Drone Warfare: Unethical, Indiscriminate and Fiscally Retarded

page: 2
11
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 27 2012 @ 10:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by The GUT
Actually, our discussion here is outmoded and irrelevant. Globalism is on the table and in the hearts of the decision makers. Does anyone disagree?

Don't get me wrong: It sounds good on paper, but...


I think there may have been an actual blueprint back in the '50's which had been plotted out a few decades prior, but now it's all chaos and money grabs and a just few scraps of the old guard left to try and keep on top of the beast.

And even if there is a plan, and even if it is being executed in front of our very eyes, I like to think that a dialog is still possible, and that good ideas may replace outmoded and defective ones.




posted on Sep, 27 2012 @ 10:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
Before drones there were cruise missles before cruise missles, there were planes dropping bombs.




Yes, and then as now, they call killing civilians .... "collateral damage". But that does not change the fact that this is state-sponsored terrorism and a crime against humanity.

They are targeting civilians. Then they target the rescuers and/or funerals. They are killing like rabid animals. They are totally out of control. You are kidding yourselves if you don't think this will be coming home to us next.



posted on Sep, 27 2012 @ 10:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Eidolon23
And even if there is a plan, and even if it is being executed in front of our very eyes, I like to think that a dialog is still possible, and that good ideas may replace outmoded and defective ones.

That's what I really like about you, Eidolon: You're smart as hell, tough as nails, and yet you still manage to hold on to your humanity-enhancing and oh-so-lovely innocence.

I'll try to hold out that hope, too, but it's a heck of a tall order.



posted on Sep, 27 2012 @ 10:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Eidolon23
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


The world as a whole became safer in an unprecedented way in the wake of WWI.


Doh. That was supposed to read WWII, not WWI.



posted on Sep, 27 2012 @ 11:20 PM
link   
so is there any way to hide from these things? thermal blanket? idk



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 12:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by jplaysguitar
so is there any way to hide from these things? thermal blanket? idk

Dress like the target and NOT a civilian?



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 12:19 AM
link   
Dones are the weapons of choice for Faceless Cowards.

That is all.



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 12:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Eidolon23
 

Why do we need 20000 drones, to fill the US SKIES?


Chew on that.


S&F

Edit to Add........

Oops!!!


The agency projects that 30,000 drones could be in the nation’s skies by 2020.



30K..........

Drones over U.S. get OK by Congress
edit on 28-9-2012 by sonnny1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 01:05 AM
link   
Drones and robotic systems make war too easy, there's no convincing to do of the public so that they also deem a war as "necessary" as in Vietnam where the Johnson administration basically sneaked our way in to having a war but once the public had had enough the outcry was unstoppable and we left.
Not any more. They don't even have to tell us who or even where they've attacked using drones. It's easy money for the arms manufacturers and it keeps the military engaged while risking zero friendly casualties.

Drones are the last resort of criminal psychopaths who would not fight for anything other than their own skins. To those being attacked they must seem like the very weapons of hell itself; silent, deadly and impossible to retaliate against in any way. To the minds of those who would fight back what choice is left them but random acts of terrorism against the nation using such weapons against them ? If you can't shoot a soldier or blow up a tank what other course is there?

All these robotic systems of warfare and surveillance must be relegated to extremely specialized roles and only used in accordance with the laws of our land and the laws governing warfare. At home they should only be used when they do not infringe on the Constitutional rights of any person. Only then will we have ethics to harness the power that these systems can project.



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 01:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Asktheanimals
 

Beeyootifully articulated and supremely and by gosh Patriotically stated. Thank you.



posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 08:36 PM
link   
So...today, Obama okayed the possible use of deadly drone strikes on American soil. What a prescient thread this turned out to be. Credible recent reports have noted that drone operators are experiencing serious psychological problems and disturbing suicide rates. I wonder why, eh?

Oh well...what goes around comes around...anyone disagree with that? China, for one, is purty good with electronics among other things. If you own it, flip it over and see where it was made.

Drones suck balls in every conceivable way.


edit on 6-3-2013 by The GUT because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2013 @ 11:37 AM
link   
6 Myths About Drone Warfare You Probably Believe


But our officers just knew it had a camera and missiles and stayed in the air a long time. They didn't care about anything else. And that ignorance ended up costing the taxpayers millions. Like, "fund a large school district" millions. When I was in Iraq, some genius decided the right place to store our fuel was in steel barrels, exposed to the sun. The fuel went bad, and seven aircraft crashed as a result.

And this won't get solved soon -- drone pilots are very scarce, and they're also unlikely to be promoted. So we're years away from seeing any overlap on the Venn diagram for "people who understand drones" and "people who command them." But really, what could possibly go wrong?


Bump



posted on Nov, 5 2013 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Eidolon23
Wait a second, aren't we in a freaking depression here? WTF? Oh, but there's more. Because, see, the taxpayer isn't the only one underwriting the drone industry. Or at least, not for long, as we are attempting to hawk this tech to other nations.

Several companies have in fact already been granted the right to sell drone-related equipment by the State Department, including L-3 Communications, Dream Hammer, and Broadcast Microwave systems...

Well, that's just great. I'm glad our tax dollars are being funnelled to fund tech that will eventually (of course) be deployed against us.

Continued...
edit on 27-9-2012 by Eidolon23 because: ...


