride", the true power brokers keep the illusion of difference of purpose alive. we are left with "jerry springer brawls" rather than mindful, purposeful debate. our fears and prejudices are manipulated to divide us. we ALL refuse to cooperate in anything. all pundits cry "the huns bayonet belgian babies!!", and we eat it up like it's prime rib with toast points. yet no belgian babies ever end up on bayonets. we have also been conditioned to NEVER admit being wrong. facts are immaterial, reality be damned, "if i believe it, it is true". both sides defy reality, both sides refuse to admit their excrement stinks. all holler at the top of their lungs, yet NOBODY listens. if all could turn up the "gain" on their ears, and lower the "volume" of their mouths, the illusion would vanish. but, honestly, im not going to hold my breath waiting for that day.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/QI3MIQKWBCROZVKHQ4XOOO5SVA Michael Elvin

    Amen to all of that, harry. We don't stand a chance of wising up to how society is being managed-- because we never get much chance to think about things in any productive manner.

    First we go through public ed. And that's about the last place you'd ever be encouraged to take a good look at society. One would think that at age five you'd be told about the Social Contract, the way people can work together to build relationships of mutual benefit. But no. They encourage you to not hit one another, and drop the subject right there. Then for the next twelve years they stress only good attendance and following instruction-- that is, good employee habits.

    Assuming you can find a job, get married and start having kids, every minute of every day then gets devoted to either (a) working, (b) doing house chores or struggling with the kids, or (c) watching carefully dummed down presentations of reality on the One Eyed Drone. So when exactly do you ever get a few moments to think about the big picture, or question your place as a cog in the Big Wheel? And how can you erect a mental framework within which to understand the sociology and the economics of history? If you can't find a bit of time to do this, you're left with whatever sound-bite understanding the media heads feel you should have. And you think human choice resolves down to voting for the stooge in column A as opposed to the dork in column B.

    We don't stand a chance. However, for the smart ones and the ones well connected by family, there's a LOT of money to be made.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/QI3MIQKWBCROZVKHQ4XOOO5SVA Michael Elvin

    In looking over my last comment I see that I've tended to widen the topic to include All & Everything. If I may narrow it back down to the subject at hand I think we're talking about the threat posed to our existence by Ansar al-Shariah (AQAP).

    I think it's being over-hyped. This tiny group's capacity to overwhelm us by force and shove the Quran down our throats is, IMO, overrated. They don't have the manpower to even impose a reign of terror on Terre Haute. Plus, I doubt very much they have either the means or the intent to do much of anything beyond Yemeni borders.

    Yet they're being presented to us as some kind of grave existential threat. Just imagine what the money we're spending on addressing this non-issue could buy if it were instead being put into American pockets. People would then buy products in American stores, boosting American profis to the point we'd have to hire on more Americans to get back to work. These people in turn would start buying stuff, etc. Wih that half a trillion or so being plowed into the street economy each year, we'd all be in high cotton.

    Instead it's like the War on Drugs, which is just a cover for official management of the drug industry. Billions go to highly paid Top Cops to manage the trade, and to put the excess unemployed in prison so their social problems won't be so evident on the streets of our fair land. How we spend public money is a choice people make. And you and I haven't been consulted.

  • SUSEJLOL

    You have an incredible GOD.

    Exodus 21:1-4 "If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him. If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself."

    Deuteronomy 15:12-18 "And if thy brother, an Hebrew man, or an Hebrew woman, be sold unto thee, and serve thee six years; then in the seventh year thou shalt let him go free from thee.And when thou sendest him out free from thee, thou shalt not let him go away empty: Thou shalt furnish him liberally out of thy flock, and out of thy floor, and out of thy winepress: of that wherewith the Lord thy God hath blessed thee thou shalt give unto him."

    Exodus 21:7 "And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do."

    Regarding the beating and killing of slaves, the Book of Exodus contains laws regarding punishment for the one who kills the slave as well as injunctions to avoid injuring the eyes and teeth.

    Exodus 21:20-21 "And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money."

