Syria: Family of 6 wounded in US airstrike

Discussion in 'Latest US & World News' started by Giftedone, Dec 6, 2021.

?

We need to stop using drones to kill people

  1. Yes .. reminds me way to much of Terminator

    4 vote(s)
    100.0%
  2. No .. we love drones - get the bad guys .. no worries about collatoral damage

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. HonestJoe

    HonestJoe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Messages:
    13,532
    Likes Received:
    3,707
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That isn't exactly what I said now is it. My core point is that there is a massive range of machines that can be commonly called drones and the ones which are effectively military aircraft without a pilot inside are a world away from the kind of drones police can and do use.

    The police can (and do) kill people all the time (especially in the US) but they can do that with guns, batons, cars or knees. Drones specifically aren't the cause of any of the problems being identified here.

    How would that be any different to them sending a manned aircraft, practically, politically or legally? How would it be different from them sending assassins with poison, guns or bombs? Again, the tool itself isn't the core issue here.

    The point remains that there are fewer differences between the kind of drone used in this military strike and an F-15 than there is between the kind of drone used in this strike and the kind of drones that are ever likely to be used by police. It's like comparing a police car and a tank.
     
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2021
  2. Aristotle66

    Aristotle66 Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2021
    Messages:
    701
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    Interesting.
     
    Hey Now likes this.
  3. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    54,509
    Likes Received:
    10,912
    Trophy Points:
    113
    and its a futile point .. meaningless to some of the questions being addressed... You were the one that moved the goalpost to "only Military" .. but .. even in the case of "Military" .. you still evaded the basic question .. whether targeted assassinations of "bad guys" in foreign nations should become the norm..

    "Legality" now that is a joke .. considering we are already violating every international rule in the book in Syria .. who gave us permission to conduct military activity in the Sovereign nation of Syria ?

    That you can't figure out any differences says much about how much you have thought - given a moron can figure out that getting an F-15 into the airspace of a foreign nation undetected is a whole lot more difficult than a drone .. and the covert rammifications as such.

    Do we accept this as normal ? ..cause precedent is being set as we speak - and US is not the only nation with drones that can kill people .. .. Predator not required .. all kinds of variations flooding the markets...

    Ohhhhpp Aaaarrooouppp .. nutting to see here Margarette .
     
  4. Big Richard

    Big Richard Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2021
    Messages:
    1,488
    Likes Received:
    1,553
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Is stupid Xoe the racist and bigot trying to kill as many innocent Arabs as he can?
     
  5. modernpaladin

    modernpaladin Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    20,848
    Likes Received:
    15,783
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    All it takes is the right 'emergency' to set the precedent. Before covid, coercing vaccination was unpopular and no one supported forced vaccination. If the public's fear strings are plucked enough, they'll demand anything, including cops be militarized with drone bombs. Just gotta find the right crisis that whips up the 'safety>freedom' crowd. And of course we have to replace local cops with national (or international) ones first...
     
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2021
  6. HonestJoe

    HonestJoe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Messages:
    13,532
    Likes Received:
    3,707
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If you wanted to focus on the military question, you shouldn't have made the ridiculous rhetorical point about the police. I'm happy to agree it was a futile point that was meaningless to the poll question.

    I don't think targeted assassination of anyone should happen anywhere. It does happen, all over the world, including by (or on behalf of) the US government.

    That wasn't your question though, you only asked about using drones to kill people. Stopping using drones as a tool for this won't change a thing (especially if it's only officially stopping).

    A reaper drone isn't much smaller or more stealthy than a conventional jet. The US don't need to sneak aircraft of any kind in to Syria because there is nobody there with the desire or capability of effectively doing anything about it.

    There is probably some benefit using drones on a political and public image stance (especially if it goes terribly wrong), but that is in great part because of how drones are viewed and presented in the media as being something new, different and special rather than just being another tool (or weapon) that shouldn't be treated as fundamentally differently to any other.
     
  7. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    54,509
    Likes Received:
    10,912
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Nothing rediculous at all ... Just because Police may not use military drones .. or they may ... you don't know that they won't do that at some point in the future .. but even if they don't ... this doesn't mean they can not use non military drones to kill people.. something that is completely relevant to the poll question. you just can't see forest for the trees today .. first you can't figure out the difference between F-15 and Drone .. now this..

    Perhaps your in the wrong room mate .. all this stuff just way to complicated.

