Drones: Morals vs Security? - Page 3

Created

Last reply

Replies

28

Views

3.1k

Users

7

Likes

48

Frequent Posters

McNinja thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Rocker Thumbnail + 3
Posted: 12 years ago
#21

Originally posted by: -Aarya-

@Baazigar & @McNinja: With or without drones the war on terrorism goes on, and it has been proven that fewer soldier have been put in harms way due to the use of drones. And one must always remember, that this is war and there are always innocent casualties in war. It's unavoidable. Whether the weapon of choice is drones or military personnel, there will be civilian casualties!

@ ipkknd_2011: May be they expect the US to stop everything and ask the terrorist to see if they would like a lawyer and then read them their rights. 😆


But have they" proven" to be an efficient weapon? I mean proving less soldiers are harmed doesn't win wars does it 😆
So drones are good because they minimize soldiers put in harms way? Fair enough. But when it comes to civilian casualties you're saying its an expected thing of war that innocents will be killed, so drones as your weapons of choice are fine? According to the rules of war, isn't it the innocent lives that are supposed to be minimized as much as possible...how easily we're brushing off the civilian casualties as "expected". Aren't soldiers in harms way an "expected" too..I'm not sure how this reasoning makes drones okay to use as a weapon of war. Not when thier efficiency is still questionable.

I don't think I've said the issues that need to be solved are a small matter that can be dealt with over a tea party. But how does the US think that repeating the same things its done for decades, which eventually lead the likes of Al-Qaida to harbor such hate for us, is going to solve anything? People are quick to ask what the US should do instead...but how about seeing how efficient and useful they have been at helping the situation thus far.

It's a mess they created for themselves after ridiculous policies and treatment of the region and people want to know what they should do instead 😆 Short answer-Stop doing exactly what they have been doing all along..that's the root of the problem, the terrorists are a result of the crap they dished out to others. Anyway, the debate was about drones and how good of an idea they are, not this...so I'll leave it at that.
Edited by McNinja - 12 years ago
-Aarya- thumbnail
14th Anniversary Thumbnail Dazzler Thumbnail Engager Level 1 Thumbnail
Posted: 12 years ago
#22
Just out of curiosity, how do they separate the actual civilians vs people supporting the militants terrorist who are killed due to these drone attack? I believe it's a impracticable and a difficult task.

And the critics of the drone program say that the only legitimate targets are those actually carrying a weapon or are actively commanding a group of militants.

Isn't the whole purpose of this war is to insure that a nation is never again another safe haven for these terrorist?


Edited by -Aarya- - 12 years ago
Frigate thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Dazzler Thumbnail + 2
Posted: 12 years ago
#23

Originally posted by: McNinja


But have they" proven" to be an efficient weapon? I mean proving less soldiers are harmed doesn't win wars does it 😆
So drones are good because they minimize soldiers put in harms way? Fair enough. But when it comes to civilian casualties you're saying its an expected thing of war that innocents will be killed, so drones as your weapons of choice are fine? According to the rules of war, isn't it the innocent lives that are supposed to be minimized as much as possible...how easily we're brushing off the civilian casualties as "expected". Aren't soldiers in harms way an "expected" too..I'm not sure how this reasoning makes drones okay to use as a weapon of war. Not when thier efficiency is still questionable.

I don't think I've said the issues that need to be solved are a small matter that can be dealt with over a tea party. But how does the US think that repeating the same things its done for decades, which eventually lead the likes of Al-Qaida to harbor such hate for us, is going to solve anything? People are quick to ask what the US should do instead...but how about seeing how efficient and useful they have been at helping the situation thus far.

It's a mess they created for themselves after ridiculous policies and treatment of the region and people want to know what they should do instead 😆 Short answer-Stop doing exactly what they have been doing all along..that's the root of the problem, the terrorists are a result of the crap they dished out to others. Anyway, the debate was about drones and how good of an idea they are, not this...so I'll leave it at that.


@BOLD: Rules of war? You really call "terrorizing people" war? This is not a conventional war, so the "rules of war" cannot be applied. Sorry! And you say, soldiers dying is "expected"? Why would any sane army send in it troops with a certainty that their men/women will be killed. Yes, there is a risk every army takes when they send their troops in to fight, but those decisions are made rationally and with an eye towards minimizing casualty to their own.
(Once again, I am not condoning civilian casualties, but merely seeking an answer from people who choose to profess their condemnation of how the US has handled the terrorists! You probably don't know anyone in the US that has been deployed. I do and that changes my perspective.).

