What is Big Think?  

We are Big Idea Hunters…

We live in a time of information abundance, which far too many of us see as information overload. With the sum total of human knowledge, past and present, at our fingertips, we’re faced with a crisis of attention: which ideas should we engage with, and why? Big Think is an evolving roadmap to the best thinking on the planet — the ideas that can help you think flexibly and act decisively in a multivariate world.

A word about Big Ideas and Themes — The architecture of Big Think

Big ideas are lenses for envisioning the future. Every article and video on bigthink.com and on our learning platforms is based on an emerging “big idea” that is significant, widely relevant, and actionable. We’re sifting the noise for the questions and insights that have the power to change all of our lives, for decades to come. For example, reverse-engineering is a big idea in that the concept is increasingly useful across multiple disciplines, from education to nanotechnology.

Themes are the seven broad umbrellas under which we organize the hundreds of big ideas that populate Big Think. They include New World Order, Earth and Beyond, 21st Century Living, Going Mental, Extreme Biology, Power and Influence, and Inventing the Future.

Big Think Features:

12,000+ Expert Videos

1

Browse videos featuring experts across a wide range of disciplines, from personal health to business leadership to neuroscience.

Watch videos

World Renowned Bloggers

2

Big Think’s contributors offer expert analysis of the big ideas behind the news.

Go to blogs

Big Think Edge

3

Big Think’s Edge learning platform for career mentorship and professional development provides engaging and actionable courses delivered by the people who are shaping our future.

Find out more
Close

Does the US really try to Capture?

February 9, 2013, 10:02 AM
New_design_6

On Thursday, John Brennan, President Obama's nominee to be the new director of the CIA, went before the Senate Intelligence Committee to answer questions.

I watched all three and-a-half hours of the discussion and despite a few moments of genuinely challenging questions I was largely disappointed.

A lot of things from the hearing deserve comment, but today I'll limit myself to just one: the capture or kill option.

According to Brennan's testimony, the Obama administration always prefers to capture and not to kill terrorist suspects. 

Here is how the Associated Press opens one of its stories on the hearing:

The man who is seeking to run the CIA says the Obama administration has never killed terror suspects when officials had the opportunity to capture them instead.

This is fine and makes sense, after all the US gets very little intelligence from the dead.

But does this theory - capture first and then if not feasible kill - actually work in practice?

Here, in my opinion, is where the senators on the committee dropped the ball.

Senator John McCain, who is not on the committee, published a list of written questions for Mr. Brennan.  On page 5 - question 4.B. - McCain asks about a topic I have written about often here at Waq al-waq: the case of 'Adnan al-Qadhi.

Relying on the great on-the-ground reporting of Adam Baron, Sen. McCain asks why the US did not try to capture al-Qadhi, who was killed in a drone strike on Nov. 7, 2012.

Unlike many of the drone strikes that take place in Yemen this one did not happen in territory outside the effective control of the Yemeni government, rather this strike took place just a short drive outside of Sanaa and, even more surprisingly, within sight of former president Ali Abdullah Salih's house.

So why, given that al-Qadhi was living openly in his house did the US not seek to capture him?

Killing should indeed be a last resort, not just the most convenient option.

 

 

 

Does the US really try to C...

Newsletter: Share: