It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Truth About Drones

page: 2
17
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 


Its like being a passenger in a vehicle were you have no clue who the driver is or what governs his actions or in what direction they will take you. That would be one hell of a scary right ride.

You could extend the analogy to the real world. The public at large does not know who is in control, how they are making decisions and how they plan on going about getting to the destination.

I don't think we will ever truly understand the contemporary decision making process and that includes actions undertaken by drones.

Put it this one, put yourself in the position of the decision maker, what would you want to know about a situation?

I would want as much information as possible. Constructive opinions from experienced individuals. Some sort of cost vs benefit analysis. Some kind of moral analysis. Anything that actually helps me make a decision in line with the fundamentals of the nation and people I represent..

Now we must ask ourselves; Is the current administration acting on behalf of the people and are they using the appropriate information? Or is it a matter of acting in the best interest of a unknown agenda instead of the citizens?
edit on 24-7-2013 by MDDoxs because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by DaTroof
 


So did Bush Jr, although it was in the National Guard. It's still military service.

The President gets the blame, because as it was said quite eloquently, "The Buck Stops Here". You can try to twist it all you like, the President is responsible for military decisions, not the JCS, not the commanders in the field (with the exception of self defense), not the military.



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 11:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by DaTroof
 


So did Bush Jr, although it was in the National Guard. It's still military service.

The President gets the blame, because as it was said quite eloquently, "The Buck Stops Here". You can try to twist it all you like, the President is responsible for military decisions, not the JCS, not the commanders in the field (with the exception of self defense), not the military.


Let's be honest here... If you had the choice between a man who served in the National Guard or a man who commanded troops, who would you choose to lead military decisions? Bush wasn't that stupid either. He let Petraeus and previously Colin Powell make his decisions.



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 11:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by GArnold

Originally posted by macman


Well, I can't wait till more drones are flying overhead.

This article basically speaks volumes as to what is really going on with drone use worldwide.


For all of those supporting 0bama, and then banter on about peace and no more wars, you really should get your head out of your butt and realize what is being done, as the Dems control 2/3 of the Govt.



www.zerohedge.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



Despite the fact the drone program was launched under the reign of G. W. Bush and he then undercut US credibility worldwide with allowing torture and kidnapping people in the night to fly them to Countries where they turn a blind eye to torture.. Or keeping people locked up on Cuba for years without a right to trial or charges or the fact that it was under his watch the surveillance of American Citizens was ok'd in secret. Or the fact the vast majority of casualties in Iraq ( in his vein attempt to restore his Daddys legacy) and Afganistan were under his watch as well you want to blame Obama? G. W. Bush has way more blood on his hands then Obama but you want to forget that part of this to attack Obama. There was over 250,000-500,000 dead Iraqi civilians by the time Obama took the oath. You would just rather overlook all that and blame Obama? Or the fact he almost allowed the economy to go belly up by sheer inaction. When Bush left office he had the lowest Presidental approval rating in our Countries History. Fact is you could care less about dead civilians anywhere., this thread was started as an attempt to bash Obama period. Learn some History then come back and let me know how exactly the Drone Program is the sole responsibility of Obama.

Obama expanded the program and the number of attacks increased.. Technology was much better and you could argue the Drones have actually saved lives of American Service Members and Civilians but is cheaper than the alternative of sending in troops.
edit on 24-7-2013 by GArnold because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-7-2013 by GArnold because: (no reason given)


Man getting through that wall of text I mean rant was tough. How many times did you have to repeat "or the fact that"? Anyways onto your actual post.

When one reads your post one can almost come to the conclusion that you believe that because Bush started all this nonsense then naturally Obama is blameless despite expanding the drone program and expanding the wars in the middle east to Libya and other countries.

Your second paragraph is laughable because the OP contradicts it. It certainly hasn't saved more civilian lives, in fact the article in the OP says that more civilians then we've been led to believe have died as a result of drone bombings. But oh you are talking about American citizens. First off, American citizens haven't been dying in these wars since they aren't being fought on our soil, so that's a moot point. Second, I hope you don't consider the lives of civilians Middle Eastern countries as less important than the lives of civilians stateside.



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by macman
A lot of Americans have an impression that drone strikes are less damaging to civilian populations that conventional airstrikes. This would be false. In fact, earlier this month I highlighted an article from the Guardian that demonstrated how in reality [color=gold] drone strikes are 10x more likely to harm civilians per incident. Now, thanks to a recently leaked document we find that many more civilians including children have been killed in these strikes than many of us would like to admit.




Oh, man.
That a lot of "collateral damage"





































edit on 24-7-2013 by mikegrouchy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed


Are/were you a Bush supporter?
edit on 7/24/2013 by Corruption Exposed because: darned grammar


Nope. No, no way.

I am a Libertarian. 0bama is a steroid pumped continuance of Bush.



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed



You can thank them for at least 4 years of Hillary coming your way very soon!




edit on 7/24/2013 by Corruption Exposed because: aipac


Kill me now.

edit on 24-7-2013 by macman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by macman


Well, I can't wait till more drones are flying overhead.

This article basically speaks volumes as to what is really going on with drone use worldwide.


For all of those supporting 0bama, and then banter on about peace and no more wars, you really should get your head out of your butt and realize what is being done, as the Dems control 2/3 of the Govt.



www.zerohedge.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



Yeah Republicans are famous for their dislike of military hardware and war.
So no drone strikes under a republican controlled gov huh ?

People on ATS should know who pulls the strings. The Pentagon.
Not exactly a bunch of hippies.
I dont think they even have to run these types of things by the president
for permission. Although they want you to think it works like that.



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 11:45 AM
link   
reply to post by DaTroof
 


You think the National Guard is any less of a military force? Who do you think flies most of our bombers, and tankers, as well as airlift?

He didn't let them make the decisions. They did exactly as they are supposed to do under the law. They presented him with options, and he made the decisions. He let the commanders in the field prosecute the fight the way they wanted to. There's a huge difference there.



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Of course I respect the National Guard. My point is that when it comes to making large scale war decisions, Bush's service might not have given him all the tools necessary to lead. Obama certainly doesn't have the background, nor did Clinton or Reagan. So for the last 33 years, 4 of those have been with a service-accomplished President. Who has done our strategy the other 29 years? C'mon, I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm saying that the President OK'ing military activity (at least recently) is like a football coach calling every play. Doesn't happen. Coach has coordinators and assistants, President has military brass. However, Coach gets credit and blame,as does President. That's as clear as I can make it.



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by DaTroof
0bama, as you call him, is just following advice from the same military brass that forced Shrub into Iraq and to increase drone use.

The military is much more conservative about entering hostilities than the civilian leadership, for obvious reasons, and has never seriously been identified as a driver of Bush's Iraq policy. And it wasn't that long ago that the kind of people who used the moniker "Shrub" were blaming Bush for not listening to his brass.



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 12:06 PM
link   
reply to post by DaTroof
 


Of course he does, but that's because he is making the decisions. In a football game, the coach calls plays in, the quarterback executes them. Sometimes the quarterback will change as necessary, which is what commanders in the field will do. But the ultimate decision comes from the President. He may take the advice of others, or he may not. But he is making the decisions for large scale policy. He's just not micromanaging like other Presidents have done.



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by DaTroof
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Of course I respect the National Guard. My point is that when it comes to making large scale war decisions, Bush's service might not have given him all the tools necessary to lead. Obama certainly doesn't have the background, nor did Clinton or Reagan. So for the last 33 years, 4 of those have been with a service-accomplished President. Who has done our strategy the other 29 years? C'mon, I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm saying that the President OK'ing military activity (at least recently) is like a football coach calling every play. Doesn't happen. Coach has coordinators and assistants, President has military brass. However, Coach gets credit and blame,as does President. That's as clear as I can make it.


Yes but you really expect us to believe... that the President of the United States.. what some people would call the most powerful man on the face of the earth did not have any say in this?!

You're living in fantasy land if you think that is true. I guarantee he was briefed and informed as to the details. His military brass answers to him. Obama has the final say and you cannot refute that statement.

And to say that he is at the mercy of military contractors I think is a tad naive. They may have pushed for this but it was Obama that signed the dotted line.



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 01:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by GArnold

Originally posted by macman


Well, I can't wait till more drones are flying overhead.

This article basically speaks volumes as to what is really going on with drone use worldwide.


For all of those supporting 0bama, and then banter on about peace and no more wars, you really should get your head out of your butt and realize what is being done, as the Dems control 2/3 of the Govt.



www.zerohedge.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



Despite the fact the drone program was launched under the reign of G. W. Bush and he then undercut US credibility worldwide with allowing torture and kidnapping people in the night to fly them to Countries where they turn a blind eye to torture.. Or keeping people locked up on Cuba for years without a right to trial or charges or the fact that it was under his watch the surveillance of American Citizens was ok'd in secret. Or the fact the vast majority of casualties in Iraq ( in his vein attempt to restore his Daddys legacy) and Afganistan were under his watch as well you want to blame Obama? G. W. Bush has way more blood on his hands then Obama but you want to forget that part of this to attack Obama. There was over 250,000-500,000 dead Iraqi civilians by the time Obama took the oath. You would just rather overlook all that and blame Obama? Or the fact he almost allowed the economy to go belly up by sheer inaction. When Bush left office he had the lowest Presidental approval rating in our Countries History. Fact is you could care less about dead civilians anywhere., this thread was started as an attempt to bash Obama period. Learn some History then come back and let me know how exactly the Drone Program is the sole responsibility of Obama.

