Started By
Message
re: What is your opinion on drones?
Posted on 2/10/14 at 10:27 am to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
Posted on 2/10/14 at 10:27 am to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
Drones are tools.
My problems come with how cavalier we are in using them. The standard needs to rise to more than a group of young men in the area = terrorist camp. Killing is too cheap when there is no chance of losing anything more than a robot.
My problems come with how cavalier we are in using them. The standard needs to rise to more than a group of young men in the area = terrorist camp. Killing is too cheap when there is no chance of losing anything more than a robot.
0
Posted on 2/10/14 at 10:33 am to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:
What is your opinion on drones?
As a weapon of war, they have proven to be valuable to our country and I support the use of them in the battle zone. Keep our guys out of harms way as much as possible while still putting it on the enemy.
As a tool used over our own soil, I believe them to have extremely intrusive and semi-unconstitutional characteristics. They will serve a purpose in the commercial market over the long term but I don't believe in government use of them over American soil.
I know they have their uses like search and rescue, protecting borders etc., so it is an interesting subject that many people are torn on IMO.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 10:50 am to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:
Compelling is pretty subjective, don't you think?
Maybe, I've failed in my search for an article that I find compelling. The short summary article- discussed This story, which is a great read. It also covered events like Christmas day truces during WWI. It explained how veterans of opposing countries in war often have more of a bond together than with their own countrymen who didn't go to war. Something about sharing the same piece of mud, terrified, cold and hungry galvanizes a bond for all who fought, regardless of side. When you're so far removed from your previous life and you're stripped to your very basic human instincts, the only thing that separates you from an animal is your humanity. These elements are lost when you're sitting in a trailer 7,500 miles from the battlefield.
Obviously the author was much more eloquent than I. It's been years since I've read it or my summary might have been a little better.
Personally, I hate drones. They screw up the airspace.
This post was edited on 2/10/14 at 10:52 am
Posted on 2/10/14 at 11:12 am to slacker130
quote:
Maybe, I've failed in my search for an article that I find compelling. The short summary article- discussed This story, which is a great read. It also covered events like Christmas day truces during WWI. It explained how veterans of opposing countries in war often have more of a bond together than with their own countrymen who didn't go to war.
-Those- types of wars are far, far over.
The drones are a direct response to another type of tactic that's by far just as cowardly (and effective) -- roadside bombs. It used to be that you could respect your enemy but after WWII (especially Japan's invasion of China and Korea) that whole philosophy is outdated.
Perhaps they do screw up airspace, but they save literally countless lives, materials and time.
They are also a very good psychological war machine.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 11:32 am to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
Posted on 2/10/14 at 11:34 am to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
The missile kind or the deliver my amazon order kind? I'm for both. 
Posted on 2/10/14 at 11:37 am to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
I support the use of drones on suspected terrorists. I have no clue why a bunch of tinfoil heads started talking about how Obama is gonna use drones on U.S. citizens domestically. 
I remember there was a bit of controversy over droning an American citizen who moved to the Middle East and became a terrorist, but IMO if you decide to join Al Quaeda your right to due process flies out the damn window.
I remember there was a bit of controversy over droning an American citizen who moved to the Middle East and became a terrorist, but IMO if you decide to join Al Quaeda your right to due process flies out the damn window.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 11:41 am to Crimson G
quote:
I remember there was a bit of controversy over droning an American citizen who moved to the Middle East and became a terrorist, but IMO if you decide to join Al Quaeda your right to due process flies out the damn window.
Two weeks later the killed his 16 year old son also.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 12:17 pm to Person of interest
quote:
Two weeks later the killed his 16 year old son also.
Anwar al-Awlaki (also spelled al-Aulaqi, al-Awlaqi; Arabic: ???? ???????? Anwar al-‘Awlaqi; April 21, 1971 – September 30, 2011) was an American[7] and Yemeni imam and Islamic militant.[8][9] U.S. government officials said that he was a senior talent recruiter and motivator who was involved in planning terrorist operations for the Islamist militant group al-Qaeda.[2][10][11][12][13][14][15][16]
-- Let me guess, his son was completely oblivious of his father's involvement and subsequently managed to get himself to Yemen and then ''accidentally'' fell in with other Al-Qaeda operatives who were killed with him.
Sorry, but frick 'em both.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 12:21 pm to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
My opinion is that if one does a fly over of my property it gets taken out by my AK47.
This post was edited on 2/10/14 at 12:23 pm
Posted on 2/10/14 at 12:32 pm to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:
-- Let me guess, his son was completely oblivious of his father's involvement and subsequently managed to get himself to Yemen and then ''accidentally'' fell in with other Al-Qaeda operatives who were killed with him.
Sorry, but frick 'em both.
