Drone on.....

[MX7]

Lost_BMW said:

Ah! That explains it then. Maverick as he is, 'have to say I'm disappointed at Obourne's tone on this one.

I don't see what he said wrong. The way I read it, he says that the use of drones is having some unintended consequences, and he thinks that perhaps we should discuss their use, given that we don't have much historical experience to refer to.

I don't necessarily agree with him, but it does sound like a reasonable suggestion that we monitor and review new technology.

As for Pakistan, the more you let your sovereignty become eroded, the more likely that there will be foreign incursions. You know the solution.

Fittster said:

Yeah, let's kill those children!!

[Fluid]

Ross1988 said:

We do. Not as many. There's a little pieces of the UK outside Las Vegas where we fly them from.

Not anymore, they are flown from RAF Waddington now.

[JagLover]

Fittster said:

As many as 168 children have been killed in drone strikes in Pakistan during the past seven years

Yeah, let's kill those children!!

The ratio of civilian casualties by drone strikes has been low as air strikes go and it is in fact lower with drones I believe than with conventional aircraft as Drones have the ability to loiter over the target area.

Any war will involve civilian casualties the question is always whether the war is worth fighting and what we can hope to achieve.

[BruceV8]

JagLover said:

Any war will involve civilian casualties the question is always whether the war is worth fighting and what we can hope to achieve.

You are right, but that is a very different question. I suspect that those who speak out against the use of drones, or anything else, are those who oppose the prosecution of this war in its entirety. Thats a whole different debate, if you see what I mean. As it happens, I think you do know what I mean, so I'm not picking on you,* but not everyone does.

• I love Jags too.

[Fittster]

BruceV8 said:

Fittster said:

As many as 168 children have been killed in drone strikes in Pakistan during the past seven years

Yeah, let's kill those children!!

No one can rejoice in thise stats - except, perhaps, the Taleban. But what else do you propose should be done?

Withdraw.

[BruceV8]

Fittster said:

BruceV8 said:

Fittster said:

As many as 168 children have been killed in drone strikes in Pakistan during the past seven years

Yeah, let's kill those children!!

No one can rejoice in thise stats - except, perhaps, the Taleban. But what else do you propose should be done?

Withdraw.

See above. I'm talking about how this war is fought, rather than if it should be fought.

[just me]

That's a lot of dead children, and of course we are not mentioning the women and innocent men also killed by these drone strikes. In the western press, they portray the strikes as being effective, but I worry about the lack of checks and balances. It's easily abused and I wonder how many times we have crossed over the line. I certainly don't believe the numbers put out by the US government. Everyone killed by a drone strike is a militant? Really? And the way the US keeps mum on the verifiable innocent lives snuffed out? That is callous beyond belief. Surely we can pay small sums to the parents of children killed by the strikes? Think any western family would stand for such an "accident?"

If we wipe out 3 militants, but create 30 more people who hate America/the West, it's hardly going to help. At some point someone's going to say enough, strap some homemade explosives to a remote controlled plane, and make a rather effective point in a western capital.

I don't know what the solution is, but the strikes seem to be getting rather frequent and indiscriminate now. The pictures I have seen are quite gruesome and very unsettling--simple google of "children drone strikes" will take you there, but it's not something I recommend.

Edited by just me on Tuesday 5th June 00:33

[just me]

Lost_BMW said:

...
Some ally when they jail the doctor (shamelessly abandoned by the US, btw) who helped nail Bin Laden.

It is reported that the US did offer to get him and his family out of Pakistan, but he didn't think he needed the protection.

[BruceV8]

just me said:

the strikes seem to be getting rather frequent and indiscriminate now. The pictures I have seen are quite gruesome and very unsettling

They seem to be getting more frequent because you're hearing about it in the news. That has no bearing on its regularity or frequency. If you accept this to be a war (I don't know, you might not) then killing the enemy is the name of the game. You know what? It is gruesome.

you said:

I don't know what the solution is

Well, when you do be sure to let us know.

[MX7]

just me said:

The pictures I have seen are quite gruesome and very unsettling--simple google of "children drone strikes" will take you there, but it's not something I recommend.

And if you look for it, I'm sure that you could find some pictures of what the Taliban have done to children, although I doubt that it would be of much interest to yourself.

Alternatively, you could read about the pros and cons of what's going on instead of drawing your conclusions from the equivalent of an internet picture book.

[just me]

BruceV8 said:

They seem to be getting more frequent because you're hearing about it in the news. That has no bearing on its regularity or frequency. If you accept this to be a war (I don't know, you might not) then killing the enemy is the name of the game. You know what? It is gruesome.

I accept this to a non-conventional shadow war. Do as many innocent bystanders get killed in such engagements? Would have thought not. Certainly if Paris or villages in India became a hotbed of Islamic militant activity, I don't think the US would kill so many civilians so readily.

I can read and understand Urdu quite well, so it's not just the US press I have been following. And no, the numbers are not apparently greater because the strikes are being more widely reported, it's because the numbers have actually increased.

I had no idea war was gruesome. Thanks for the condescending tone. Infantile, but amusing. :cheers:

Edited by just me on Tuesday 5th June 02:18

[just me]

MX7 said:

And if you look for it, I'm sure that you could find some pictures of what the Taliban have done to children, although I doubt that it would be of much interest to yourself.

Alternatively, you could read about the pros and cons of what's going on instead of drawing your conclusions from the equivalent of an internet picture book.

What have the Taliban done to their children? Genuinely curious.

[MX7]

just me said:

What have the Taliban done to their children? Genuinely curious.

I would put some pictures up for you, but then I'd be banned.

[just me]

Are you referring to stoning, or female circumcision, or cutting limbs off for theft? What?

[just me]

Not sure what your argument is, MX7. If the Taliban commit crimes against children, it makes it morally ok for us to kill them? That doesn't make much sense. Care to explain, rather than just hint at things?

[glazbagun]

BruceV8 said:

There might be a debate to be had about wether the US should be operating in Pakistani territory. To moan about the tools of operating is pretty pointless, unless you object to their military effectiveness. A missile fired from a manned aircraft would kill the targets just as dead.

I think the problem many have (or had, I've not kept up with the use of drones), is the accountability/who pulls the trigger, etc. They are, effectively, going around assasinating people, but IIRC, under the authority of the CIA, not just the Military.

[MX7]

just me said:

Are you referring to stoning, or female circumcision, or cutting limbs off for theft? What?

Everything, and more.

You seem to think that drones are unacceptable because of a few pictures. There is no doubt that drones have done unacceptable damage at times, but so have many other things in the region, and you can't really form a real foundation of an opinion based on an image search from Google.

Basing opinions on pictures is deeply flawed. In my opinion, when The Independent newspaper started becoming a visually driven newspaper, instead of a factual one, it lost all credibility. You can show a picture of a dead child, but so can both sides. It doesn't mean much.

Personally I believe that the intentions are far more important than anything else.

[just me]

My opinion is not based on the pictures, same as you. The pictures merely show what is happening. It is the morality of what is being done, the callous indifference to the casualties, the refusal to acknowledge them, even, that is bothersome. Pictures are just medium. A powerful medium, for sure, but a well-written description or narration would be just as effective.

[Jimbeaux]

Fittster said:

SmoothCriminal said:

More of them we can eliminate the better! And more so if we don't have to send fully loaded manned aircraft up there!

As many as 168 children have been killed in drone strikes in Pakistan during the past seven years

Yeah, let's kill those children!!

So says the "Bureau of Investigative Journalism"? WTF is that? What about the space aliens who are just there to observe and get caught up in the attacks, who is looking out for their interests?? Huh?

[Jimbeaux]

just me said:

At some point someone's going to say enough, strap some homemade explosives to a remote controlled plane, and make a rather effective point in a western capital.

JM,don't suggest things like that on a forum; even though it may be a common sense deduction, it will bode ill if some fool happens to act upon it.

Edited by Jimbeaux on Tuesday 5th June 04:24