Thread: Drone Bombers: The Weapon of Pussies

So what's your alternative Panda?

Every time a bit of intell comes in about a target, load up a few helicopters with troops and send 'em in to verify it before hitting it?

I say nuke em all. The fuckin Arabs, Jews, Muslims, Christians, Pakistanis, Chinese, Indians, Americans, British, French, Somalis, Congolese, South Africans, Canadians, Ozzies, Kiwis, whales, polar bears et al.

Let's have a going away party par excellance.

Will I be accepted into the Republican party? I can buy some guns.

^ No.

Originally Posted by Panda

Understand this Jet,-- It ain't a contest to name a war where civilians were not harmed. Its a case of making ethical decisions to avoid civilian casualties in the pursuit of war against a military opponent.

Ethical? Please explain where war is ever ethical.

Originally Posted by Panda

USA is sacrificing Afghan and Pakistani civilians by way of using inaccurate drone strikes in order to shield their soldiers from risk in doing the job on the ground for purely political reasons. If you want me to spell it out for you I will tell you the way it is..... The US public dont respond well to heavy casualties in these minor wars.

Give me a country or people that does respond well to war casualties. Oh ya, the Hutus, the Japs in WWII, the Huns, the Nazis, hek even the Hatfields and the McCoys. Face it, war is all about winning and that means killing more of the other guys and protecting more of your own guys by whatever smarts or force possible so you WIN. Pity about the Light Brigade.

Originally Posted by Panda

these poor civilian casualties have been dehumanized in the eyes of average Americans to the extent that their lives no longer count.

How wrong you are.

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

Originally Posted by Panda

these poor civilian casualties have been dehumanized in the eyes of average Americans to the extent that their lives no longer count.

How wrong you are.

Off course they have been. That's the exact reason why the phrase 'collateral damage' was coined in the first place.

Drone Bombers: The... 07-07-2009 12:04 PM Jet Gorgon Quit drinking

A red from you my deluded old dear is like a green from anyone else. Glad to know i'm on your wrong side.

Originally Posted by crippen

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

^ Nothing's fair in war, Pandie.

The quote is 'nothing's fair in love and war' End quote

If you're going to correct somebody then at least get it right.

The phrase is 'All's fair in love and war'

It is not a direct quote and it is not really true in either case.

^^ Its all well and good to pick and choose your case histories there Larvidchr. No one is saying they dont sometimes get it right. But they certainly do often get it wrong. To say that these innocent women and kids deserve to die because they are harbouring enemies of USA (who no doubt would be related in some way) is no better than condoning terrorism. Would it therefore be accepted as legitimate for the Taliban to kill the families if US soldiers for providing them refuge? Does that make 9/11 a legitimate strategic warfare tactic?

These anonymous drone strikes are nothing more than a scatter gun approach which often kills and maims innocent civilians. Often missing their intended targets completely and wiping out whole families just going about their business.
Bad or vindictive and misleading intelligence? Oh yea you get that in war, so too bad for the victims hey?

Drone bombers directed via satellite by someone in a bunker back in USA are cowardly political tool to save the lives of US soldiers at the cost of Afghan and Pakistani civilians, which very often includes innocent women and children.
Its all just a matter of politics rater than strategic military objectives. Soldiers on the ground going up and taking the fight to the enemy causes increased US casualties. Increased US casualties weakens the will for the voting public to back the war. It saddens me to think the US public would back the unnecessary deaths an maiming of innocent women and kids just to protect their own soldiers who are in fact paid to go out there and fight. It doesn't say much for the American people that they have so little respect for the lives of people in other countries.

Oh yea, the argument always comes up that the Taliban are bad people and kill innocent civilians through terrorism, -- so why shouldn't we do the same ? Or as Jet put it, -- all is far in war. Well, fact is that if you are fighting for an end to terrorism, how is it possible to achieve that ends by joining with them in furthering that practice?

Afghanistan has always been a war that USA has never really had their heart in in the first place. They only ever sent a very small fraction of the troops into Afghanistan that they did into Iraq. And they have been bleating like lambs for more support from NATO allies to pick up the slack. If the USA was ever serious about the war in Afghanistan to free the people from the Taliban and to capture Osama, they would have put 200,000 troops in Afghanistan instead of Iraq.
The whole war in Afghanistan is a sad joke. It was never entered into with any heart by USA in the first place, and its still just in a holding pattern.

