Opinions on Drones

[tecoyah]

Personally, I am a bit torn on the issue.
While I feel this is little more than a form of assassination, and do not feel comfortable with such a thing...I also would prefer we not put our own in danger if we decide upon a targeted killing campaign.
I understand the benefits of this two be two-fold, in that it is likely far fewer people will die in a drone strike than a traditional airstrike, and by removing the intended target we eliminate someone likely to attack us in the furture, but also see the negatives inherent in robotic death.

Comments?

 

[Iolo]

Weapons for war-criminals. The US electorate is coming more and more to resemble the Germans under Hitler.

 

[tecoyah]

Weapons for war-criminals. The US electorate is coming more and more to resemble the Germans under Hitler.

If you could flesh out this opinion it might help, as it seems little more than ranting about a dislike for the Government and Hitler.

For instance:

In what ways do you see a comparison between Nazi Germany and the use of Drones as valid?

In what ways do you view the use of drones as a war crime, and by extension what constitutes a war crime?

Inquiring minds want to know.

 

[Iolo]

If you could flesh out this opinion it might help, as it seems little more than ranting about a dislike for the Government and Hitler.

For instance:

In what ways do you see a comparison between Nazi Germany and the use of Drones as valid?

In what ways do you view the use of drones as a war crime, and by extension what constitutes a war crime?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Obviously against international law and the law of nations, like Hitler's attacks on other countries. A war crime, amongst other things, is murdering people with whom you are not at War, obviously. The people you murder are NOT sovereign states.

 

[Stonewall]

Weapons for war-criminals. The US electorate is coming more and more to resemble the Germans under Hitler.

Know alot about the Germans under Hitler?

 

[Stonewall]

Personally, I am a bit torn on the issue.
While I feel this is little more than a form of assassination, and do not feel comfortable with such a thing...I also would prefer we not put our own in danger if we decide upon a targeted killing campaign.
I understand the benefits of this two be two-fold, in that it is likely far fewer people will die in a drone strike than a traditional airstrike, and by removing the intended target we eliminate someone likely to attack us in the furture, but also see the negatives inherent in robotic death.

Comments?

I'm glad some can today be torn.....or see things both ways. Such aggression wasn't ever considered proper under our previous administrations. "Torn" on issues today such as the Patriot Act, the Surveillance Act, the prison at Gitmo, the prison at Parwan, drone strikes, Obama's surge in Afghanistan(still 60,000 troops there), the use of force or support in such places as Egypt, Mali, Syria, Yemen, or Libya. Crossing into a sovereign nations airspace to carry out military strikes, drone campaigns playing whack-a-mole infuriating Muslims worldwide.......

My comment is that I'm really happy to see comments....."torn" or otherwise, means people are actually thinking these issues through rather than being convinced by the media in presenting their opinions.

My what a difference a D or R makes after one's name. By all means, comment away.

 

[Stonewall]

Onviously against international law and the law of nations, like Hitler's attacks on other countries. A war crime, amongst other things, is murdering people with whom you are not at War, obviously. The people you murder are NOT sovereign states.

Terrorism..is against international law as well, are you as vocal about that tactic?

 

[tecoyah]

Onviously against international law and the law of nations, like Hitler's attacks on other countries. A war crime, amongst other things, is murdering people with whom you are not at War, obviously. The people you murder are NOT sovereign states.

That begs the question of what this "War On Terror" actually is. In the current military situation, as well as the type of aggressor we face, how do we define the new reality...it seems not to be war as we have come to know it, yet we are under what seems a constant attack threat.
Do we simply defend our borders as well as possible and hope it is enough?
Do we hide behind walls while enemies plot?
Do we abandon allies, and what stability we have gained in the world in order to avoid being labeled bad guys?

It is very simple to sit back and critique the reaction, while ignoring the cause of it. It seems to me the place in between that defines this use of advanced weaponry....and I am unsure it is the correct approach.

I suppose that is why I allow others to decide for me, and thus act to ensure my protection.

 

[Stonewall]

That begs the question of what this "War On Terror" actually is. In the current military situation, as well as the type of aggressor we face, how do we define the new reality...it seems not to be war as we have come to know it, yet we are under what seems a constant attack threat.
Do we simply defend our borders as well as possible and hope it is enough?
Do we hide behind walls while enemies plot?
Do we abandon allies, and what stability we have gained in the world in order to avoid being labeled bad guys?

It is very simple to sit back and critique the reaction, while ignoring the cause of it. It seems to me the place in between that defines this use of advanced weaponry....and I am unsure it is the correct approach.

I suppose that is why I allow others to decide for me, and thus act to ensure my protection.

You are my hero for the day! This is dead on hammer on nail accurate.

 

[Iolo]

Know alot about the Germans under Hitler?

Yes, a great deal.

 

[Iolo]

That begs the question of what this "War On Terror" actually is. In the current military situation, as well as the type of aggressor we face, how do we define the new reality...it seems not to be war as we have come to know it, yet we are under what seems a constant attack threat.
Do we simply defend our borders as well as possible and hope it is enough?
Do we hide behind walls while enemies plot?
Do we abandon allies, and what stability we have gained in the world in order to avoid being labeled bad guys?

It is very simple to sit back and critique the reaction, while ignoring the cause of it. It seems to me the place in between that defines this use of advanced weaponry....and I am unsure it is the correct approach.

I suppose that is why I allow others to decide for me, and thus act to ensure my protection.

It is not a new reality at all. You are murdering people when no war exists. That is against international law. You are not 'defending your borders' at all - that is sheer fantasy. I'm sorry, but you are mad as hatters. Stop making war on Islam and subsidising the zionist murder gangs for a start, and then give up talking nazi nonsense, please.

 

[tecoyah]

It is not a new reality at all. You are murdering people when no war exists. That is against international law. You are not 'defending your borders' at all - that is sheer fantasy. I'm sorry, but you are mad as hatters. Stop making war on Islam and subsidising the zionist murder gangs for a start, and then give up talking nazi nonsense, please.

In other words.....you have no intention of actually discussing the issue, but instead wish to discuss your opinion of the larger issue of "Unjust" warfare.

I recommend you start a thread based on that, rather than spoil this one with your opinions...I will happily debate it there.

 

[Stonewall]

Yes, a great deal.

Then you understand your "The US electorate is coming more and more to resemble" statement is way off

 

[Iolo]

Then you understand your "The US electorate is coming more and more to resemble" statement is way off

Not at all. Before the Nazis took over the great mass of Germans were all for 'my Country right or wrong!' You judge civilization (in my view) by the proportion that thumb their noses at such filth. Think on.

 

[Iolo]

In other words.....you have no intention of actually discussing the issue, but instead wish to discuss your opinion of the larger issue of "Unjust" warfare.

I recommend you start a thread based on that, rather than spoil this one with your opinions...I will happily debate it there.

I don't think I understand that. Wars are between sovereign states, not between governments and people they decide to murder. If you want to change international law, get in touch with the UN and try it.

 

[Stonewall]

Not at all. Before the Nazis took over the great mass of Germans were all for 'my Country right or wrong!' You judge civilization (in my view) by the proportion that thumb their noses at such filth. Think on.

Obama got elected apologizing for our 'methods', our electorate voting a President in who had just finished a world tour proclaiming US foreign and domestic policy mistakes, what in God's name are you going on about. Your analogy is not only poor, it's inaccurate and as an historian, I can tell you your statement and analogy using Nazi Germany isn't even close. Think at all.

 

[David]

Obviously against international law and the law of nations, like Hitler's attacks on other countries. A war crime, amongst other things, is murdering people with whom you are not at War, obviously. The people you murder are NOT sovereign states.

To be fair, most of those nations joined Germany willingly (Austria voted to join with 94% of the vote) and France invaded Germany. Czechoslovakia, Poland (and maybe Norway depending on who you ask) were the only true acts of Imperialism committed by Hitler.

 

[Stonewall]

To be fair, most of those nations joined Germany willingly (Austria voted to join with 94% of the vote) and France invaded Germany. Czechoslovakia, Poland (and maybe Norway depending on who you ask) were the only true acts of Imperialism committed by Hitler.

He invaded Russia

 

[David]

He invaded Russia

And the Soviets were planning on doing the same to him.

 

[Polydectes]

using battlements in military against non combative people, foregoing sure process, seems a bit creepy to me.