Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
- No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
- Times and dates in your local timezone.
- Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
- Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
- Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/02 17:48:15
Subject: Why is there so much fuss over the use of Drones?
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
ShumaGorath wrote:
We have never used a drone in a war. We've used them solely in counter insurgency efforts and unilateral actions against civilian populations. Using robots to blow people up without a ground presence encourages terrorist attacks on civilian targets and breeds immense ill will with everyone.
That's a cute sentiment but it's false. We've used drones in both of the Persian Gulf Wars in addition to their use in COIN during the occupation.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/02 17:48:30
Avatar 720 wrote:You see, to Auston, everyone is a Death Star; there's only one way you can take it and that's through a small gap at the back.
Come check out my Blood Angels,Crimson Fists, and coming soon Eldar
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/391013.page
I have conceded that the Eldar page I started in P&M is their legitimate home. Free Candy! Updated 10/19.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/391553.page
Powder Burns wrote:what they need to make is a fullsize leatherman, like 14" long folded, with a bone saw, notches for bowstring, signaling flare, electrical hand crank generator, bolt cutters.. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/02 17:52:43
Subject: Why is there so much fuss over the use of Drones?
|
 |
!!Goffik Rocker!!
(THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
|
AustonT wrote: ShumaGorath wrote: We have never used a drone in a war. We've used them solely in counter insurgency efforts and unilateral actions against civilian populations. Using robots to blow people up without a ground presence encourages terrorist attacks on civilian targets and breeds immense ill will with everyone.
That's a cute sentiment but it's false. We've used drones in both of the Persian Gulf Wars in addition to their use in COIN during the occupation. Sorry, I should have specified armed drones. Satellites and 70s spy balloons can be considered surveillance drones (and while technically a computerized missile could be considered a drone, that's kinda silly).
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/02 17:53:35
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Do you remember that time that thing happened?
This is a bad thread and you should all feel bad |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/02 17:59:01
Subject: Why is there so much fuss over the use of Drones?
|
 |
Imperial Admiral
|
ShumaGorath wrote:We have never used a drone in a war. We've used them solely in counter insurgency efforts and unilateral actions against civilian populations. Using robots to blow people up without a ground presence encourages terrorist attacks on civilian targets and breeds immense ill will with everyone.
We've never used drones against civilian populations. We've used drones against enemy combatants who've embedded themselves within civilian populations. There is a massive difference. An illustration would be "drone strike on terrorist with collateral damage" versus "suicide attack on civilian commercial airliner."
Also, I would take issue with your implication that we never had our civilians targeted until we started using drones.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/02 18:06:16
Subject: Why is there so much fuss over the use of Drones?
|
 |
!!Goffik Rocker!!
(THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
|
We've never used drones against civilian populations. We've used drones against enemy combatants who've embedded themselves within civilian populations. There is a massive difference. Considering one set is contained within the other, no. There isn't a massive difference. We're also not fighting people internationally classified as a military force, we're fighting at best international criminals. At worst we're targeting support staff or actual civilians. What our government considers these people is irrelevant insofar as global public (and even domestic) opinion goes. The majority of the world classifies what we're doing as beyond the scope of legal warfare or international policing and it's not winning us very many friends. An illustration would be "drone strike on terrorist with collateral damage" versus "suicide attack on civilian commercial airliner." Part of the issue with illustrating discussion is that both sides can do it. When we hit four insurgents, three unrelated adults, and six children it certainly hurts the credibility of the drone mission. When we hit a fuel supply tanker and kill 30+ people, few of them being classified as enemy combatants, it makes us look damn terrible. Also, I would take issue with your implication that we never had our civilians targeted until we started using drones. Of course we didn't, but their utilization unilaterally over the borders of countries like Pakistan and Yemen paint a bigger target over our head than existed previously and thus far has not seemingly impacted our stated missions in either Iraq of Afghanistan materially. They are at best half measures or blunt tools of police warfare, at worst they're one of the best propaganda tools extremists have.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/02 18:07:35
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Do you remember that time that thing happened?
This is a bad thread and you should all feel bad |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/02 18:10:43
Subject: Why is there so much fuss over the use of Drones?
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
ShumaGorath wrote: AustonT wrote: ShumaGorath wrote:
We have never used a drone in a war. We've used them solely in counter insurgency efforts and unilateral actions against civilian populations. Using robots to blow people up without a ground presence encourages terrorist attacks on civilian targets and breeds immense ill will with everyone.
That's a cute sentiment but it's false. We've used drones in both of the Persian Gulf Wars in addition to their use in COIN during the occupation.
Sorry, I should have specified armed drones. Satellites and 70s spy balloons can be considered surveillance drones (and while technically a computerized missile could be considered a drone, that's kinda silly).
You can attempt to obfuscate the point all you want. Drones, armed drones have been used in war, by us, against purely military targets. A drone isn't even at it's most dangerous when it is armed.
|
Avatar 720 wrote:You see, to Auston, everyone is a Death Star; there's only one way you can take it and that's through a small gap at the back.