What a waste of funds and human lives this fruitless war is.

Panda I disagree that the choice of using Drone's is just to save soldiers life's, they are used to engage targets where it is not possible to engage on such short notice with ground forces without the targets being warned of beforehand, and in areas where it is not possible to deploy large Nato/US forces like in Pakistan, as soon as the intelligence comes in a drone is dispatched and can strike where the terrorists feel safe and maybe is a bit of guard, the Terrorists are extremely illusive and many move every night to a new location, the drones have not only in Afghanistan but also in the middle east and once in Yemen been a huge success in eliminating high profile terrorist targets with pinpoint accuracy.

Let me remind you of the alternative, Clinton on receiving info on the where about of Osama and other terrorists once send a whole batch of cruise missiles against the target, And then the Sudan thing!, they are far more devastating and would kill many more civilians if they where used.

There really is no more precise alternative to the drones in the situations where they are deployed, and as explained ground forces is for obvious reasons not a viable alternative, the target would be long gone before they got there, even if it was in an area where they could deploy.

And no matter whether you are family or not when harbouring a wanted terrorist you yourself is a criminal, and then it is not the hunter who is wrong, but the terrorist that knowingly put his loved ones at risk that is an ass hole, but in reality you very well know that that don't even enter the equation in the head of a fundamentalist Taliban terrorist, women and children can be sacrificed, they very deliberate gamble on our different ethics to work against us both in terms of actions and Political spin, if they loose a few to a drone they gain a victory in the news. And unfortunately it works a charm, far to many in the western media and world are far to gullible to understand what is really going on because they "rightly or wrongly?" is already anti US prepped and eat it up raw.

But I do agree that wars in general should be avoided like the plague and they are a terrible waste of life's and resources.

Regards.

Very good and informative posts Lars, but you will never get a school teacher to agree that anything about warfare is correct if an American is doing it and he seems to be with ButterButt on all things American are vile.

You make it sound like these drone strikes are precise and accurate in striking their intended targets. The fact is that they are not. Every week news comes in of another cock up where innocents were killed. If these military targets are so far behind enemy lines that the most powerful military nation on earth cant reach them, how the hell can they get reliable intelligence as to their exact location? Its just a numbers game. Sometimes the intel is legit. Sometimes its just an informant with a longstanding family grudge against a rival clan. Its pretty much hit or miss as you well must know.

Its just a politically expedient alternative to sending in adequate ground troops with the inevitable rise in body bags coming home. And that would only be if USA put sufficient troops into the conflict to do the job, which after 7 years they haven't as yet done.

The way you and some others here dehumanize these poor families being killed and maimed by cowardly drone strikes disgusts me. You pass off their deaths and suffering by saying they deserve what they get for harbouring known terrorists when you dont know what kind of pressure these families might have been under to make their homes available. And add into that the number of strikes later found to be misguided on bad intelligence with innocent civilians killed and maimed.
Easy for you and these other armchair war strategists to write off the death and suffering of so many poor souls in a far away place. I am surprised you are not advocating nukeing the whole area as a cheaper alternative. These are human beings we are talking about here, not just some pieces on a chess board that can be sacrificed on a whim. What you are advocating and indeed supporting is nothing more than terrorism against civilians here, which makes you no better than the people you claim to be against.

How in the fuck do you know this for a fact Pandy?
I personally think you are full of shit and are listening to to damn much media news programs.
The drones themselves give a lot of info, they can read and transmit the pic of your shirt collar to the ops and they can read where your momma wrote your name in there last summer when you went to camp with your little buddys.
So when a pic of a known asshole is seen going into a house, then they pop the cork on one and he is no more.
You believe and think that you know a hell of a lot more than you actually do.
But you never fail to run your mouth on your own assumptions.
I would sure as hell not want to be on trial for my life and an asshole like you on my jury.

Obama isn't listening Pandy- more Drone attacks :-


At least 40 people have been killed in a suspected US missile strike in north-west Pakistan, local officials say.
They told the BBC three suspected US drones had fired missiles at militants near Ladha in South Waziristan.
It is the third strike in two days, after 19 reportedly died in attacks earlier on Wednesday and on Tuesday.


The latest Waziristan attacks included the targeting of a stronghold of Pakistan's top Taliban commander, Baitullah Mehsud, in South Waziristan.
US officials believe he is providing both the Taliban and al-Qaeda with a refuge in the region. They are offering a reward of $5m for his capture.
There have been dozens of drone strikes since last August, killing hundreds of militants and civilians.
Most of the strikes have taken place in the tribal regions of North and South Waziristan.
The latest attack took place on the road between Ladha and another town, Sararoga, local officials said. At least five missiles were fired at vehicles carrying Taliban fighters, they said.
Earlier, at least three missiles hit a suspected training camp for militants in South Waziristan, witnesses said.
Officials said the missiles were fired at a camp in the thickly-forested and mountainous Karwan Manza area, some 10km south-east of Ladha.

Full Article BBC NEWS | South Asia | Drones 'kill dozens' in Pakistan

The Taliban is being hurt, no question about that- and more than it ever was under the Bush administration. I have no problem with that, as it has proved impossible to negotiate with and routinely breaks agreements.

Originally Posted by MustavaMond

Drone Bombers: The Weapon of Pussies

Nothing like a good pussy

Panda I am not writing anybody off in my armchair, as I stated I think war is terrible, but again life can be very tough and you have to make tough choices some times, harbouring terrorists is one of the worst crimes you can commit, they might have told you if you don't you die, but you must know by doing so you facilitate the death of many more innocent people, there is only one choice that is the right choice.

All through human conflict there have been dilemmas like this put to people, and thousands of brave Women and Men have refused to go along and thus forfeited their own life's because it was the right thing to do, and because they did not want to see others die because of them.

You know that the drones do not target specific the ones harbouring these terrorists but the terrorists themselves, there is such a thing as collateral damage in war, no matter how terrible that is, it is unavoidable.

And you do not talk sense when you talk about the greatest military power in the world could just send in ground forces, firstly they cant in Pakistan that would be conceived as a full-scale invasion and would be a declaration of war.

Secondly no commander in his right mind would commit 10.000 or 20.000 let alone 200.000 thousand men to kill 1-5-10 men hiding in a hut in some inaccessible mountain region, an operation that would require weeks of planning, and would be far to costly on all levels.

By default any major military operation takes so long to get going, that any terrorists by the time you where ready, would be long gone from the area, or have mingled into the general population with no chance for the force to weed them out.

And last but not least, I am any time willing to bet you, that a full-scale invasion of Waziristan will cost many many more civilian life's than any drone strikes. But the way you put your point you don't seem to care about that insisting on the full-scale thing in that remote region? you just want to see more dead US soldiers, so if that is the case you would be the cynical between us two, you would sacrifice tens of thousands of life's and hundreds of dead young US/coalition soldiers just to sway public opinion against the war ?.

As I understand it the Taliban do not invite US personnel in to verify the efficiency of strikes, they remove any bodies of dead terrorists before the press is called in, any information is by the nature of things bound to be extremely lopsided, I choose a more balanced view, I am sure few mistakes happen, but I am equal sure that the intelligence that spark these strikes is pretty good and that they get their man most times, but of cause the intel. service can not come out and reveal their intel. sources just to silence the voices of critics in the public sphere.

I am not evil, and I am not arguing the merits of this war, but I am arguing that the drone strikes is probably the least harmful option if it has to be done, and I do believe taking out terrorists is always in order wherever we can find them.

OK, Pandie, what's your solution? US pullout, let the Taliban go back to opium production to support world terror and leave the people to starve, give them a base to attack Western nations, and a place to beat and stone women and refuse their education and rights?

Originally Posted by Looper

Originally Posted by crippen

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

^ Nothing's fair in war, Pandie.

The quote is 'nothing's fair in love and war' End quote

If you're going to correct somebody then at least get it right.

The phrase is 'All's fair in love and war'

It is not a direct quote and it is not really true in either case.

Thanks, Loop. I missed that petty post. You're right, I was not quoting coz I see no need to reference "love" in this thread. I just checked as I remember from English Lit days the original was different:
The rules of fair play do not apply in love and war. John Lyly
That actually fits better in this case, methinks.

Originally Posted by blackgang

How in the fuck do you know this for a fact Pandy?
I personally think you are full of shit and are listening to to damn much media news programs.
The drones themselves give a lot of info, they can read and transmit the pic of your shirt collar to the ops and they can read where your momma wrote your name in there last summer when you went to camp with your little buddys.
So when a pic of a known asshole is seen going into a house, then they pop the cork on one and he is no more.
You believe and think that you know a hell of a lot more than you actually do.
But you never fail to run your mouth on your own assumptions.
I would sure as hell not want to be on trial for my life and an asshole like you on my jury.

Typical irrational debate with incorrect assumptions and some verbal abuse from the silly old fart.

Pakistan Drone Attack Secrecy Hides Abuses
"In April, The News, a newspaper in Lahore, Pakistan, published figures provided by Pakistani officials indicating that 687 civilians have been killed along with 14 al Qaeda leaders in some 60 drone strikes since January 2008 - just over 50 civilians killed for every al Qaeda leader."

They seem to be making a lot of mistakes identifying the enemy.

Originally Posted by sabang

Obama isn't listening Pandy- more Drone attacks :-


At least 40 people have been killed in a suspected US missile strike in north-west Pakistan, local officials say.
They told the BBC three suspected US drones had fired missiles at militants near Ladha in South Waziristan.
It is the third strike in two days, after 19 reportedly died in attacks earlier on Wednesday and on Tuesday.


The latest Waziristan attacks included the targeting of a stronghold of Pakistan's top Taliban commander, Baitullah Mehsud, in South Waziristan.
US officials believe he is providing both the Taliban and al-Qaeda with a refuge in the region. They are offering a reward of $5m for his capture.
There have been dozens of drone strikes since last August, killing hundreds of militants and civilians.
Most of the strikes have taken place in the tribal regions of North and South Waziristan.
The latest attack took place on the road between Ladha and another town, Sararoga, local officials said. At least five missiles were fired at vehicles carrying Taliban fighters, they said.
Earlier, at least three missiles hit a suspected training camp for militants in South Waziristan, witnesses said.
Officials said the missiles were fired at a camp in the thickly-forested and mountainous Karwan Manza area, some 10km south-east of Ladha.

Full Article BBC NEWS | South Asia | Drones 'kill dozens' in Pakistan

The Taliban is being hurt, no question about that- and more than it ever was under the Bush administration. I have no problem with that, as it has proved impossible to negotiate with and routinely breaks agreements.

You left out the best part.
"Up to 50 suspected militants have been killed in two US attacks in north-west Pakistan, local officials told the BBC."

I have no problem with the use of drones against legitimate military targets BTW.

It is their reckless and widespread use based on unreliable intelligence resulting in hugely disproportionate civilian casualties that I object to.

"WASHINGTON, Jun 12 (IPS) - The U.S. Central Intelligence Agency's refusal to share with other agencies even the most basic data on the bombing attacks by remote-controlled unmanned predator drones in Pakistan's northwestern tribal region, combined with recent revelations that CIA operatives have been paying Pakistanis to identify the targets, suggests that managers of the drone attacks programmes have been using the total secrecy surrounding the programme to hide abuses and high civilian casualties"
Pakistan Drone Attack Secrecy Hides Abuses

Originally Posted by larvidchr

Panda I am not writing anybody off in my armchair, as I stated I think war is terrible, but again life can be very tough and you have to make tough choices some times, harbouring terrorists is one of the worst crimes you can commit, they might have told you if you don't you die, but you must know by doing so you facilitate the death of many more innocent people, there is only one choice that is the right choice.

All through human conflict there have been dilemmas like this put to people, and thousands of brave Women and Men have refused to go along and thus forfeited their own life's because it was the right thing to do, and because they did not want to see others die because of them.

You know that the drones do not target specific the ones harbouring these terrorists but the terrorists themselves, there is such a thing as collateral damage in war, no matter how terrible that is, it is unavoidable.

