Blowback From US Drone Strikes on Pakistan Leaves 10 Civilians Dead - Polidicks

[QUOTE=demoguy08;39454012]No wonder America gets into qualms with the countries you occupy when even its citizens reason like military strategists[/QUOTE] But I don't support the wars considering they're all pretty pointless and the overly long lasting legacy of Bush's decision to act on the 9/11 attacks. I was just trying to argue for the use of drones as replacements for ground troops, not that they, or ground soldiers, should be used as tools for the U.S to achieve the pointless goals they have set up.

[QUOTE=Starpluck;39452302]It's a terrible act done by savages and killing innocents is always unjustifiable. Regardless, using drones in general is also lazy and reckless. They have an infamous "double-tap" program where they bomb a site, then bomb it again 15-20 minutes later targeting rescuers and emergency services.[/QUOTE] To be honest, that double tap strike is pretty old. It's not a recent developement.

Okay, I think we're arguing past eachother - I guess you're talking from the point of practicality of the drones. Sure, I agree with you. But that kind of reasoning is pointless if America wants to progress beyond mere military success.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;39453396]I think our problem is, in your idea of "do more damage to us than they do to the enemy" is only counted with military damage to us while I consider it political, social, economical and collateral damage back to us - such 9/11, TSA screening, crumbling economy, etc. Broaden your perspectives a bit.[/QUOTE] Let's see... 9/11: Happened long before the drones were in the arsenal. TSA: Knee-jerk response by some morons that think it's a good idea to give up a little liberty for an illusion of safety Crumbling economy: Entirely unrelated to the war. If anything, the war has propped it up a bit, kept money flowing into it. No, the economy crashed because the housing market crashed. It had nothing to do with the middle east and everything to do with banks lending far too much money to people that could never pay it off, speculation, and other such domestic economic stupidity. None of those things are related to whether or not it's 'right' to use drones or not. [QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;39452524]Saving lives and saving money isn't the point. [/quote] Yes it is. That's the entire reason the drone program exists at all. It is cheaper and safer for our troops to use drones instead of strike teams, attack helos or A-10s. That's the entire reason the drones are used. [quote]It allows America to continue its aggressive foreign policy, at times now even in secret, while the people are either apathetic or ignorant of its usage. [/quote] And that would continue just as it does now without the drones. They'd just find a different way to do it. [quote] With this, we can have so many more nice wars without bitching populace complaining about it.[/quote] The public is too war weary to give a damn as it is. We're tired of it to the point we don't even want to hear about it anymore. We've been at war so long we might as well call our mid-eastern military bases states. This shit ends up on the news from time to time, but nobody cares anymore. Even still, the government doesn't give half a rotten fuck what the populace back home think about the ethics of the war. Washington stopped caring about public opinion years ago. [quote]9/11 happened because of America's foreign policy.[/quote] That I do agree on, and for the record, I think this whole war is a goddamn clusterfuck of derp. We should have never gone over there at all, and if I had been in the white house we wouldn't have. IMO the proper response to 9/11 would have been to rebuild the towers, put a memorial to the fallen in the new lobby, and move on with our lives. No troops in the mid-east, no TSA, no nothing. Just rebuild, put a memorial up to the dead civvies, and carry on as if nothing had happened at all. Had we, as a country, done that, we would have given Al Qaeda a bigger defeat than it could possibly imagine, since of course their goal was to terrorize us and doing that would have sent the message that they simply can not do that. Instead they got exactly what they wanted, a frightened public and a military mired in a bullshit war they cannot win. It's Vietnam II: Sand in our Boots. Honestly the proper thing to do is to just abandon that part of the world entirely, let them do whatever they want to do to each other. Basically forget they exist at all. [quote]I wouldn't say the near 3,000 Americans who died in those attacks plus the destruction of all those buildings count as "no one died, saved money" when you put [I]everything[/I] in perspective.[/QUOTE] They would have died drones or no drones. Do note: We didn't start using the drones until several years [i]after[/i] the clusterfuck in the middle east started. The drone program exists as a way to continue operations there without endangering american lives. It was put into place when it was found out just how fucking dangerous it was to do this shit by hand, so to speak. It's the natural progression of war, if you look back in time all the way to antiquity you'll see the same sort of thing happen. Side A gets a better weapon, side B figures out a way to defeat it. Side A gets an even better weapon, side B counters it, etc etc. Plate armor countered swords, muskets countered plate armor. The musket was then countered with the firing line, which was countered with automatic weapons, rifles, and artillery. That was countered with trench warfare, which was countered six months later with bombers...those were countered by mounting machine guns on other aircraft, as well as pointing the artillery skyward and setting the shells on a timed fuse...that was countered with faster, higher flying aircraft..etc etc. It's only natural that we would, to counter enemy fire, IEDs and the like, look for ways to move our own personnel out of the line of fire entirely, and drones do that nicely since they can be flown half a continent away if need be. Besides, 9/11 is irrelevant to this discussion. The topic at hand is the drone strikes, not the reason we stomped in there in the first place.

[QUOTE=Starpluck;39452302]It's a terrible act done by savages and killing innocents is always unjustifiable. Regardless, using drones in general is also lazy and reckless. They have an infamous "double-tap" program where they bomb a site, then bomb it again 15-20 minutes later targeting rescuers and emergency services.[/QUOTE] Lol didn't read the OP.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;39452384]I hate the use of drones, but I was under the impression that the "double tap" thing was made out to be false?[/QUOTE] Well if you remember that old Attack helicopter footage leaked by wikileaks they do seem to pull that shit: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0[/media]

[QUOTE=Zenreon117;39455533]Well if you remember that old Attack helicopter footage leaked by wikileaks they do seem to pull that shit: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0[/media][/QUOTE] I can understand why they shot, still. From up there it clearly looked like one of them had an RPG or something similar, especially the one who was kneeling behind the wall.

[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;39455852]I can understand why they shot, still. From up there it clearly looked like one of them had an RPG or something similar, especially the one who was kneeling behind the wall.[/QUOTE] Tell that to the two kids in the van that happened upon some injured people.

[QUOTE=Zenreon117;39455870]Tell that to the two kids in the van that happened upon some injured people.[/QUOTE] I said that the initial shooting was justified, I didn't get to the part with the van yet. [editline]3rd February 2013[/editline] Sounded like they were told to stand down afterwards, but the voice was cut off by someone giving the go ahead.

[QUOTE=Zenreon117;39455870]Tell that to the two kids in the van that happened upon some injured people.[/QUOTE] Army helicopters don't have X-ray vision man. To those involved, it looked like the van had arrived with the express purpose of helping withdraw the "combatants" they had just eliminated. However unfortunate the reality of the passengers that the van contained, the van was a valid target in the line of thinking that the pilots were following, in that they were helping the enemy, and were assumed to be combatants themselves. This comment is just to clarify their line of thinking and I am not trying to make an argument one way or another.

The drone program has been successful tactically, but strategically flying over and bombing a country isn't gonna win you the support of the public. It's just gonna give people another reason to justify anything they want to. Whoever is right, [b]74% of Pakistani civilians call the US an enemy, and that number was 10% less in 3 three years ago.[/b] That is not how you defeat an insurgency.

But blow back doesn't exist.

[QUOTE=scout1;39452422]Nice job spouting the same insane propaganda stuff that you attack others for doing[/QUOTE] You know that there was a thread about that "double-tap" thing 3-5 months ago. [editline]3rd February 2013[/editline] It's seemingly propaganda when it's convenient for you to look like you to look so edgy & cool.