Come check out my Blood Angels,Crimson Fists, and coming soon Eldar
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/391013.page
I have conceded that the Eldar page I started in P&M is their legitimate home. Free Candy! Updated 10/19.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/391553.page
Powder Burns wrote:what they need to make is a fullsize leatherman, like 14" long folded, with a bone saw, notches for bowstring, signaling flare, electrical hand crank generator, bolt cutters.. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/02 18:13:10
Subject: Why is there so much fuss over the use of Drones?
|
 |
[MOD]
Anti-piracy Officer
Somewhere in south-central England.
|
I supposed people would feel OK about suicide bombers if they achieved some threshold ratio of military to civilian kills.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/02 18:15:01
Subject: Why is there so much fuss over the use of Drones?
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)
The Great State of Texas
|
Considering one set is contained within the other, no. There isn't a massive difference. We're also not fighting people internationally classified as a military force, we're fighting at best international criminals. At worst we're targeting support staff or actual civilians. What our government considers these people is irrelevant insofar as global public (and even domestic) opinion goes. The majority of the world classifies what we're doing as beyond the scope of legal warfare or international policing and it's not winning us very many friends.
***Using that argument, its not smart to try to kill or even harm terrorists in any form.
Part of the issue with illustrating discussion is that both sides can do it. When we hit four insurgents, three unrelated adults, and six children it certainly hurts the credibility of the drone mission. When we hit a fuel supply tanker and kill 30+ people, few of them being classified as enemy combatants, it makes us look damn terrible.
***How is that different than a bombing run, missile strike, artillery bombardment, or 100 redcoats firing muskets?
Of course we didn't, but their utilization unilaterally over the borders of countries like Pakistan and Yemen paint a bigger target over our head than existed previously and thus far has not seemingly impacted our stated missions in either Iraq of Afghanistan materially. They are at best half measures or blunt tools of police warfare, at worst they're one of the best propaganda tools extremists have.
***This goes back to your first point. You’re arguing that its not smart to kill or even harm terrorists in any form.
|
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/02 18:15:01
Subject: Why is there so much fuss over the use of Drones?
|
 |
!!Goffik Rocker!!
(THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
|
AustonT wrote: ShumaGorath wrote: AustonT wrote: ShumaGorath wrote: We have never used a drone in a war. We've used them solely in counter insurgency efforts and unilateral actions against civilian populations. Using robots to blow people up without a ground presence encourages terrorist attacks on civilian targets and breeds immense ill will with everyone.
That's a cute sentiment but it's false. We've used drones in both of the Persian Gulf Wars in addition to their use in COIN during the occupation. Sorry, I should have specified armed drones. Satellites and 70s spy balloons can be considered surveillance drones (and while technically a computerized missile could be considered a drone, that's kinda silly).
You can attempt to obfuscate the point all you want. Drones, armed drones have been used in war, by us, against purely military targets. A drone isn't even at it's most dangerous when it is armed. I'm not obfuscating gak. You know I was talking about predators and their ilk, I know it, the moon knows it, That Frankenstein who felt racially oppressed in that Dave Chappelle munsters skit knows it, everyone does.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/02 18:16:04
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Do you remember that time that thing happened?
This is a bad thread and you should all feel bad |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/02 18:17:38
Subject: Why is there so much fuss over the use of Drones?
|
 |
Imperial Admiral
|
Kilkrazy wrote:
I supposed people would feel OK about suicide bombers if they achieved some threshold ratio of military to civilian kills.
You mean like kamikaze pilots?
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/02 18:22:07
Subject: Why is there so much fuss over the use of Drones?
|
 |
!!Goffik Rocker!!
(THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
|
Using that argument, its not smart to try to kill or even harm terrorists in any form.
The argument that acting outside of the scope of international law and ignoring human rights to prosecute a seemingly innefectual and expensive campaign of anti terrorist activities using tools designed for war is a good idea is pretty foolish in the year 2012. We've done it. We've seen the effects. We've seen the aftermath. It's failed. Every hiding place we blow up several more are created in new countries, this is effectively an infinite war and has led to the destabilization of the entire region. My argument is that we should probably stop pretending otherwise. The half measures of distributed targeted violence and full measures of full scale occupancy didn't work. It's time to address the fundamental causes rather than the symptoms.
How is that different than a bombing run, missile strike, artillery bombardment, or 100 redcoats firing muskets?
When humans do it they're often times prosecuted and there is a form of culpability implied. It's also rarer.
This goes back to your first point. You’re arguing that its not smart to kill or even harm terrorists in any form.
I'm only arguing that if you're incapable of legitimately considering or even listening to other peoples arguments. Which you are. Time and time again. In basically every thread. If you start to talk about weiner dogs when you don't like the tone of the conversation this could have been any thread in the last six months. Automatically Appended Next Post: Seaward wrote: Kilkrazy wrote:
I supposed people would feel OK about suicide bombers if they achieved some threshold ratio of military to civilian kills.
You mean like kamikaze pilots?
The western attitude towards suicide and the implied invulnerability of our forces forcing such tactics probably have more to do with the hatred of suicide bombing than anything else. We hate suicide, it's trained within us to be viewed as something immoral and cowardly from an early age. Doubly so we hate it when something cowardly and immoral is used to defeat the idea that in a "fair fight" we're effectively unbeatable (which makes me wonder how its fair). It's socially ingrained within us to see something like a suicide bomb as a desperate act of an evil person.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/02 18:24:39
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Do you remember that time that thing happened?
This is a bad thread and you should all feel bad |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/02 18:30:04
Subject: Why is there so much fuss over the use of Drones?
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
ShumaGorath wrote: AustonT wrote: ShumaGorath wrote: AustonT wrote: ShumaGorath wrote:
We have never used a drone in a war. We've used them solely in counter insurgency efforts and unilateral actions against civilian populations. Using robots to blow people up without a ground presence encourages terrorist attacks on civilian targets and breeds immense ill will with everyone.
That's a cute sentiment but it's false. We've used drones in both of the Persian Gulf Wars in addition to their use in COIN during the occupation.
Sorry, I should have specified armed drones. Satellites and 70s spy balloons can be considered surveillance drones (and while technically a computerized missile could be considered a drone, that's kinda silly).
You can attempt to obfuscate the point all you want. Drones, armed drones have been used in war, by us, against purely military targets. A drone isn't even at it's most dangerous when it is armed.
I'm not obfuscating gak. You know I was talking about predators and their ilk,
Yeah armed UAVs I caught that, used in a war. Next.
|
Avatar 720 wrote:You see, to Auston, everyone is a Death Star; there's only one way you can take it and that's through a small gap at the back.
Come check out my Blood Angels,Crimson Fists, and coming soon Eldar
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/391013.page
I have conceded that the Eldar page I started in P&M is their legitimate home. Free Candy! Updated 10/19.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/391553.page
Powder Burns wrote:what they need to make is a fullsize leatherman, like 14" long folded, with a bone saw, notches for bowstring, signaling flare, electrical hand crank generator, bolt cutters.. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/02 18:36:33
Subject: Why is there so much fuss over the use of Drones?
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)
The Great State of Texas
|
The argument that acting outside of the scope of international law and ignoring human rights to prosecute a seemingly innefectual and expensive campaign of anti terrorist activities using tools designed for war is a good idea is pretty foolish in the year 2012. We've done it. We've seen the effects. We've seen the aftermath. It's failed. Every hiding place we blow up several more are created in new countries, this is effectively an infinite war and has led to the destabilization of the entire region.
***There is no international law in regards to terrorists. Further, terrorism is down since the bombers started flying. Further, it appears you’re ceding the point although attempting to cloud the issue.
My argument is that we should probably stop pretending otherwise. The half measures of distributed targeted violence and full measures of full scale occupancy didn't work. It's time to address the fundamental causes rather than the symptoms.
***Wait, you want to quit being half assed and nuke them now?
When humans do it they're often times prosecuted and there is a form of culpability implied. It's also rarer.
***So you want Americans to abandon drones, use troops instead, and then have them prosecuted in criminal courts. Pardon me for not understanding that argument.
I'm only arguing that if you're incapable of legitimately considering or even listening to other peoples arguments. Which you are. Time and time again. In basically every thread. If you start to talk about weiner dogs when you don't like the tone of the conversation this could have been any thread in the last six months.
***Sounds like a personal attack when I am only asking you to support your argument. That and you’re jealous of wiener dogs. If I had the wiener dogs with me Suday night I wouldn’t have had to chase a rooster around the back yard, in the dark.
|
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/02 18:43:29
Subject: Why is there so much fuss over the use of Drones?
|
 |
Imperial Admiral
|
ShumaGorath wrote:
The argument that acting outside of the scope of international law and ignoring human rights to prosecute a seemingly innefectual and expensive campaign of anti terrorist activities using tools designed for war is a good idea is pretty foolish in the year 2012. We've done it. We've seen the effects. We've seen the aftermath. It's failed. Every hiding place we blow up several more are created in new countries, this is effectively an infinite war and has led to the destabilization of the entire region. My argument is that we should probably stop pretending otherwise. The half measures of distributed targeted violence and full measures of full scale occupancy didn't work. It's time to address the fundamental causes rather than the symptoms.
So if we stopped using UAVs, we'd stop having people trying to terrorize us?
Perhaps you could point out which UAV strike it was that triggered 9/11?
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/02 18:43:56
Subject: Why is there so much fuss over the use of Drones?
|
 |
!!Goffik Rocker!!
(THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
|
Yeah armed UAVs I caught that, used in a war. Next. Name one without it being something stupid like a mine or a cruise missile. Automatically Appended Next Post: Seaward wrote: ShumaGorath wrote: The argument that acting outside of the scope of international law and ignoring human rights to prosecute a seemingly innefectual and expensive campaign of anti terrorist activities using tools designed for war is a good idea is pretty foolish in the year 2012. We've done it. We've seen the effects. We've seen the aftermath. It's failed. Every hiding place we blow up several more are created in new countries, this is effectively an infinite war and has led to the destabilization of the entire region. My argument is that we should probably stop pretending otherwise. The half measures of distributed targeted violence and full measures of full scale occupancy didn't work. It's time to address the fundamental causes rather than the symptoms.
So if we stopped using UAVs, we'd stop having people trying to terrorize us? Perhaps you could point out which UAV strike it was that triggered 9/11? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy Just find your own, I'm tired of pointing these out for people. These conversations aren't ever worth having.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2012/10/02 18:45:08
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Do you remember that time that thing happened?
This is a bad thread and you should all feel bad |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/02 18:46:30
Subject: Why is there so much fuss over the use of Drones?
|
 |
Ancient Ultramarine Venerable Dreadnought
|
Playing Devils advocate here as a hearty supporter of glorious remote controlled death, did Shuma actually say he is against us using drones?
I never got that from his posts, I just thought he was pointing out some negatives, not saying outright we shouldn't use them.
|
We are arming Syrian rebels who support ISIS, who is fighting Iran, who is fighting Iraq who we also support against ISIS, while fighting Kurds who we support while they are fighting Syrian rebels. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/02 18:50:05
Subject: Why is there so much fuss over the use of Drones?
|
 |
!!Goffik Rocker!!
(THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
|
mattyrm wrote: Playing Devils advocate here as a hearty supporter of glorious remote controlled death, did Shuma actually say he is against us using drones?
I never got that from his posts, I just thought he was pointing out some negatives, not saying outright we shouldn't use them.
I endorse drone use, just not the government excuses for them or the lies people like frazzle or seaward use to support them (lies that include things like defaming anyone who questions how they're used).
|
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Do you remember that time that thing happened?
This is a bad thread and you should all feel bad |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/02 18:50:53
Subject: Why is there so much fuss over the use of Drones?
|
 |
Ancient Ultramarine Venerable Dreadnought
|
ShumaGorath wrote:
Just find your own, I'm tired of pointing these out for people. These conversations aren't ever worth having.
As I've pointed out from grizzled experience on the OT forum, I generally find that if a sentence starts with "So" its not worth reading.
"So what your saying is...." /insert gak nobody said
The thing I find most fascinating, is that its right there in black and white above your post, and yet people insist on doing it all day every day. Here Ill start us with another one.
"I agree with Drone use"
"So...... we drop napalm on nuns?" Automatically Appended Next Post: ShumaGorath wrote: mattyrm wrote: Playing Devils advocate here as a hearty supporter of glorious remote controlled death, did Shuma actually say he is against us using drones?
I never got that from his posts, I just thought he was pointing out some negatives, not saying outright we shouldn't use them.
I endorse drone use, just not the government excuses for them or the lies people like frazzle or seaward use to support them (lies that include things like defaming anyone who questions how they're used).
Yeah I figured as much.. makes the last ten posts above kinda pointless then eh?
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/02 18:51:46
We are arming Syrian rebels who support ISIS, who is fighting Iran, who is fighting Iraq who we also support against ISIS, while fighting Kurds who we support while they are fighting Syrian rebels. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/02 18:58:42
Subject: Why is there so much fuss over the use of Drones?
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)
The Great State of Texas
|
Wait you endorse drone use but are arguing that they cause terrorism? OK...
|
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/02 19:01:31
Subject: Why is there so much fuss over the use of Drones?
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
ShumaGorath wrote:Yeah armed UAVs I caught that, used in a war. Next.
Name one without it being something stupid like a mine or a cruise missile.
K
OIF History Brief dated May 2003 declassified May 2013 wrote:22 Mar (2003)
3rd ID clashes with Iraqi troops, killing 45 of the enemy. 3rd ID bypasses urban areas and resistance,
penetrating 150 miles into Iraq. UK and I MEF close on Basrah. Spotted Iraqi resistance grows along the
main supply route, especially at the Euphrates River crossing at An Nasiriyah. A Predator unmanned aerial
vehicle (UAV) destroys a ZSU 23-4 radar-guided anti-aircraft artillery vehicle outside the town of AI
Amarah. This is the first armed UAV kill in Iraq.
9
|
Avatar 720 wrote:You see, to Auston, everyone is a Death Star; there's only one way you can take it and that's through a small gap at the back.
Come check out my Blood Angels,Crimson Fists, and coming soon Eldar
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/391013.page
I have conceded that the Eldar page I started in P&M is their legitimate home. Free Candy! Updated 10/19.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/391553.page
Powder Burns wrote:what they need to make is a fullsize leatherman, like 14" long folded, with a bone saw, notches for bowstring, signaling flare, electrical hand crank generator, bolt cutters.. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/02 19:05:44
Subject: Why is there so much fuss over the use of Drones?
|
 |
Ancient Ultramarine Venerable Dreadnought
|
Frazzled wrote:Wait you endorse drone use but are arguing that they cause terrorism? OK...
Well, they obviously do Frazzled. And nobody endorses them as heartily as me.
The culture in places like Pakistan and Afghanistan and such is all about revenge. If a drone drops a bomb on 5 innocent men accidentally, then a buck says twenty that many of those mens kids will pick up an AK47 and try to bring it. Thats how it works.. surely you can understand that?
I don't think either of you are wrong, I think you are doing to old dakka trick of drawing two lines in the sand far too obviously. With the old "So, what you are saying is......" line.
You can heartily accept drone use should continue, whilst acknowledging that there can be one or two downsides surely?
For example, I think we should bomb the fething gak out of people, a part of me thinks we should bomb Afghanistan right down to the fething reptiles.... but I'm well aware that this can lead to major issues in the surrounding area. Automatically Appended Next Post: AustonT wrote: ShumaGorath wrote:Yeah armed UAVs I caught that, used in a war. Next.
Name one without it being something stupid like a mine or a cruise missile.
K
OIF History Brief dated May 2003 declassified May 2013 wrote:22 Mar (2003)
3rd ID clashes with Iraqi troops, killing 45 of the enemy. 3rd ID bypasses urban areas and resistance,
penetrating 150 miles into Iraq. UK and I MEF close on Basrah. Spotted Iraqi resistance grows along the
main supply route, especially at the Euphrates River crossing at An Nasiriyah. A Predator unmanned aerial
vehicle (UAV) destroys a ZSU 23-4 radar-guided anti-aircraft artillery vehicle outside the town of AI
Amarah. This is the first armed UAV kill in Iraq.
9
Hey you know I was actually there for that. We moved into Basrah in March supported by I MEF.
I was there for the opening of shock and awe.. it was the best free fireworks display I ever attended.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/02 19:07:36
We are arming Syrian rebels who support ISIS, who is fighting Iran, who is fighting Iraq who we also support against ISIS, while fighting Kurds who we support while they are fighting Syrian rebels. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/02 19:14:20
Subject: Why is there so much fuss over the use of Drones?
|
 |
!!Goffik Rocker!!
(THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
|
AustonT wrote: ShumaGorath wrote:Yeah armed UAVs I caught that, used in a war. Next. Name one without it being something stupid like a mine or a cruise missile. K OIF History Brief dated May 2003 declassified May 2013 wrote:22 Mar (2003) 3rd ID clashes with Iraqi troops, killing 45 of the enemy. 3rd ID bypasses urban areas and resistance, penetrating 150 miles into Iraq. UK and I MEF close on Basrah. Spotted Iraqi resistance grows along the main supply route, especially at the Euphrates River crossing at An Nasiriyah. A Predator unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) destroys a ZSU 23-4 radar-guided anti-aircraft artillery vehicle outside the town of AI Amarah. This is the first armed UAV kill in Iraq. 9
There we go, was that so hard? Now I know something I didn't. They used the predator drone to fire a missile in the quick little war that preceded their use as a fire support and assassination mechanism against extremists and insurgents. Everyone is better for this being shared, rather than aggressive bluster. Now we can actually talk about how irrelevant that strike was now that we've established that I was wrong.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2012/10/02 19:15:49
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Do you remember that time that thing happened?
This is a bad thread and you should all feel bad |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/02 19:19:53
Subject: Why is there so much fuss over the use of Drones?
|
 |
Imperial Admiral
|
Oh, I see. You're saying you weren't actually saying that if we didn't use drones, people in that region would like us more.
Yet...people didn't like us before we started using drones. Pakistan wasn't all about the US prior to us starting to hit gak in Waziristan. Nor was Yemen.
What's your proposed alternative, short of what Frazzled mentioned before, just leaving terrorists to continue hopping merrily about? We go in with a team, the outcry's even more massive than hitting something with a drone. You may want to look up Pakistani reactions to the bin Laden raid if you believe otherwise.
We can't kill these guys with drones. We can't kill them with raids. So what are you proposing?
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/02 19:23:13
Subject: Why is there so much fuss over the use of Drones?
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
ShumaGorath wrote:Now we can actually talk about how irrelevant that strike was now that we've established that I was wrong.
If it was irrelevant why'd you say it in the first place? and then proceed to vehemently defend it. It only highlights how willing you are to make gak up when you have no idea what you are talking about.
|
Avatar 720 wrote:You see, to Auston, everyone is a Death Star; there's only one way you can take it and that's through a small gap at the back.
