Drones

@BJCard:

Well, I am fairly certain that plenty of countries have drones, and they are military weapons, so they would not be permitted in another countries’ airspace without authorization.  I don’t see drones as any different than any other weapon delivery system.  We don’t permit Russian bombers over NATO airspace and they don’t permit NATO bombers over Russian airspace.  Same for drones. Â

If they (The Taliban) didn’t want to fight Americans, why harbor terrorist training camps?  Now they are mad at the consequences of 9/11 and other terrorist bombings?  What did they think the Western world would do?  Back off? Â

We are at war in Afghanistan - against the Taliban and terrorist groups.  Why would we not use any and all available assets to protect the lives of Americans? Â

Last I checked, you typically don’t have a trial for enemy combatants… you attack and kill them if possible.  Do you not consider Taliban military leaders and terrorist leaders as enemy combatants? Â

Now, if you are talking about suspected enemy combatants in countries other than Afghanistan, then perhaps you have a point.  But if there is any proof, then drones are a better than using tomahawks fired from offshore ships/submarines or B-52s carpet bombing the place.

Cars kill 10x more people in America every year than the Taliban ever has, even at the 9/11 high mark.

Why aren’t we bombing them!

Infact, I bet Americans kill more Americans than the Taliban every year.

looks up some stats

Hmm, 17,000 murders in America last year. Not saying they are all citizens, but even if it’s half…

Garg, that is a whole other topic, unrelated to drones.

Of course the murder rate is high, but it has been dropping since its high in the early 90’s.

15,935 die in Canada and they have far less population than US…

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_people_die_a_year_from_a_car_accident_in_Canada

A car is a weapon. :-D

@Imperious:

15,935 die in Canada and they have far less population than US…

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_people_die_a_year_from_a_car_accident_in_Canada

A car is a weapon. :-D

LOL! The taliban must be making cars!

They buy them to use as bombs…see still a weapon :mrgreen:

here is the Taliban practicing on how to race cars for death…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTD38ZX9824

Stupidity is a weapon…

@Jermofoot:

Stupidity is a weapon…

That’s called democracy.

@Gargantua:

@Jermofoot:

Stupidity is a weapon…

That’s called democracy.

Its good that we (the US) are in a constitutional republic then.

@BJCard:

@Gargantua:

@Jermofoot:

Stupidity is a weapon…

That’s called democracy.

Its good that we (the US) are in a constitutional republic then.

then why are you trying to spread democracy, when you don’t even like it yourselves??

Well, I never said I was trying to spread democracy.  I can’t help it that politicians use the word ‘democracy’ for any form of government that has some sort of meaningful voting.

Hard to say if Democracy would be a good thing.  Even less would get done around here if all 300 million+ Americans had to vote on everything.

Here’s a recent BBC article I’ve just noticed on the subject of drones and modern war:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-18896236

Interesting story, thanks.  Weird that artillery strikes are treated kinder by the public than drone strikes, despite the higher death toll.

Is it better to fire RPGs indiscriminately into Israel or use a drone strike to target a specific individual?

@BJCard:

Is it better to fire RPGs indiscriminately into Israel or use a drone strike to target a specific individual?

No, but I can’t prevent that from happening by voting or protesting, I can prevent the other.

There is also a vital difference here, if the west are to intervene in other countries matters, we have to do it for moral reasons. It is impossible to support operations in afghanistan if their goal is not the make it better for the people. In that case, we have to aspire to a near perfect moral standard. Assasinations are NOT a part of a high moral standard.

The people fireing PRGs into israel view themselves as freedom fighters. They are doing horrible things, but they are doing it closer to home. Therefore they have to aspire to the same moral standards forex the americans had to aspire to in the civil war, or the war of 1812 or the war of independence.

@Kreuzfeld:

@BJCard:

Is it better to fire RPGs indiscriminately into Israel or use a drone strike to target a specific individual?

No, but I can’t prevent that from happening by voting or protesting, I can prevent the other.

There is also a vital difference here, if the west are to intervene in other countries matters, we have to do it for moral reasons. It is impossible to support operations in afghanistan if their goal is not the make it better for the people. In that case, we have to aspire to a near perfect moral standard. Assasinations are NOT a part of a high moral standard.

The people fireing PRGs into israel view themselves as freedom fighters. They are doing horrible things, but they are doing it closer to home. Therefore they have to aspire to the same moral standards forex the americans had to aspire to in the civil war, or the war of 1812 or the war of independence.

Assassinations are part of the game in America.

I bet that nearly every American president has ordered an assassination.  Certainly a fact over the last 50 years.

Perhaps this “higher moral standard” you think we’re being held to, isn’t so “high”.

Also - I’d be careful with this “we go there for moral reasons” thing.

Killing people in general isn’t usually considered a moral solution - and there are plenty of “moral” causes that don’t get addressed.

Also a reminder - America entered WWII because they were attacked, not because their “morals” were offended.

It’s safer to say that “keeping the balance of power” is the root interest, and “moral cause” is the veil.

Well, I don’t entirely disagree with you guys, but:

Is 9/11 not like Pearl Harbor?  Was it not a surprise attack that spurred us into war?

I believe the stated purpose of going into Afghanistan was to stop the terrorist training camps, which the 9/11 attackers reportedly went to.  Not sure what moral reasons you are talking about.  I suppose it is morally right to try and leave the place in best of shape as possible.  The place is already a better place in some respects (women’s rights come to mind.  Now they can go to school).

Typically, assassinations are for political reasons.  I guess I don’t see how every time we kill a terrorist it is an ‘assassination.’  Are we not supposed to kill terrorists?  Maybe they will play nice and not attack us, right?

I am curious how you think drone strikes are conducted.  Admittedly, I don’t know for sure, but in my ten year military experience, we only rely on facts.  It seems to me that known terrorists make a ‘watch list’ and when one of their locations is found a drone strike is conducted.  They aren’t going out everyday and killing every brown person they see.

@BJCard:

Well, I don’t entirely disagree with you guys, but:

Is 9/11 not like Pearl Harbor?  Was it not a surprise attack that spurred us into war?Â

I believe the stated purpose of going into Afghanistan was to stop the terrorist training camps, which the 9/11 attackers reportedly went to.  Not sure what moral reasons you are talking about.  I suppose it is morally right to try and leave the place in best of shape as possible.  The place is already a better place in some respects (women’s rights come to mind.  Now they can go to school).

Have you been latley in Afghanistan to claim such a statement??

If you can simply answer the question with YES or NO, then your answer is honored and appreciated.
If you are going on with any kind of argumentation then save it,it is obvious what you really know.

NO, I have not been to Afghanistan.  I only know what’s been reported in the news.  Have you guys been there?

@BJCard:

I am curious how you think drone strikes are conducted.  Admittedly, I don’t know for sure, but in my ten year military experience, we only rely on facts.  It seems to me that known terrorists make a ‘watch list’ and when one of their locations is found a drone strike is conducted.  They aren’t going out everyday and killing every brown person they see.

Well it’s like this…

People are being condemned to death without a trial, based more on actions they ‘may’ to do, as opposed to actions they have actually done.

And the bigger problem is that other innocent people die alongside the individuals during the strikes.  (Little Kids for example.)

Ask yourself these things….

Is pre-thinking a crime a crime? And is the sentence death?

Are we allowed to throw some innocent lives away if it means more innocent lives will be spared?

What is a human life worth?  Are they all equal?