You think the US is doing exactly what it has been doing for ever? So, how old is this idea of using drones? And the US has created a mess, how so? That region has also benefitted the most from the US! If the US dusts its hands off the region and leaves, you think it will all be ok? China is just waiting for an opportunity to jump in and become the arbitrator of the world! That region needs to clean house, stop aiding terrorists, learn to seperate religion and govt., improve business and become financially independent before having any notions of being taken seriously by the rest of the world! Sorry to say this, but I am just tired of people finding excuses for what has happened in the region and always pointing fingers at someone outside. A little introspection will do wonders!

Edited by Frigate - 12 years ago
Frigate thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Dazzler Thumbnail + 2
Posted: 12 years ago
#24

Originally posted by: .Baazigar.


Pakistan govt. policy is just like the dual policy at the helm of US just create alqueda for own interest then destroy the same in this process murder thousands of civilians. Pakistan govt. policy is just like US who never handover one of conspirator of terrorism David Headly which will open a Pandora box. When you suspect one or two people were taliban that does not justify firing a missile from a drone by taking 50 lives by a civilised nation . just because terrorist target funerals and rescue workers one cant make it a strategy and fire missle on the rescuers and people who provide medics mainly civilians, Infact that target was not to kill those one or two people that target was done just because 50 people gather for a meeting , it was drone mistaken as taliban gathering and fire missile, that is the main loophole of drone attack.

In fact today the onus of blame lies more on pakistan govt. than US for creating this terror network. If pakistan did not allow these terrorists to breed ground with the US help then there is no question of any country attack its own sovereign land and kill innocent civilians with missiles. Just because someone giving aid to a country for fight against terror that does not qualify to murder civilians along with the process of terrorists with a repeated drone missile attack.


@BOLD: Sadly, that is the only part I whole heartedly agree with! Not saying killing innocent civilians is alright, but cannot think of ways to curtail the menace of terrorism! High time Pak govt. took responsibility for their people and sent terrorists on their way. If Pak wants US to stop meddling on her soil, Pak should ensure people on "her soil" are not conspiring to hurt people/property of another nation!
Frigate thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Dazzler Thumbnail + 2
Posted: 12 years ago
#25

Originally posted by: .Baazigar.

US mindless drone bombing cant curb terrorism, neither the pak politicians whatever politics nor the US-NATO international politics, nor the talibans . Only people can stand for themselves and stop all these menace , a very apt song which reflect the essence of this :

Umeed e Sahar by LAAL Poet: Faiz Ahmed Faiz
[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjaNQFChkCY[/YOUTUBE]


That was a beautiful song. Hope the people rise to the occasion. The mindless bloodshed within and out of Pak has gone on for decades! Frankly, I have little hope, unless they can elect a "benevolent" govt. and that is a tall order! All politicians come with their own agendas and seldom to help build a nation! The general public, be it in India, Pak or US is always made up of good people, mostly, but the govt. and their narrow minded policies play havoc. Ummeed pe duniya kaayam hai!
McNinja thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Rocker Thumbnail + 3
Posted: 12 years ago
#26

Originally posted by: Frigate


@BOLD: Rules of war? You really call "terrorizing people" war? This is not a conventional war, so the "rules of war" cannot be applied. Sorry! And you say, soldiers dying is "expected"? Why would any sane army send in it troops with a certainty that their men/women will be killed. Yes, there is a risk every army takes when they send their troops in to fight, but those decisions are made rationally and with an eye towards minimizing casualty to their own.
(Once again, I am not condoning civilian casualties, but merely seeking an answer from people who choose to profess their condemnation of how the US has handled the terrorists! You probably don't know anyone in the US that has been deployed. I do and that changes my perspective.).

You think the US is doing exactly what it has been doing for ever? So, how old is this idea of using drones? And the US has created a mess, how so? That region has also benefitted the most from the US! If the US dusts its hands off the region and leaves, you think it will all be ok? China is just waiting for an opportunity to jump in and become the arbitrator of the world! That region needs to clean house, stop aiding terrorists, learn to seperate religion and govt., improve business and become financially independent before having any notions of being taken seriously by the rest of the world! Sorry to say this, but I am just tired of people finding excuses for what has happened in the region and always pointing fingers at someone outside. A little introspection will do wonders!


Me saying soldiers dying in war is expected was in response to a post saying civilians dying in a war is expected. I fail to see the outrage over the statement.

I don't think I've said drone use is something that's been going on for decades, in fact my point relating to the original debate has been that the entire use of drones is still an evolving field.

What I did say was that the US is practicing the same policies it has been for decades now, policies that played a huge role in creating the mess in the M.E region. America has a history of intervening, for whatever self-interest, which has only left nations ravaged by civil war and anarchy, we can look to Afghanistan during the 80s..leading to the eventual rise of Taliban, Afghanistan today, Libya, Iraq. There's no doubt of the region being in turmoil but its ignorant to assume the US isn't part of the problem, as hard as it is for some to accept. You may be tired of people pointing fingers at the US, but they're not undeserved. I still don't see anyone pointing out how our current policies have helped us or the issues at hand?

I have never undermined the current situation and the need to take action, so I don't know where that assumption comes from. But I do believe its better to look at things from both side, to understand the history, and to accept shortcomings of all involved rather than blindly support a military that's failing to deliver any progress.

As far as your assumption that I don't know anyone deployed, I'm not sure how this should change my views on a war that's leading to needless lives lost. Perhaps because to me it doesn't matter if a civilian or soldier killed is American or Iraqi, I base my views solely on what's wrong and right. But if in fact you do think that should have some bearing on my opinions, then yes I actually have family members that have been deployed to Iraq and friends currently in Afghanistan...note the plural.

Anyway, I'm not here to turn atheists into believers. But I do firmly believe and hope people learn to understand all POVs and the history leading to current world affairs, so as to combat the ignorance.
Edited by McNinja - 12 years ago
McNinja thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Rocker Thumbnail + 3
Posted: 12 years ago
#27

Originally posted by: -Aarya-

Just out of curiosity, how do they separate the actual civilians vs people supporting the militants terrorist who are killed due to these drone attack? I believe it's a impracticable and a difficult task.

And the critics of the drone program say that the only legitimate targets are those actually carrying a weapon or are actively commanding a group of militants.

Isn't the whole purpose of this war is to insure that a nation is never again another safe haven for these terrorist?



That's like asking how do we determine which soldiers are the ones that are fulfilling thier duties correctly and in accordance to their training versus the ones torturing and peeing on captives. What's the solution, do we punish all of the upright soldiers for the few outlaws that haven't been outed? Do we punish all of the innocent civilians for the few radicals among them?

The only legitimate targets for any military action should be those opposing militaries we're after.. And do you really think killing innocent people will have no fallout? I mentioned earlier the greater likelihood of blowback. It's situations like the one you're describing, that can lead to more radicalization. So how does this ensure national security in the long run?
Edited by McNinja - 12 years ago
Frigate thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Dazzler Thumbnail + 2
Posted: 12 years ago
#28

Originally posted by: McNinja


Me saying soldiers dying in war is expected was in response to a post saying civilians dying in a war is expected. I fail to see the outrage over the statement.

I don't think I've said drone use is something that's been going on for decades, in fact my point relating to the original debate has been that the entire use of drones is still an evolving field.

If it is an evolving field, its too early to write it off as "ineffective". And, since no one has better ideas for a solution, the US will have to try methods that reduce risk to its own troops.


What I did say was that the US is practicing the same policies it has been for decades now, policies that played a huge role in creating the mess in the M.E region. America has a history of intervening, for whatever self-interest, which has only left nations ravaged by civil war and anarchy, we can look to Afghanistan during the 80s..leading to the eventual rise of Taliban, Afghanistan today, Libya, Iraq. There's no doubt of the region being in turmoil but its ignorant to assume the US isn't part of the problem, as hard as it is for some to accept. You may be tired of people pointing fingers at the US, but they're not undeserved. I still don't see anyone pointing out how our current policies have helped us or the issues at hand?