Come check out my Blood Angels,Crimson Fists, and coming soon Eldar
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/391013.page
I have conceded that the Eldar page I started in P&M is their legitimate home. Free Candy! Updated 10/19.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/391553.page
Powder Burns wrote:what they need to make is a fullsize leatherman, like 14" long folded, with a bone saw, notches for bowstring, signaling flare, electrical hand crank generator, bolt cutters.. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/02 19:31:13
Subject: Why is there so much fuss over the use of Drones?
|
 |
!!Goffik Rocker!!
(THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
|
Oh, I see. You're saying you weren't actually saying that if we didn't use drones, people in that region would like us more. No, I'm saying that by using drones so much, without sanction by operation governments, without culpability, and without regard to sovereignty we make people like us less. Yet...people didn't like us before we started using drones. Pakistan wasn't all about the US prior to us starting to hit gak in Waziristan. Nor was Yemen. Nope. In fact, it's about the same. Europe certainly isn't a big fan of us now though, nor is egypt or turkey. We've lost plenty of our high ground in South American too. Everyone can see this happening, not just the guys who might have a drone above them. What's your proposed alternative, short of what Frazzled mentioned before, just leaving terrorists to continue hopping merrily about? We go in with a team, the outcry's even more massive than hitting something with a drone. You may want to look up Pakistani reactions to the bin Laden raid if you believe otherwise. Stop patronizing me every time we speak. It's obnoxious, especially from someone with so blisteringly simple a world view. I propose bringing to the U.N. a measure to update war doctrine and the classification of military's and combatants. I also propose the creation of a multilateral military police force that can act against terrorist elements in failing or weak states without the permission of said states. The biggest problem with the U.S. strong arming everything in the mideast and africa is that we're doing it alone. We're the sole target and we're bleeding for everyone elses safety while operating outside of the law and at the mercy of corrupt contractors or governments. We're also fething it up. We can't kill these guys with drones. We can't kill them with raids. So what are you proposing? Where did I say that? Seriously? Automatically Appended Next Post: AustonT wrote: ShumaGorath wrote:Now we can actually talk about how irrelevant that strike was now that we've established that I was wrong.
If it was irrelevant why'd you say it in the first place? and then proceed to vehemently defend it. It only highlights how willing you are to make gak up when you have no idea what you are talking about. Oh, I'm saying that using them in a weaponized fashion to bombard an effectively crippled and useless opponent for three days before using them in a COIN strategy for a decade doesn't really impact the fact that they've never really seen actual war and their primary use is and has always been in killing people who don't have realistic military means. Their use in shock and awe is pointless because, lets be honest, hot air balloons with people dropping grenades would have worked out just as well there. That was a war, certainly, but it was hardly against an opponent prepared to shoot them down or particularly aware of their use in the first place. It's now down to the realm of my personal opinion, but that was hardly the teeth cutting of an actual war I would want to pass the test of "This thing has seen war".
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2012/10/02 19:36:59
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Do you remember that time that thing happened?
This is a bad thread and you should all feel bad |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/02 19:39:48
Subject: Why is there so much fuss over the use of Drones?
|
 |
Imperial Admiral
|
ShumaGorath wrote:
No, I'm saying that by using drones so much, without sanction by operation governments, without culpability, and without regard to sovereignty we make people like us less.
And I've said, repeatedly, they didn't like us before. Nothing much has changed as a result of the use of drones.
Nope. In fact, it's about the same. Europe certainly isn't a big fan of us now though, nor is egypt or turkey. We've lost plenty of our high ground in South American too. Everyone can see this happening, not just the guys who might have a drone above them.
You attribute all of this to drones? That's impressive. Not as impressive as if you had any actual documentation to back it up, but impressive nonetheless. I somewhat suspect our "lowered standing in the world" has a lot less to do with the specific use of drones than with military adventurism in general.
Stop patronizing me every time we speak. It's obnoxious, especially from someone with so blisteringly simple a world view. I propose bringing to the U.N.
Destined to work like a charm.
a measure to update war doctrine and the classification of military's and combatants. I also propose the creation of a multilateral military police force that can act against terrorist elements in failing or weak states without the permission of said states.
So sort of like NATO in Libya or Coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan? Are you under the impression that we turned away other countries wanting to get in on shooting terrorist elements in those latter cases? We got the people who were actually willing to come on board.
And what happens when this proposed multinational military police force realizes that drone strikes are a hell of a lot less risky than sending in teams of snake-eaters?
The biggest problem with the U.S. strong arming everything in the mideast and africa is that we're doing it alone. We're the sole target and we're bleeding for everyone elses safety while operating outside of the law and at the mercy of corrupt contractors or governments. We're also fething it up.
I don't really know what to say to the first bolded claim, other than pointing you towards Wikipedia.
