No one is debating the efficacy of drones.
I have already addressed your points earlier in this thread. I’d point you to Garg’s earlier post pointing out the issue isn’t the drones. It is whether the use of drones constitutes war or murder and whether we’re executing criminals before they’ve committed a crime.
The question is whether or not what we’re doing with them is right, whether the powers that be are being honest with us and themselves.
My point about Stark is when a man who’d committed a capital crime needed to be put to death, the man with the power and responsibility for making that decision went out, looked the man in the eye, heard what he had to say for himself, and then swung the sword with his own hands. I don’t think any of the people making the decisions on drones have that kind of honor or even the concept of that kind of honor.
The question is not whether or not we are using the right tool but whether we should be doing the job at all.
Well, if you are arguing the bigger picture - i.e. why we are fighting Islamic Extremism or why we are fighting in Afghanistan, then that is a whole other can of worms. I’m just arguing that drone strikes are no different than any other long range weapon.
If you are insinuating that a drone pilot has no honor, and only does as ordered even if he/she feels it is wrong, than again that is a whole other topic. If you mean the big wigs ordering ‘hits’ on known terrorists, then what would you have them do instead?