Obama expanded the program and the number of attacks increased.. Technology was much better and you could argue the Drones have actually saved lives of American Service Members and Civilians but is cheaper than the alternative of sending in troops.
edit on 24-7-2013 by GArnold because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-7-2013 by GArnold because: (no reason given)


Yet we still aren't out of Afghanistan, we still have troops in Iraq as "advisers." We bombed Libya, we armed Libyan rebels, He also escalated proxy wars in Somalia and Syria. According to an article from The Nation he has dispatched special forces units to Georgia, Ukraine, Bolivia, Paraguay, Ecuador, Peru, Yemen, Pakistan (including in Balochistan) and the Philippines. He also also used them in concert with the DEA in Colombia and Mexico. He has opened a base in Chile and seven in Colombia.

He has taken personal responsibility for overseeing a "kill list" of terrorist suspects. He claims the right to kill at will any where in the world without due process. His administration has killed US Citizens. This is a program he has said that he personally oversees. It has resulted in the deaths of thousands of innocent bystanders. If a person is a terrorist and has committed crimes and their is ample evidence to warrant death, there is ample evidence for a trial.

The Nation




The ExOrd spells out that we reserve the right to unilaterally act against al Qaeda and its affiliates anywhere in the world that they operate," said one special forces source. The current mindset in the White House, he said, is that "the Pentagon is already empowered to do these things, so let JSOC off the leash. And that's what this White House has done." He added: "JSOC has been more empowered more under this administration than any other in recent history. No question."

*****

"The Obama administration took the 2003 order and went above and beyond," says the special forces source. "The world is the battlefield, we've returned to that," he adds, referring to the Obama administration's strategy. "We were moving away from it for a little bit, but Cambone's 'preparing the battlefield' is still alive and well. It's embraced by this administration."

******

While some of the special forces missions are centered around training of allied forces, often that line is blurred. In some cases, "training" is used as a cover for unilateral, direct action. "It's often done under the auspices of training so that they can go anywhere. It's brilliant. It is essentially what we did in the 60s," says a special forces source. "Remember the 'training mission' in Vietnam? That's how it morphs."



According to everyone involved Obama has taken the Bush policies to new heights. He has expanded the idea of global warfare to new heights and personally oversees large parts of it. There is no dismissing his part in the matter.



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by sealing
 


Yeah, but Warriors haven't dominated the Pentagon for some time now.

The Tyrant 0bama is still in charge. But as usual, excuses are made and passed around.



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 




CFR, Bilderbergers, the Banking Elite, AIPAC... just to name a few.

You can thank them for at least 4 years of Hillary coming your way very soon!



YIKES !!!

How does the 'Path to Citizenship' work in Canada ?

We need to plan ahead !!



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by xuenchen
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 




CFR, Bilderbergers, the Banking Elite, AIPAC... just to name a few.

You can thank them for at least 4 years of Hillary coming your way very soon!



YIKES !!!

How does the 'Path to Citizenship' work in Canada ?

We need to plan ahead !!



Must best me in a beer drinking contest


I would say being a Canadian citizen you face issues of a different sort. Every country has something that just a thorn in your side.



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 





Perhaps it is you who should get your head out of your butt and realize that they are the same puppet with a different face. They do what they are told, they are figureheads. It frightens me that so many people still fall for the left/right, liberal/conservative, republican/democrat BS. These factors were created to cause divide as they conquer us.


What is with the 'Us' there?

Not an American are ya?




Do you think people like Bush or Obama actually have the mental capacity to run a country? Let's just completely forget about the people "behind the curtain" they don't matter


Lemme guess them evil zionist's?

Perhaps someone else needs to 'get their head out of something'.


On Topic which the above clearly didn't have a damn thing to do with before there was drones there were cruise missiles.
edit on 24-7-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed

Originally posted by macman

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
I am not saying you are a bush supporter, but you appear to be a Republican supporter which leads me to assume that you voted for Bush...twice!



So you aren't saying that I am a Bush supporter, but then you are.

Maybe you should get the meta data from the NSA and find out just who I voted for.

Or..............just ask......


All I meant is that I assumed you might be a Bush supporter due to your dislike of the Dems, I did not want to say you were a Bush supporter because I did not see if you said so or not and did not want to misquote you.

Are/were you a Bush supporter?
edit on 7/24/2013 by Corruption Exposed because: darned grammar


And what's the point?

After all they are just 'puppets'.

Nice political trolling there



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 06:49 PM
link   
reply to post by MDDoxs
 


Yes, I agree great points and great questions.

No matter how informed an individual may believe they actually are, all they/we have access too is what they allow to be known such as mainstream media, alternative news that can be found via the internet and other outlets, alleged leaks from whistleblowers...most of them red herrings.

I would hate to be the one in "power" as I would end up like JFK for going against the "plan".

As for the last part of your post:



Now we must ask ourselves; Is the current administration acting on behalf of the people and are they using the appropriate information? Or is it a matter of acting in the best interest of a unknown agenda instead of the citizens?


In my opinion the answer is obvious, all a person has to do is take a look at what is happening on this planet and ask themselves who's interests are they acting in. My observation is an agenda that they show in plain sight, but disguise it as something else such as for our protection...hence the drone strikes on innocent civilians on other continents that had nothing to do with the fabricated reasons that we are there for in the first place.

Cheers.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join