The Truth About US Military Drones

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/sep/25/study-obama-drone-deaths

Interesting read. Is Obama and the increased use of military drones threatening the security of the US even more?

Summary?

Silly me, thinking this forum has members who can have a serious discussion.

Your own fault for not at least summarizing or quoting part of the article in the OP. If you had done that I'd agree with you.

With the drones I look at it two ways, do you want to remotely strike targets with almost no cost to US lives, or do you want to send soldiers (in a really uncooperative environment anyway) with their lives on the line? The drones are not perfect, and there are always going to be casualties, but in America / to Americans, I don't think the lives of civilization casualties matter that much. Sending drones is a tough thing to do but sending soldiers isnt easy either. I can't critize Obama for his use of them because either way it's a lose/lose. But the specific deployment of them should be revised.

Plus, this article is dumb long.

dena wrote:With the drones I look at it two ways, do you want to remotely strike targets with almost no cost to US lives, or do you want to send soldiers (in a really uncooperative environment anyway) with their lives on the line? The drones are not perfect, and there are always going to be casualties, but in America / to Americans, I don't think the lives of civilization casualties matter that much. Sending drones is a tough thing to do but sending soldiers isnt easy either. I can't critize Obama for his use of them because either way it's a lose/lose. But the specific deployment of them should be revised.

Plus, this article is dumb long.

I'm more upset on how it is done.

Hitting funerals....

any boy over 16 = militant.

dena wrote:With the drones I look at it two ways, do you want to remotely strike targets with almost no cost to US lives, or do you want to send soldiers (in a really uncooperative environment anyway) with their lives on the line? The drones are not perfect, and there are always going to be casualties, but in America / to Americans, I don't think the lives of civilization casualties matter that much. Sending drones is a tough thing to do but sending soldiers isnt easy either. I can't critize Obama for his use of them because either way it's a lose/lose. But the specific deployment of them should be revised.

Plus, this article is dumb long.

I see what you mean, but like NZG said, it's the fact they are attacking innocents on purpose (i.e. funerals) and the government is lying about the effectiveness of the drones.

I was expecting a behind the scenes story of a US drone going home to his family and crying on the edge of his bed in the middle of the night.

ahlycotc wrote:Silly me, thinking this forum has members who can have a serious discussion.

I'll be honest, I just wanted to post that picture

dena wrote:With the drones I look at it two ways, do you want to remotely strike targets with almost no cost to US lives, or do you want to send soldiers (in a really uncooperative environment anyway) with their lives on the line? The drones are not perfect, and there are always going to be casualties, but in America / to Americans, I don't think the lives of civilization casualties matter that much. Sending drones is a tough thing to do but sending soldiers isnt easy either. I can't critize Obama for his use of them because either way it's a lose/lose. But the specific deployment of them should be revised.

Plus, this article is dumb long.

The US military today is more conscientious of civilian casualties than any military in history.

Bombing funerals is very wrong, though.

Mustangt125 wrote:

dena wrote:With the drones I look at it two ways, do you want to remotely strike targets with almost no cost to US lives, or do you want to send soldiers (in a really uncooperative environment anyway) with their lives on the line? The drones are not perfect, and there are always going to be casualties, but in America / to Americans, I don't think the lives of civilization casualties matter that much. Sending drones is a tough thing to do but sending soldiers isnt easy either. I can't critize Obama for his use of them because either way it's a lose/lose. But the specific deployment of them should be revised.

Plus, this article is dumb long.

The US military today is more conscientious of civilian casualties than any military in history.

Bombing funerals is very wrong, though.

Any superpower military in history. How many innocent civilians does the Swiss army victimize?

I just read this morning that the US classifies any male killed by drones as 'militant', mannnn.

dena wrote:I just read this morning that the US classifies any male killed by drones as 'militant', mannnn.

It's in the article. That's what NZG and I were talking about.

ahlycotc wrote:

dena wrote:I just read this morning that the US classifies any male killed by drones as 'militant', mannnn.

It's in the article. That's what NZG and I were talking about.

How in the hell does that kind of wording ever occur in policy?

ahlycotc wrote:

dena wrote:I just read this morning that the US classifies any male killed by drones as 'militant', mannnn.

It's in the article. That's what NZG and I were talking about.

Oh I missed that part, it's ridiculous.

dena wrote:

ahlycotc wrote:

It's in the article. That's what NZG and I were talking about.

Oh I missed that part, it's ridiculous.

dat smirk.

http://www.businessinsider.com/us-drone-tweets-reveal-double-tap-plan-2012-12