Pakistan school Attack
Discussion
KareemK said:
Not in the same sense as the drone operators have they don't.
As has been said by someone earlier, not on 50" plasma screens and with aircraft able to stay on station until a determination is made. Nowadays when you initiate a drone attack you have a greater knowledge of who you will be killing.
Why do you think the drones are so controversial and acting as a recruitment tool for these idiots where ordinary fighter jets aren't. From their perspective we're deliberately killing as many innocents as they are.
With all due respect, Ive been in a Typhoon during (trial) target acquisition and even from 20'000ft you can see the target in incredible detail, cloud cover or not.As has been said by someone earlier, not on 50" plasma screens and with aircraft able to stay on station until a determination is made. Nowadays when you initiate a drone attack you have a greater knowledge of who you will be killing.
Why do you think the drones are so controversial and acting as a recruitment tool for these idiots where ordinary fighter jets aren't. From their perspective we're deliberately killing as many innocents as they are.
I think the main reason peoples arguments against drones falls down so quickly is because the people against them dont actually know what theyre talking about. A pilot sat in an ISO container flying a reaper realistically faces the same danger as a GR4 pilot flying above the clouds. Neither are seen, neither are in range of any defences, both are as likely to die from an accident. Before we put so many drones into the field, the insurgents had already resorted to using IEDs because our CAS was so effective. People werent overjoyed to be obliterated by paveways coming from a manned aircraft.
The main reason we rely heavily on drone use isnt particularly the safety of pilots (which was never really in any doubt) but the ability to loiter with almost complete impunity. As ever, when we invent new tactics the enemy has to adapt and come up with new tactics of their own. The fact is that drones are a very effective killing platform. Any argument against the morality of their use is flimsy at best.
KareemK said:
No they wouldn't. RAF pilots don't have on-board cameras zooming in to see who is entering the building etc. Drone pilots know exactly who is in the building from intel and direct observation.
I think you'll find the wedding guests have an even better view of who is entering the building.If you don't want you or your kids to be blown to bits during an attack on a Taliban fighter, don't hang around with Taliban fighters. Rogue86 said:
With all due respect, Ive been in a Typhoon during (trial) target acquisition and even from 20'000ft you can see the target in incredible detail, cloud cover or not.
I think the main reason peoples arguments against drones falls down so quickly is because the people against them dont actually know what theyre talking about. A pilot sat in an ISO container flying a reaper realistically faces the same danger as a GR4 pilot flying above the clouds. Neither are seen, neither are in range of any defences, both are as likely to die from an accident. Before we put so many drones into the field, the insurgents had already resorted to using IEDs because our CAS was so effective. People werent overjoyed to be obliterated by paveways coming from a manned aircraft.
The main reason we rely heavily on drone use isnt particularly the safety of pilots (which was never really in any doubt) but the ability to loiter with almost complete impunity. As ever, when we invent new tactics the enemy has to adapt and come up with new tactics of their own. The fact is that drones are a very effective killing platform. Any argument against the morality of their use is flimsy at best.
better said than I could ever explain - thank youI think the main reason peoples arguments against drones falls down so quickly is because the people against them dont actually know what theyre talking about. A pilot sat in an ISO container flying a reaper realistically faces the same danger as a GR4 pilot flying above the clouds. Neither are seen, neither are in range of any defences, both are as likely to die from an accident. Before we put so many drones into the field, the insurgents had already resorted to using IEDs because our CAS was so effective. People werent overjoyed to be obliterated by paveways coming from a manned aircraft.
The main reason we rely heavily on drone use isnt particularly the safety of pilots (which was never really in any doubt) but the ability to loiter with almost complete impunity. As ever, when we invent new tactics the enemy has to adapt and come up with new tactics of their own. The fact is that drones are a very effective killing platform. Any argument against the morality of their use is flimsy at best.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
KareemK said:
No they wouldn't. RAF pilots don't have on-board cameras zooming in to see who is entering the building etc. Drone pilots know exactly who is in the building from intel and direct observation.
I think you'll find the wedding guests have an even better view of who is entering the building.If you don't want you or your kids to be blown to bits during an attack on a Taliban fighter, don't hang around with Taliban fighters. Rogue86 said:
A pilot sat in an ISO container flying a reaper realistically faces the same danger as a GR4 pilot flying above the clouds. Neither are seen, neither are in range of any defences, both are as likely to die from an accident. .
Please quantify that. I'll lead with the Syrian pilot currently held by ISIS.indeed, I've never heard anybody make that claim before. In fact it's usually the opposite claim thats made that its far safer from a personnel point of view.
BTW, somebody mentioned the TV program Homeland and whilst I'm aware of its existence I've never watched 1 episode. I have however seen much factual footage of drones being piloted remotely.
The circumstances surrounding the Jordanian pilot certainly aren't the norm and even without us being made publically aware of what actually happened there are a number of very big differences between our air force and that of Jordan. In particular keeping the airframes up to date and maintaining their air-worthiness, thats before we look at operating procedures and discipline.