    Of course it was my question .. should we be using drones to kill people in foreign lands .. aka Targeted assassination -- glad you agree that we shouldn't be doing this stuff .. as will come back to bite us .. is a bad direction.. Will these neocon morons veer off the dark path .... highly unlikely ..

    1) there are many different kinds of drones ..
    2) Iran managed to fly drones undetected into El Saud .. past our Patriot System air defenses .. your claim is simply not true .. unless you think we are not as technically accomplished as the Iranians .. and even if we are not .. China, Russia, Turkey, Japan .. and so on .. do have the technical accumin of Iran .. and far better.
     
  8. Poohbear

    Poohbear Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2018
    Messages:
    5,953
    Likes Received:
    1,422
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I was quite young at the time of the Munich Massacre. One Jew made a comment
    and I thought to myself that I would try to remember it - test and see if he is right
    or wrong (I was quite leftist back then) as the years went by.
    This was the capture and killing of Israelis, and hijacking of a German plane, BTW.

    'What they have done to us today they will do to you tomorrow.'

    And that proved 100% correct.

    Israel is the front line in this Islamist campaign. And Islamism is no different than
    Communism and Fascism - all declared global ambitions to make everyone Fascist
    Communist or Muslim.

    America drifts in and out in its apprehension of this. Americans turned a blind eye in
    the 1930's - I think they were something like 17th on the list of military powers - this
    was not lost on the Japanese.
    But in the1950's and 1960's Americans seemed on top of the next wave with Communism
    and to date seem to be doing 'something', not a lot, sometimes wrongly, but something
    about Islamism.
    And let's hope they keep on top of China - because, like the Islamists, if you don't then
    China will be on top of you. China even told Austalia to curtail its media.
     
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2021
  9. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    54,509
    Likes Received:
    10,912
    Trophy Points:
    113
    None of the above has anything to do with question you are so desperate to avoid .. Should Nations start taking out "bad guys" .. in other Sovereign nations with drones.
     
  10. Poohbear

    Poohbear Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2018
    Messages:
    5,953
    Likes Received:
    1,422
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's a multi-nuanced question, but I take note of your dismissal of the issue.
    Watch how many 'peace activists' are marching in the streets to protest Mr
    Putin's 175,000 troops on the Ukraine border. About the same number who
    are protesting China's imperial ambiditions.
    Never seen a world more dangerous since 1962.

    If a nation is already at war, ie Syria, then the answer is easy. Yes.
    If a nation provides sanctuary to groups attacking the West then a qualified
    Yes (ie Uganda Entebbe incident.)
    If a nation is fighting its own terrorist nationals and requests supports then
    Yes.
    If a nation is fighting terrorism and does not want help (ie German Munich
    Massacre) then it become problematic if the violence is effecting your own
    nation and the host country is failing to prevent it. I suggest No - but there's
    ways and means.
     
  11. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    54,509
    Likes Received:
    10,912
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Dismissal of what issue you are the one who has been avoiding the question of the OP .. and in this post you seem to be having trouble figuring out what the issue actually is.

    We are not talking about some nation inviting another into play.. We are talking about the use of drones for targeted assassinations... like when Israel killed the Israeli nuclear scientist.

    Your "Nations that provide Sanctuary" is nonsense.. as Every nation provides sanctuary for "bad guys"

    So then .. just to clarify --- you have no problem with foreign nations taking out what they consider to be "bad guys" in the USA with drones .. They have these suicide drones now .. perfect for the job.
     
  12. Poohbear

    Poohbear Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2018
    Messages:
    5,953
    Likes Received:
    1,422
    Trophy Points:
    113
    In the Western world we have Extradition Treaties for bad guys who have fled.
    Sometimes there's no Extradition but the bad guys might get a stiffer sentence
    than had they gone back to USA. This happened in some French territories that
    US fugatives fled to.
    Sometimes, like Snowdon, your host country has no treaty, but living there is no
    picnic - and you can't leave, ever.
    Sometimes treaties won't operate if there's the death penalty, ie Canada.

    But some nations make heros out of terrorists who have murdered Westerners,
    ie Libya and the Munich Massacre terrorists. In this case Israel's Mossad ran the
    'Wrath of God' operation to kill those responsible, and bombed PLO camps in
    Lebanon and Syria. The logic is: there's a price for killing our nationals. Otherwise
    how would you seek justice? The UN isn't going to help - indeed, last week it
    declared the temple in Jerusalem, the one built by King Solomon,has no Jewish
    affiliation at all.
     
  13. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    54,509
    Likes Received:
    10,912
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You keep avoiding the question ... mumbling to yourself about completely unrelated issues -- down numerous rabbit holes - not connecting any of it to the question you are so desperate to avoid.

    This is not about extradition .. not about a trial . this is about targeted assassination with drones - the uninvited kind - one nation targeting some bad guy in another.

    Do you - or do you not -think it is OK for Iran - or some other nation with a gripe - to sent a drone into the US to target some "bad guy" who we refused to extradite .. Heck .. why not put a face to the name .. Tricky Dick Cheney for example..

    You are all good with that .. tit for tat .. good for goose .. good for gander ?
     
  14. Aleksander Ulyanov

    Aleksander Ulyanov Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    35,345
    Likes Received:
    13,321
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    So it's okay to kill civilians as long as it's real people doing it?

    I think every police-person should have a whole cloud of little AI drones flying along with them everywhere they go. Not killing or hurting anyone but seeing, recording and reporting back, little omniscient observers of everything. This is not science fiction, we could do this now with off-the-shelf technology; practically NOBODY could get away from it and it wouldn't be hurting anyone besides
     
    Last edited: Dec 8, 2021
  15. Poohbear

    Poohbear Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2018
    Messages:
    5,953
    Likes Received:
    1,422
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The Iran nuclear engineer killed by robot (not drone) was to slow down Iran's nuclear
    program. Iran boasts Israel is a 'one bomb country' - a nuclear bomb of course, and by
    logic - a Iranian nuclear bomb. Once Iran has the bomb, so too does Arabia, Egypt and
    Turkey. Forget Cheney - Obama gave Iran license to eventually build the bomb it said it
    wasnt building.
    What to do?
    Diplomacy? Nah
    Promises? Double nah
    Wait for the Mullah's bomb? Triple nah
    Use violence to stop this bomb? That's about it, wouldn't you say?

    So let's put aside virtue signalling about killing Iran's nuclear engineers - how would YOU,
    elected by the Israelis, ensure the number one job of govt is to be conducted- security.
     
  16. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    54,509
    Likes Received:
    10,912
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Who said it was OK to kill civilians .. so long as real people doing it. .. always helps to start with something other than strawman.

    Monitoring police with drones is irrelevant to the issue at hand .. which is nations violating the sovereignty of other nations .. using a particularly insidious technology.

    and .. in response to the moronic trope that some folks might field .. banning biological weapons does not make it okay to kill civilians with nuclear bombs.
     
  17. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    54,509
    Likes Received:
    10,912
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Why are you avoiding the question .. one which has nothing to do with some Iranian Engineer - nothing to do with Iranian nuclear program .. as we are talking the USA .. Dick Cheney .. "bad guy"

    Are you OK with other nations doing a targeted assassination on "bad guy" Dick Cheney using drones .. or .. if you prefer a Blue victim .. Syria taking out one of Obama's hencemen for terrorism committed.

    The reason matters not .. should this be acceptible way of handling things going forward .. Your problem .. is you can't see the other side of the coin.... "Do as we say .. not as we do" kind of thing.

    and while we were able to get away with this in days gone by ... for reasons outlined in detail in previous posts .. this is no longer how things work .. and if we are doing these things .. it legitimizes other nations doing these things .. and they will do these things .. so we can no longer count on "Do as I say .. not as I do"

    And the cool thing about Drones .. is that they do not identify themselves like an F15 .. don't know who sent it your way.

    You seem completely oblivious to any thought .. any perception of furture consequence .. If its good in the moment .. make the move .. never mind the long term structural damage to the position .. or that taking that pawn might result in checkmate a few moves down the road.

    answer the question .. You OK with some nation targeting one of Obama's hencement .. all fair game you may not like it but, no foul.

    Once you have stated your position we can talk about Iran's nuclear scientist - a position that is completely lost .. my having handed it to you previously.
     
    Last edited: Dec 8, 2021
  18. Poohbear

    Poohbear Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2018
    Messages:
    5,953
    Likes Received:
    1,422
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Terrorists already target US servicemen - soldiers, peacekeepers, diplomats, military commanders...
    And worse, they target planes, schools, shopping malls, army barracks, hotels, buses - in some cases
    the rape and murder of whole communities. I have just covered the Chechen, PLO, Al Quaeda, ISIS,
    Hamas, Houthis, Islamic Jihad, Taliban and all the other depressing r.a.g h.e.a.d.s.