I'm guessing as a 16 year old he had little decision making on where he lived or what his father did. He was an American citizen and regardless of his fathers crimes, he was never charged or convicted of anything before he was assassinated. When America is in the business of assassinating teenagers I question where we are at as a country.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 12:39 pm to Person of interest
quote:
I'm guessing as a 16 year old he had little decision making on where he lived or what his father did. He was an American citizen and regardless of his fathers crimes, he was never charged or convicted of anything before he was assassinated. When America is in the business of assassinating teenagers I question where we are at as a country
Yeah, if he wasn't with other Al-Qaeda operatives I'd be way more sympathetic with him being killed. But fact is, he had ties to Al-Qaeda just like his father did, was in the same country and looking for him. He didn't go there to find daddy, he went there to go join Al-Qaeda just like his father did.
''He was never charged or convicted'' - a waste of time. The only other conclusion you could draw is so infinitesimally possible that it's asking to suspend too much disbelief.
Abdulrahman al-Awlaki was killed at the age of 16 in an American drone strike on October 14, 2011, in Yemen, along with alleged al-Qaeda members two weeks after the death of his father.[251]
According to U.S. officials the killing of Abdulrahman al-Awlaki was a mistake; the actual target was an Egyptian, Ibrahim al-Banna. Abdulrahman al-Awlaki was reported to have gone out in the desert to search for his missing father but was sitting in a cafe when he was killed.[253]
His son wasn't targeted like he was -- he was just hanging out with Al-Qaeda operatives. You know, innocently looking for his dad.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 12:54 pm to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
He was innocent until proven guilty. Guess that is an old fashioned idea though.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 12:56 pm to Person of interest
When I think of good, mature, thought out decisions; I tend to think of 16 year olds.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 12:58 pm to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:
His son wasn't targeted like he was -- he was just hanging out with Al-Qaeda operatives. You know, innocently looking for his dad.
Extra-judicial murders are cool? What about when they are in countries the USA isn't technically at war with?
The worst part of the war of terror the USA does is the double-tap, where the USA intentionally murders first-responder to get a higher chance of getting the target.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 1:10 pm to Person of interest
quote:
He was innocent until proven guilty. Guess that is an old fashioned idea though.
quote:
He was innocent until proven guilty. Guess that is an old fashioned idea though.
Yeah, let's go ahead and put every single Al-Qaeda operative on trial. If it isn't 100% obvious what he was doing in Yemen hanging out with Al-Qaeda (when his father had deep, deep ties with Al-Qaeda) then you can't be trusted to be intellectually honest.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 1:11 pm to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:
The drones are a direct response to another type of tactic that's by far just as cowardly (and effective) -- roadside bombs. It used to be that you could respect your enemy but after WWII (especially Japan's invasion of China and Korea) that whole philosophy is outdated.
Roadside bombs were used during WWII. In fact, the Germans came up with the EFP if memory serves. Insurgents using roadside bombs is smart. If someone invaded the US and I was outgunned, I would certainly use them too. Cheap alternative to expensive C-IED measures and defeat systems.
As for drones, they might have their uses, but I am not a fan...especially for domestic purposes.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 1:13 pm to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:
Yeah, let's go ahead and put every single Al-Qaeda operative on trial. If it isn't 100% obvious what he was doing in Yemen hanging out with Al-Qaeda (when his father had deep, deep ties with Al-Qaeda) then you can't be trusted to be intellectually honest.
Huge difference between "every Al-Qaeda operative" and a 16 y/o American citizen that is supposed to have certain rights.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 1:16 pm to MagicCityBlazer
quote:
Extra-judicial murders are cool? What about when they are in countries the USA isn't technically at war with?
The worst part of the war of terror the USA does is the double-tap, where the USA intentionally murders first-responder to get a higher chance of getting the target.
1. It's not murder if they're actively fighting against America (going to Yemen to join Al-Qaeda, for instance), that's called warfare.
2. The other countries allow us to do it, they give us permission. The Pakistani government actually likes it even though publicly they need to condemn it and act indignant for their population's sake. 3% civilian kill rate is better than any other mechanical (non-human) platform for killing civilians.
3. The double-tap has become completely misconstrued as have most of the ''neutral articles'' produced by the United Nations.
A. What kind of people would come to respond to a drone strike or an explosion in the first place?
B. Most (if not all) instances where 'first responders' come to pick up the casualties, they're never marked as such. They're just plain white vans or trucks that drive up to the place and start giving first-aid to people we want dead.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 1:19 pm to Person of interest
quote:
Huge difference between "every Al-Qaeda operative" and a 16 y/o American citizen that is supposed to have certain rights.
You do realize he was killed with other Al-Qaeda members, his father was one and he was in a country that's currently having an active insurgency against people that his dad is working for/with? If that's not conclusive, again, I question your intellectual honesty.
Dislike Drones, but that was a completely legitimate strike and unintended to kill him. He happened to be hanging out with the wrong guys at the wrong time.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News