    Exodus 21:26-27 "And if a man smite the eye of his servant, or the eye of his maid, that it perish; he shall let him go free for his eye's sake. And if he smite out his manservant's tooth, or his maidservant's tooth; he shall let him go free for his tooth's sake."

    The Book of Leviticus prohibited the harsh ruling over other Israelites, but that slaves could be taken from the Gentiles.

    Leviticus 25:44-46 "Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids. Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour."

    Also, in Leviticus, a distinction is made between the hired servant and the slave.

    Leviticus 25:48-53 "After that he is sold he may be redeemed again; one of his brethren may redeem him: Either his uncle, or his uncle's son, may redeem him, or any that is nigh of kin unto him of his family may redeem him; or if he be able, he may redeem himself. And he shall reckon with him that bought him from the year that he was sold to him unto the year of jubilee: and the price of his sale shall be according unto the number of years, according to the time of an hired servant shall it be with him."

    Slaves were to undergo circumcision.

    Genesis 17:13 "He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant."

    Genesis 17:27 "And all the men of his house, born in the house, and bought with money of the stranger, were circumcised with him."

    Female captives are considered spoils of war.

    Deuteronomy 21:10-14 "When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies, and the Lord thy God hath delivered them into thine hands, and thou hast taken them captive, And seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife; Then thou shalt bring her home to thine house; and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails; And she shall put the raiment of her captivity from off her, and shall remain in thine house, and bewail her father and her mother a full month: and after that thou shalt go in unto her, and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife. And it shall be, if thou have no delight in her, then thou shalt let her go whither she will; but thou shalt not sell her at all for money, thou shalt not make merchandise of her, because thou hast humbled her."

    Deuteronomy 20:14 "But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself"

    The punishment for sexual activity with a female slave who is engaged consisted of animal sacrifice in the Temple. There is no comment on sexual activity with one who is not married or engaged.

    Leviticus 19:20-22 "And whosoever lieth carnally with a woman, that is a bondmaid, betrothed to an husband, and not at all redeemed, nor freedom given her; she shall be scourged; they shall not be put to death, because she was not free. And he shall bring his trespass offering unto the Lord, unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, even a ram for a trespass offering. And the priest shall make an atonement for him with the ram of the trespass offering before the Lord for his sin which he hath done: and the sin which he hath done shall be forgiven him."

    It is not permitted to return an escaped slave, nor was it permissable to "oppress" him.

    Deuteronomy 23:15-16 "Thou shalt not deliver unto his master the servant which is escaped from his master unto thee: He shall dwell with thee, even among you, in that place which he shall choose in one of thy gates, where it liketh him best: thou shalt not oppress him."

  • SUSEJLOL

    Exodus 21:1-4 "If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him. If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself."

    Deuteronomy 15:12-18 "And if thy brother, an Hebrew man, or an Hebrew woman, be sold unto thee, and serve thee six years; then in the seventh year thou shalt let him go free from thee.And when thou sendest him out free from thee, thou shalt not let him go away empty: Thou shalt furnish him liberally out of thy flock, and out of thy floor, and out of thy winepress: of that wherewith the Lord thy God hath blessed thee thou shalt give unto him."

    Exodus 21:7 "And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do."

    Regarding the beating and killing of slaves, the Book of Exodus contains laws regarding punishment for the one who kills the slave as well as injunctions to avoid injuring the eyes and teeth.

    Exodus 21:20-21 "And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money."

    Exodus 21:26-27 "And if a man smite the eye of his servant, or the eye of his maid, that it perish; he shall let him go free for his eye's sake. And if he smite out his manservant's tooth, or his maidservant's tooth; he shall let him go free for his tooth's sake."

    The Book of Leviticus prohibited the harsh ruling over other Israelites, but that slaves could be taken from the Gentiles.

    Leviticus 25:44-46 "Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids. Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour."

    Also, in Leviticus, a distinction is made between the hired servant and the slave.

    Leviticus 25:48-53 "After that he is sold he may be redeemed again; one of his brethren may redeem him: Either his uncle, or his uncle's son, may redeem him, or any that is nigh of kin unto him of his family may redeem him; or if he be able, he may redeem himself. And he shall reckon with him that bought him from the year that he was sold to him unto the year of jubilee: and the price of his sale shall be according unto the number of years, according to the time of an hired servant shall it be with him."

    Slaves were to undergo circumcision.

    Genesis 17:13 "He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant."

    Genesis 17:27 "And all the men of his house, born in the house, and bought with money of the stranger, were circumcised with him."

    Female captives are considered spoils of war.

    Deuteronomy 21:10-14 "When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies, and the Lord thy God hath delivered them into thine hands, and thou hast taken them captive, And seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife; Then thou shalt bring her home to thine house; and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails; And she shall put the raiment of her captivity from off her, and shall remain in thine house, and bewail her father and her mother a full month: and after that thou shalt go in unto her, and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife. And it shall be, if thou have no delight in her, then thou shalt let her go whither she will; but thou shalt not sell her at all for money, thou shalt not make merchandise of her, because thou hast humbled her."

    Deuteronomy 20:14 "But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself"

    The punishment for sexual activity with a female slave who is engaged consisted of animal sacrifice in the Temple. There is no comment on sexual activity with one who is not married or engaged.

    Leviticus 19:20-22 "And whosoever lieth carnally with a woman, that is a bondmaid, betrothed to an husband, and not at all redeemed, nor freedom given her; she shall be scourged; they shall not be put to death, because she was not free. And he shall bring his trespass offering unto the Lord, unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, even a ram for a trespass offering. And the priest shall make an atonement for him with the ram of the trespass offering before the Lord for his sin which he hath done: and the sin which he hath done shall be forgiven him."

    It is not permitted to return an escaped slave, nor was it permissable to "oppress" him.

    Deuteronomy 23:15-16 "Thou shalt not deliver unto his master the servant which is escaped from his master unto thee: He shall dwell with thee, even among you, in that place which he shall choose in one of thy gates, where it liketh him best: thou shalt not oppress him."

  • tim1888

    the west thinks like well if we don't them kill first they are sure is hell going to kill us which is probably true

  • djrm.80

    not the west...some forces of...i sure not like america and im western

  • http://www.facebook.com/glen.hale2 Glen Hale

    While we have religion we will NEVER have peace.

  • http://www.facebook.com/farasle.mohamed Kka Hha

    "blow-back" - this whole Alqaida network was created and manufactured by USA and Saudi arabia, and now those Alqaid veteran are hunting their previous recureters.. fair a game, i say

  • http://www.facebook.com/james.shawver.94 James Shawver

    The cruelty belongs to mankind, not religion. It was proven beyond all doubt in the 20th century that atheist can wreak the same havoc that believers can.

  • DEADPHILOSOPHER

    In politics this situation is normally referred to as unintended consequences. The opening of new fronts on the war on terror leads to further destabilization. The native population will become radicalized because they do not have access to CNN or MSNBC in fact they have access to their local cleric who happens to be affiliated with Al-Qaeda for information on how to think and feel about the events.

  • seamus watson

    Why does Obama continue to kill with drone strikes, every but where the terrorists are. No drones strikes on the city Ansar al Sharia has taken and held. I suspect that would defeat the point of keeping these wars going, for the profits that can be made killing innocent people.

  • seamus watson

    We should had them over to them.

  • hell hole

    and the yank's sit around scratching their thick skulls wondering WHY there hated so much, after firing about two dozens missile's at non combatant's in muslim countries

  • jonik

    The more the US is hated, the more resistance there will be, and then the more "justification" there is to hand over billions of dollars to BP, Boeing, Raytheon, Halliburton, GE, and the rest to "fight the war on terror". Well, it's really the US war on those who OPPOSE US terrorism....but our mainstream media don't word it quite like that.
    One point....the more innocent people US drones kill, the better it is for the US military industrial complex. The US military is far, far, beyond being embarrassed, ashamed, apologetic (or other humane reactions) for that.