Hate to sound militant but I think drones are destined to be one of the finest assets in Americas' arsenal. This technology will only get better with time and having adversaries of America recognize that uncle Sam is capable of performing surgical strikes at tactical targets to end conflicts swiftly and definitely would be a positive thing. If that makes me militant than so be it. America could cut military spending if drones became the front-line of our arsenal in combat situations. Drones combined with satellite surveillance would be disheartening and intimidating enough to dismay our enemies from stepping out of line. This could free up resources formerly used to occupy territory, etc. to focus on intro-personal intelligence, covert efforts and diplomacy. I don't see why we must have multiple military bases in nearly every country. One military base / foreign relations center in each nation should be enough in my opinion... Consolidated efforts are more official anyway.

As for complaining about the costs when we are in a "depression"... Absurd. This "depression" was labeled a "recession" because it was the product of people taking profits and a tightening of the credit tap in order to restrain the economy which turned into an excuse to print up enough cash to supply further economic expansion and increase the systems stability. The financial catastrophes were nothing compared to depressions we have endured before. Funding this drone program is hardly a drop in the bucket. We have the resources, the problem with the economy is not drones and other cutting edge developments; it's inefficiency in the consumer market - mostly due to high distribution costs. Programs like the drone program will foster technological development in the future which is another positive to keep in mind. The only problem I have with government spending is with what is out-dated and spending that is too far removed from our interests to be relevant in our immediate objectives. I think drone warfare will prove to be crucial in protecting western interests. Other countries will want this technology, we can reap the profits and other benefits of this program. Drone development and production is one thing I can get behind.

Also you really think the government is going to use these weapons against its' own civilians in significant numbers? Are you wearing a tinfoil hat? We already have enough missiles to blow up the entire country. You're being ridiculous.



posted on Nov, 5 2013 @ 12:58 PM
link   
S&F. this issue really has to be dealt with. people have complained, but this country really isn't a democracy anymore. people can voice what they want, but it ain't gonna happen if the puppet masters behind the curtain don't want it to.

btw your title made me laugh pretty hard because it's ridiculously true.



posted on Nov, 5 2013 @ 01:00 PM
link   
The problem here is rules of engagement and doctrine. How these things are being employed and by whom.

Blaming the technology is misguided. You could have B2s orbiting dropping JDAMs under the same ROE causing the same loss of life and being even more expensive.

The problem is that pre-emptive state assassination as a concept is flawed and self defeating regardless if its employed by drone, B-52 or car bomb.



posted on Nov, 5 2013 @ 01:09 PM
link   
Wut up, Frank.


On7a7higher7plane

Hate to sound militant but I think drones are destined to be one of the finest assets in Americas' arsenal. This technology will only get better with time and having adversaries of America recognize that uncle Sam is capable of performing surgical strikes at tactical targets to end conflicts swiftly and definitely would be a positive thing. If that makes me militant than so be it.


Ninja, please. Drone strikes are anything but surgical, which was one of the cited points in the OP. And besides, it's been well established since WWII that extended bombing campaigns only serve to strengthen a besieged population's resolve. The sole thing that is proven to crushe resistance and end conflict is boots on the ground-- therefore we must conclude that victory isn't the goal.

War without end, on the other hand...


Other countries will want this technology, we can reap the profits and other benefits of this program.


Didja really throw up a wall of irrelevant stinkscreen after having failed to read the thread, or is age taking its toll on your reading comprehension skills? One of the main points made is that the mutherload lies in foreign markets. And how that could bite us in the ass.


Also you really think the government is going to use these weapons against its' own civilians in significant numbers?


Uh-huh. Although the tech is getting pimped out to nation states and private entities alike, there's still plenty of hay to be made in the domestic market.

Remember Chris Dorner? There was talk of deploying an armed drone against him, but they settled for mere surveillance.



posted on Nov, 5 2013 @ 01:38 PM
link   

On7a7higher7plane
Drone development and production is one thing I can get behind.

God bless its wittle unethical soul. So you prefer weasel over warrior? That's cool. Neither are very humanitarian, but at least the latter deserves some respect.


Also you really think the government is going to use these weapons against its' own civilians in significant numbers? Are you wearing a tinfoil hat? We already have enough missiles to blow up the entire country. You're being ridiculous.

Think, 7, think! Your "higher plane" is obviously a monotonous drone. Missiles can't achieve a globalist directive in the homeland. I can't even imagine how you got there from here. Fear and, ahem, semi-precision, would be needed. Missiles make no sense. Drones do...if one is trying to bully a population.
edit on 5-11-2013 by The GUT because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2014 @ 12:27 AM
link   

...Majorities in most countries are opposed to U.S. drone attacks against terrorists. McCauley notes, 'Should drones' unpopularity in the United States continue to increase, and their unpopularity in other countries persist, they may well become politically impractical, no matter how convenient and cost-effective the technology may be'.

Metin Gurcan's "Drone Warfare and Contemporary Strategy Making: Does the Tail Wag the Dog?" argues that increasing use of drones in asymmetric conflict is reversing the dominance of strategy over tactics and may be undermining civilian control of the military. Gurcan notes that while there are a number of advantages to using drones, such as effectiveness at removing key targets and avoidance of friendly casualties, they may also increase the power of extremists amongst civilian populations by creating a siege mentality. He notes that breaking the power of extremists does not rest on the killing or capture of high-value targets, rather it depends on 'removing their power to intimidate -- something that drone strikes cannot do'.

www.sciencedaily.com...





new topics
top topics
 
11
<< 1   >>

log in

join