    If such wonderful people don't respect Western values (Geneva conventions, rule of law, religious rights,
    separation of religion and govt etc..) then speak to them in terms of what they do respect - naked power.
    If you don't then they will kill you.
    Drone attacks are remarkably proportionate against people who hope to nuke the lot of us just as soon as
    they can buy or make their own nuclear weapons. And Iran will break nuclear non-proliferation wide open -
    those who felt we should do nothing about Iran will bear some of the responsibility for what comes next, and
    that includes Russia, China and the virtue signallers in the West.
     
    Last edited: Dec 8, 2021
  19. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    54,509
    Likes Received:
    10,912
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's nice .. but we are not talking about Terrorists. We are talking the rules of engagement .. among sovereign nations. Did you not realize that a terrorist is not a sovereign nation ? or is this just another avoidance tactic .. to the question.

    You OK with some nation targeting one of Obama's hencement .. all fair game you may not like it but, no foul.
     
  20. HonestJoe

    HonestJoe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Messages:
    13,532
    Likes Received:
    3,707
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The problem with that specificity is that the implication could be that targeted assassination is fine as long as drones aren't used. I'm concerned that the focus on the drone aspect risks distracting from the moral questions of the strike and all of the different ways such targets can be (and are) targeted. It shouldn't be "Drones are bad!", it should be "Killing people is bad!".

    I agree. I mentioned Reapers because that was the kind of drone reportedly used in this strike. It would have been perfectly possible for the same strike to be carried out using a manned aircraft (or quite possibly other methods) and, if that had been the case, it wouldn't have altered the moral question in any way what-so-ever.
     
  21. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    54,509
    Likes Received:
    10,912
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What part of the biological weapons analogy went deer in headlights .. that targeted assassinations are OK .. is not the implication.

    You mentioned "A drone" ..and it matters not the name. What matters is this was a foreign nation.. targeting some bad guy - uninvited in a different foreign nation .. with a drone.

    This about this particular technology .. being used in such a way .. being a serious problem .. like "Biological Weapons" remember when the novochuk thing happened .. should the reaction not be the same for the use of Drones to kill people .. or do we allow this disease to spread .. nothing to see here .. as you say .. no differnt than shooting someone with a gun .. both kill bugs dead.
     
  22. Poohbear

    Poohbear Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2018
    Messages:
    5,953
    Likes Received:
    1,422
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ok, the 'rules of engagement' for terrorists and terrorist states include
    drone strikes (Iran) or bombing buses (Hamas) or mass murder (ISIS
    Caliphate state.)
    As history shows, when you fight a war with one hand behing your
    back (ie Vietnam) you lose. Allowing your enemy to fight dirty but
    holding to some liberal value (ie Israel) means either
    1 - you lose
    2 - you fight forever

    So if that neat new 'Ninja bomb' can take out a terrorist - from a
    terrorist state (ie Taliban Afghanistan) wihout harming anyone in
    his car, then I am all for it. It might just save a lot of lives.
     
  23. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    54,509
    Likes Received:
    10,912
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not sure what your deal is .. don't understand why you can't figure out what we are discussing .. this is not about what the US labels as "bad guy" -- and the US is violating every rule in the book with respect to "engagement" but that is another matter .. those rules are already in place.

    This is about what Russia deems as a bad guy - and the methods they use to go after that bad guy ... and who they decide to label and what "States" they decide to label.. and about what China decideds to label .. and so on .. and so on .. Taiwan is a "rogue state" according to China .. should the start targeting the leaders with drones ..... taking out their Scientists as Iran did ..

    What part of the question .. Should violating a nations sovereignty - using drones to target leaders or "bad guys" in that nation - be an accepted norm ..

    That you even mention ISIS is laughable given it was the US that was supporting ISIS - Al Qaeda in the mess in Syria .. created a safe haven .. a "Jihadist Vunderland" in Syria .. but this is a digression .. shouldn't be following you down these rabbit holes until you have stated your position.

    Now .. What is your position ? "Do as we say - Not as we do" ? Speak .. why are you so afraid to state your position..
     
    Eleuthera likes this.

Share This Page