As to the second...I'd say we're pretty successful at it, actually. Most of those drone strikes hit what they're aiming at.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/02 19:47:25
Subject: Why is there so much fuss over the use of Drones?
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
ShumaGorath wrote: Platuan4th wrote: Kilkrazy wrote: Platuan4th wrote:The issue(at least according to the UN and the Air Force members I know) is that Drones can be sent in to kill without exposing our own soldiers. Essentially, the 'issue' is that it's unfair. I think there is some concept of honourable combat in which the aggressor at least exposes himself to some kind of danger. In that concept, drones rank with snipers as people killing defenceless targets from afar, without risk. Interestingly, westerners tend to see suicide bombers as unfair, though their level of risk is 100%. Oh, no doubt. I'm not saying that it's right or wrong in either direction, just that it's what the arguments against drones essentially boil down to. I thought the argument boiled down to the fact that were indiscriminate, as characterizes all aerial weapons. Certainly, there's a weird honor thing going on too, but I've yet to see that as more than a footnote or a part of an argument stating a dwindling level of morality involved in western warfare. Not really a footnote as I understand it. Several countries have asked the UN to make it illegal( or at least sanctioned) to use Drones as strike weapons for the very reason that "it's unfair that they don't have to risk their soldiers" in addition to being indiscriminate. Of course, the UN's done squat about it since it's coming from non-Permanent Security Council members. Of course, I could be reading in to it wrong since most of the info about it I get is filtered through Military channels and members.
|
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2012/10/02 19:50:37
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/02 19:51:10
Subject: Why is there so much fuss over the use of Drones?
|
 |
!!Goffik Rocker!!
(THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
|
And I've said, repeatedly, they didn't like us before. Nothing much has changed as a result of the use of drones.
Than why are we harming our goodwill in the rest of the world to do nothing.
You attribute all of this to drones? That's impressive. Not as impressive as if you had any actual documentation to back it up, but impressive nonetheless. I somewhat suspect our "lowered standing in the world" has a lot less to do with the specific use of drones than with military adventurism in general.
Is your screen a funhouse mirror? How are you getting this gak from what I'm saying? Where did I attribute all of it to the drones? The answer is I didn't.
Destined to work like a charm.
As opposed to leaving two states on the brink of collapse, wasting trillions, and breeding a new generation of freshly anti American terrorists.
So sort of like NATO in Libya or Coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan? Are you under the impression that we turned away other countries wanting to get in on shooting terrorist elements in those latter cases? We got the people who were actually willing to come on board.
What coalition? That was a unilateral action that had us pleading for others to help. What is needed is a something that is binding. Neither of those cases were of stateless terrorist forces either, both were the overthrow of totalitarian governments.
I don't really know what to say to the first bolded claim, other than pointing you towards Wikipedia.
As to the second...I'd say we're pretty successful at it, actually. Most of those drone strikes hit what they're aiming at.
Yep, we killed a lot more than we lost in vietnam too. Sure did win there. You are useless to communicate with, this is dumb. You're just twisting everything I say to mean something else and every example you bring unrelated at best. Automatically Appended Next Post: Platuan4th wrote: ShumaGorath wrote: Platuan4th wrote: Kilkrazy wrote: Platuan4th wrote:The issue(at least according to the UN and the Air Force members I know) is that Drones can be sent in to kill without exposing our own soldiers. Essentially, the 'issue' is that it's unfair.
I think there is some concept of honourable combat in which the aggressor at least exposes himself to some kind of danger. In that concept, drones rank with snipers as people killing defenceless targets from afar, without risk.
Interestingly, westerners tend to see suicide bombers as unfair, though their level of risk is 100%.
Oh, no doubt. I'm not saying that it's right or wrong in either direction, just that it's what the arguments against drones essentially boil down to.
I thought the argument boiled down to the fact that were indiscriminate, as characterizes all aerial weapons. Certainly, there's a weird honor thing going on too, but I've yet to see that as more than a footnote or a part of an argument stating a dwindling level of morality involved in western warfare.
Not really a footnote as I understand it. Several countries have asked the UN to make it illegal( or at least sanctioned) to use Drones as strike weapons for the very reason that "it's unfair that they don't have to risk their soldiers" in addition to being indiscriminate. Of course, the UN's done squat about it since it's coming from non-Permanent Security Council members.
Of course, I could be reading in to it wrong since most of the info about it I get is filtered through Military channels and members.
I'd question where the emphasis of their requests lie. The honor thing could well footnote the document or be part of an impassined plea about the changing state of warfare and Americas detached killing of their citizens which in effect rides the "indiscriminate" point.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/02 19:52:35
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Do you remember that time that thing happened?
This is a bad thread and you should all feel bad |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/02 20:02:49
Subject: Why is there so much fuss over the use of Drones?
|
 |
Imperial Admiral
|
ShumaGorath wrote:Than why are we harming our goodwill in the rest of the world to do nothing.
Largely because it's not doing nothing. Are you really under the impression that we're just picking people out at random to target with drones? We're hitting guys actively involved in the planning and execution of terrorist activity.
Is your screen a funhouse mirror? How are you getting this gak from what I'm saying? Where did I attribute all of it to the drones? The answer is I didn't.
Well, you actually did, right here:
ShumaGorath wrote:No, I'm saying that by using drones so much, without sanction by operation governments, without culpability, and without regard to sovereignty we make people like us less.
What coalition? That was a unilateral action that had us pleading for others to help. What is needed is a something that is binding. Neither of those cases were of stateless terrorist forces either, both were the overthrow of totalitarian governments.
That is, factually, incorrect as it comes.
Contributed troops to Afghanistan: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Security_Assistance_Force#Contributing_nations
Contributed troops to Iraq: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-National_Force_%E2%80%93_Iraq
Libya was largely NATO members other than us.
Yep, we killed a lot more than we lost in vietnam too. Sure did win there. You are useless to communicate with, this is dumb. You're just twisting everything I say to mean something else and every example you bring unrelated at best.
I suspect you're finding me so difficult to communicate with because I deal primarily within the realm of reality.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/02 20:05:51
Subject: Why is there so much fuss over the use of Drones?
|
 |
Hallowed Canoness
|
mattyrm wrote:
Agreed. All is fair in love and war.
I also don't see why we should get so pissed about the occasional glut of civilian casualties when our enemies actively target our civilians. They say all American/British citizens are legitimate targets. I mean, Jesus, at least we fething TRY not to kill people that don't deserve it.
Now, clearly I'm far too experienced to not be aware that the most important aspect of winning an occupation such as the Afghan conflict and the wider war on terror is winning the hearts and minds of the populace, which is why we have strict ROE and always try to keep civilian casualties down to a minimum. But I dont think its the end of the world when we occasionally feth up. I certainly don't think we should stop using the drones. They work, they are awesome.
At the end of the day, we already occupy the moral high ground. Most Muslims don't see us as heartless baby killers, they are aware we don't intentionally kill the innocent. Only the most extreme fethers think we eat babies... and we aren't going to win them over anyway! I don't see why we should freak out over the occasional wayward drone attack.
feth em. I want us to win, not worry about playing fair with a bunch of savage mother fethers who never do.
Oh, and have a side hobby of throwing acid in little girls faces for the crime of learning to read.
This probably should have ended the thread. Well said Matty.
|
I beg of you sarge let me lead the charge when the battle lines are drawn
Lemme at least leave a good hoof beat they'll remember loud and long
SoB, IG, SM, SW, Nec, Cus, Tau, FoW Germans, Team Yankee Marines, Battletech Clan Wolf, Mercs
DR:90-SG+M+B+I+Pw40k12+ID+++A+++/are/WD-R+++T(S)DM+ |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/02 20:11:44
Subject: Why is there so much fuss over the use of Drones?
|
 |
!!Goffik Rocker!!
(THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
|
Seaward wrote: ShumaGorath wrote:Than why are we harming our goodwill in the rest of the world to do nothing.
Largely because it's not doing nothing. Are you really under the impression that we're just picking people out at random to target with drones? We're hitting guys actively involved in the planning and execution of terrorist activity. Is your screen a funhouse mirror? How are you getting this gak from what I'm saying? Where did I attribute all of it to the drones? The answer is I didn't.
Well, you actually did, right here: ShumaGorath wrote:No, I'm saying that by using drones so much, without sanction by operation governments, without culpability, and without regard to sovereignty we make people like us less. What coalition? That was a unilateral action that had us pleading for others to help. What is needed is a something that is binding. Neither of those cases were of stateless terrorist forces either, both were the overthrow of totalitarian governments.
That is, factually, incorrect as it comes. Contributed troops to Afghanistan: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Security_Assistance_Force#Contributing_nations Contributed troops to Iraq: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-National_Force_%E2%80%93_Iraq Libya was largely NATO members other than us. Yep, we killed a lot more than we lost in vietnam too. Sure did win there. You are useless to communicate with, this is dumb. You're just twisting everything I say to mean something else and every example you bring unrelated at best. Oh look, someone is pretending that the coalition of the willing had a meaningful and material impact on the conflict in Afghanistan. A conflict that didn't even have coalition support (outside of the UK sending a tenth what we had sent) after the first five years. We sure were lucky for luxumborgs 10 soldiers! Maybe this really is a funhouse, I'm seeing oddities everywhere. He's even pretending that Libya was predominantly the work of non US nato forces, despite the fact that we had the most material assets used in the conflict! I suspect you're finding me so difficult to communicate with because I deal primarily within the realm of reality. No, you really don't. You're not even close to it. You don't even seem to know where it is.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2012/10/02 20:15:20
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Do you remember that time that thing happened?
This is a bad thread and you should all feel bad |
|
 |
 |
|