America has played politics to further its interests, strengthen its nation... How is that wrong? Or, are you suggesting that the US become altruistic? If America was doing things in self interest, what was stopping the ME nations from doing the same? Actually, they were! The Afghans wanted to get rid of USSR, Pak wanted military and financial support from the US, most of these oil rich countries have benefitted monetarily from US's thirst for oil... None of these countries were giving freebies!

What in your opinion was Pak doing in promoting terrorism across its borders in India? Was that not in "self-interest"? What goes around... comes around! Karma is a b**ch (you like that expression, I know)!

Most of all, how long will the blame be dragged on? If historically America did something wrong and has to pay the price for it, what about what the British did all over the world, what about what the Europeans did in the Americas (with the Natives) and the same in Australia, what of the Mughal rulers plundering India? Who will pay the price for that? If we have let bygones be bygones and moved on, why not now?

I have never undermined the current situation and the need to take action, so I don't know where that assumption comes from. But I do believe its better to look at things from both side, to understand the history, and to accept shortcomings of all involved rather than blindly support a military that's failing to deliver any progress.

Why are you making the assumption that I am "blindly" supporting a military? Sure, I may empathise with the US military more than I do with the Pak military/govt. and I have my reasons for it, not the least of which has to do with the havoc it has played with India. I do however empathise with the people of Pak; esp. the poor and illiterate that are clueless about how they have been taken for a ride by their military, govt., religious heads...

As far as your assumption that I don't know anyone deployed, I'm not sure how this should change my views on a war that's leading to needless lives lost. Perhaps because to me it doesn't matter if a civilian or soldier killed is American or Iraqi, I base my views solely on what's wrong and right. But if in fact you do think that should have some bearing on my opinions, then yes I actually have family members that have been deployed to Iraq and friends currently in Afghanistan...note the plural.

I made no assumptions regarding your affiliations to the US troops, a mere conjecture for plausible reasons your sympathies lying more with Pak. Have you expressed these opinions to those people you mention in plurality above? What do they have to say about it? You have, I know and they concur with your opinion. Just to clarify, I also happen to know more than one person in the US armed forces, many actually. Let me give you an example... I have a neighbor who is a doctor in the marine corps and he came back from deployment last month. He has a 3 yr. old boy and they are expecting twin boys any day now. Can you imagine the stress his wife went through during her pregnancy? And, for what? Would you blame her if the US army wants to use drones so her husband and his colleagues can be safe?


Anyway, I'm not here to turn atheists into believers. But I do firmly believe and hope people learn to understand all POVs and the history leading to current world affairs, so as to combat the ignorance.

I hope, you honestly are not calling me ignorant, but if you are no worries.😃 All you and I will do is sip our pina-colodas, watch the beautiful sun set over oceans and hypothesize what someone else should not be doing! As Col. Jessup said in "A Few Good Men"...

Jessup: You can't handle the truth! Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lieutenant Weinberg? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom! You weep for Santiago and you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that Santiago's death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives! You don't want the truth, because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall! You need me on that wall! We use words like "honor", "code", "loyalty". We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline! I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it! I would rather you just said "Thank you," and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to!


See my reply in BOLD.
Edited by Frigate - 12 years ago
McNinja thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Rocker Thumbnail + 3
Posted: 12 years ago
#29
@Baazigar I think your views have been pretty much on par with mine as well, including trying to break off from this discussion since its gone totally off topic 😆

I'm no fan of being politically correct for the sake of being politically correct, and that's all we really see from the general public of most countries. People assume my sympathies lie with these other countries rather than the US because I'm against the tactical approach the US has been practicing and find this current war going nowhere. Fact is, I have no sympathies for any government and military that's allowing bullshit to proceed, be it the US, Pak, N.Korea etc. Like I said, it pays to step back and look at the entire situation from all sides rather than chant on about wars and what not.

As far as that marine, I have seen people like him up close and their change of hearts only show how these people in charge are selling us a nonsense war. I have friends that have come back from being deployed who ended up having the same views as him. Sadly, most of the general public doesn't want to enlighten themselves and depend on the media to guide them like puppet masters.
Edited by McNinja - 12 years ago

Related Topics

Top

Stay Connected with IndiaForums!

Be the first to know about the latest news, updates, and exclusive content.

Add to Home Screen!

Install this web app on your iPhone for the best experience. It's easy, just tap and then "Add to Home Screen".