And you do not talk sense when you talk about the greatest military power in the world could just send in ground forces, firstly they cant in Pakistan that would be conceived as a full-scale invasion and would be a declaration of war.

Secondly no commander in his right mind would commit 10.000 or 20.000 let alone 200.000 thousand men to kill 1-5-10 men hiding in a hut in some inaccessible mountain region, an operation that would require weeks of planning, and would be far to costly on all levels.

By default any major military operation takes so long to get going, that any terrorists by the time you where ready, would be long gone from the area, or have mingled into the general population with no chance for the force to weed them out.

And last but not least, I am any time willing to bet you, that a full-scale invasion of Waziristan will cost many many more civilian life's than any drone strikes. But the way you put your point you don't seem to care about that insisting on the full-scale thing in that remote region? you just want to see more dead US soldiers, so if that is the case you would be the cynical between us two, you would sacrifice tens of thousands of life's and hundreds of dead young US/coalition soldiers just to sway public opinion against the war ?.

As I understand it the Taliban do not invite US personnel in to verify the efficiency of strikes, they remove any bodies of dead terrorists before the press is called in, any information is by the nature of things bound to be extremely lopsided, I choose a more balanced view, I am sure few mistakes happen, but I am equal sure that the intelligence that spark these strikes is pretty good and that they get their man most times, but of cause the intel. service can not come out and reveal their intel. sources just to silence the voices of critics in the public sphere.

I am not evil, and I am not arguing the merits of this war, but I am arguing that the drone strikes is probably the least harmful option if it has to be done, and I do believe taking out terrorists is always in order wherever we can find them.

So many weak excuses in the post above as to why USA cant mount an adequate ground offencive against the Taliban and Al Qaeda.

USA has beefed up their ground troops in Afghanistan from around a piddly 18k to around 60 k now. If they were serious about it in the first place they could have put 200k troops into the Afghan conflict rather sending them into Iraq chasing oil instead of Osama.

After 7 years of being bogged down in costly wars with no benefits to be seen, the US voting public is losing heart. Body bags cost votes in a drawn out conflict and drones are a far more politically acceptable alternative for the home crowd in US.

The governments of both Pakistan and Afghanistan are warning USA that these drone attacks on civilians are seriously counterproductive in the long term as they are galvanizing support for the Taliban and creating hatred for USA. Thus creating only more and more radical opponents.

^ I heard the "unreliable" intel is coming from Fake Afghan supporters who are actually Taliban. They in turn scream bladdy murder to the Western press over civilian casualties.
Give us your solution in Afghan, P.

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

OK, Pandie, what's your solution? US pullout, let the Taliban go back to opium production to support world terror and leave the people to starve, give them a base to attack Western nations, and a place to beat and stone women and refuse their education and rights?

.

Why even bother making such a silly post there Jet?
Perhaps an attempt at satire?

^No solution then, Mr Commander in Chief?

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

^ I heard the "unreliable" intel is coming from Fake Afghan supporters who are actually Taliban. They in turn scream bladdy murder to the Western press over civilian casualties.
Give us your solution in Afghan, P.

Really Jet? Now who did you hear that from?

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

^No solution then, Mr Commander in Chief?

Another attempt at satire no doubt?

This so called war in Afghanistan which is spreading into Pakistan is unlikely to ever be "won" in the conventional meaning of the word. Radical Muslim resistance manifesting in terrorism will remain a fact of life and can only be contained at best. That hard core of radicals extremists will always exist, however it can only grow with support of the general community around them. Winning hearts and minds is the only way for the west to isolate these extremist Muslim radicals, and raining missiles down on innocent civilians from drones is having the opposite effect as the governments of both Pakistan and Afghanistan have been trying to tell the US administration. However the US administration has their own domestic political agenda to consider, which mainly revolves around the number of body bags containing US soldiers corpses coming home.

USA & NATO may eventually win the ground, but unless they can win the people over, they can never win the war.

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

^No solution then, Mr Commander in Chief?

I will say Jet, you've an incrediby narrow and indoctrinarted worldwiew. They just keep planting the seed and nourish by repeating it over and again.