WakeandBake
Well-known member
Just War Theory. Adorable
So why have you defended every other stupid and horrible mistake that has resulted in innocent deaths?
Just War Theory. Adorable
Explain to me the difference between a drone strike and a strike from a manned aircraft. Is the theory that we won't fly manned missions over Yemen so we shouldn't be able to use drones?
Could be a product of my age (only really been paying attention to this sort of news post 9/11, in the drone era) or more media coverage of it, but were/are there that many examples of this sort of thing happening with piloted missions?
sent from my Galaxy Note II via Tapatalk 4
Agreed, but that's one example. Seems that this sort of thing happens often with drones, but less so with pilots.
sent from my Galaxy Note II via Tapatalk 4
My theory is the same as I feel about guns, the further away killers are moved from their victims the easier it is to pull the trigger. Sure someone can murder someone with a club, but it's probably a lot taller psychological barrier than pushing a button from thousands of miles away.
Could be a product of my age (only really been paying attention to this sort of news post 9/11, in the drone era) or more media coverage of it, but were/are there that many examples of this sort of thing happening with piloted missions?
sent from my Galaxy Note II via Tapatalk 4
Right, completely agree. Just wondering if there were as many accidents with pilots as drones, as some seemed to suggest that it was the same.
sent from my Galaxy Note II via Tapatalk 4
Is there any doubt OBL won?
I mean, we certainly have used manned aircraft to bomb people and installations throughout Iraq (in 2 wars) and Afghanistan. We bombed the shit out of N. Vietnam for a period of time.
I think the US honestly tries to limit civilian casualties. Probably more than any country in the world actively involved in fighting a war. But there is also a "better them than us" component to it, and I would suggest that is exactly what the American people want.
Let me ask a different question that might help clarify positions. If one of our intelligence agencies developed actionable intelligence suggesting that members of AQAP were going to be meeting at a certain spot at a certain time in Yemen, do people on the board think:
(a) we can't do anything about it- Yemen is a soverign nation with whom we are not at war, therefore we cannot take action in Yemen;
(b) we can take action, but only through us of manned airstrikes or ground troops; or
(c) kill the bad guys any which way we can, including through the use of drones?
I'm firmly in the camp of (a) unless (b) is negotiated with the local government. I just don't really understand the legality of (c). If some American bro was planning on doing damage in another country and that country came killed him on our soil, wouldn't we be livid? With or without collateral damage. If innocents were killed, it would be the biggest story ever.
Found this post in the wayback machine...
RAcer, is this real?
Explain to me the difference between a drone strike and a strike from a manned aircraft. Is the theory that we won't fly manned missions over Yemen so we shouldn't be able to use drones?