In this case, the US claim that ISIS did not shoot the aircraft down and has restrained from commenting further as you might expect, given the F16 is an American warbird. When you take the number of bombing sorties in that region of the World over the last ten years into account though, the fact this is the first coalition pilot to be captured shows the relative risk even compared to training sorties at home, let alone the risk of randomly dropping dead of heart failure or being killed in a road-traffic incident on your way home.
In this case, the US claim that ISIS did not shoot the aircraft down and has restrained from commenting further as you might expect, given the F16 is an American warbird. When you take the number of bombing sorties in that region of the World over the last ten years into account though, the fact this is the first coalition pilot to be captured shows the relative risk even compared to training sorties at home, let alone the risk of randomly dropping dead of heart failure or being killed in a road-traffic incident on your way home.
KareemK said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
KareemK said:
No they wouldn't. RAF pilots don't have on-board cameras zooming in to see who is entering the building etc. Drone pilots know exactly who is in the building from intel and direct observation.
I think you'll find the wedding guests have an even better view of who is entering the building.If you don't want you or your kids to be blown to bits during an attack on a Taliban fighter, don't hang around with Taliban fighters. Burwood said:
KareemK said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
KareemK said:
No they wouldn't. RAF pilots don't have on-board cameras zooming in to see who is entering the building etc. Drone pilots know exactly who is in the building from intel and direct observation.
I think you'll find the wedding guests have an even better view of who is entering the building.If you don't want you or your kids to be blown to bits during an attack on a Taliban fighter, don't hang around with Taliban fighters. KareemK said:
Burwood said:
KareemK said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
KareemK said:
No they wouldn't. RAF pilots don't have on-board cameras zooming in to see who is entering the building etc. Drone pilots know exactly who is in the building from intel and direct observation.
I think you'll find the wedding guests have an even better view of who is entering the building.If you don't want you or your kids to be blown to bits during an attack on a Taliban fighter, don't hang around with Taliban fighters. KareemK said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
KareemK said:
No they wouldn't. RAF pilots don't have on-board cameras zooming in to see who is entering the building etc. Drone pilots know exactly who is in the building from intel and direct observation.
I think you'll find the wedding guests have an even better view of who is entering the building.If you don't want you or your kids to be blown to bits during an attack on a Taliban fighter, don't hang around with Taliban fighters. TwigtheWonderkid said:
KareemK said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
KareemK said:
No they wouldn't. RAF pilots don't have on-board cameras zooming in to see who is entering the building etc. Drone pilots know exactly who is in the building from intel and direct observation.
I think you'll find the wedding guests have an even better view of who is entering the building.If you don't want you or your kids to be blown to bits during an attack on a Taliban fighter, don't hang around with Taliban fighters. KareemK said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
KareemK said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
KareemK said:
No they wouldn't. RAF pilots don't have on-board cameras zooming in to see who is entering the building etc. Drone pilots know exactly who is in the building from intel and direct observation.
I think you'll find the wedding guests have an even better view of who is entering the building.If you don't want you or your kids to be blown to bits during an attack on a Taliban fighter, don't hang around with Taliban fighters. PRTVR said:
KareemK said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
KareemK said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
KareemK said:
No they wouldn't. RAF pilots don't have on-board cameras zooming in to see who is entering the building etc. Drone pilots know exactly who is in the building from intel and direct observation.
I think you'll find the wedding guests have an even better view of who is entering the building.If you don't want you or your kids to be blown to bits during an attack on a Taliban fighter, don't hang around with Taliban fighters. I don't think we should have been there in the first place. It's a 'problem' of our own making and we're about to leave them to their own devices without the Taliban having been neutered and they'll likely have to be included in any final settlement.
The planet is an infinitely more dangerous place for westerners now than it was before we started meddling/invading.
Anyone remember the so-called "peace bonanza" we were promised when the berlin wall came down and communism was defeated? That didn't last long did it.
It's an intravtable issue though and none of us any idea how to deal with it ultimately or we'd be busy writing our nobel peace prize speech.
Burwood said:
Even I have a few leftie friends who will go off on a rant whenever the US of A is mentioned-evil b
ds, arrogant, deserve all they get but when asked what the solution is, the silence is deafening.
Exactly what are the alternatives sit back and wait to see what happens and hope for the best.?ds, arrogant, deserve all they get but when asked what the solution is, the silence is deafening.TwigtheWonderkid said:
KareemK said:
Afghanistan?
The planet is an infinitely more dangerous place for westerners now than it was before we started meddling/invading.
As I recall, 9/11 was actually before we got involved in Afghanistan. So "doing nothing" was never an option after that.The planet is an infinitely more dangerous place for westerners now than it was before we started meddling/invading.
The French, Germans, Japanese and Italians etc all lost people in the 9/11 attack but never invaded Afghanistan.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
KareemK said:
Afghanistan?
The planet is an infinitely more dangerous place for westerners now than it was before we started meddling/invading.
As I recall, 9/11 was actually before we got involved in Afghanistan. So "doing nothing" was never an option after that.The planet is an infinitely more dangerous place for westerners now than it was before we started meddling/invading.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff