Drones and ExtraJudicial Killings

[+and-then]

http://counterterrorism.newamerica.net/drones

I thought I'd post this so a discussion could be engaged over the USE of drones in modern warfare. From other threads I've sensed real animosity against the US for using these aircraft to kill combatants as well as "suspected" combatants. I believe that the collateral losses associated with the drone program is acceptable in a war time situation. Others think every individual who is targeted needs the due process of law rendered prior to killing them. Can anyone offer suggestions how the "process" of target selection and execution can be made more foolproof? Should drones just not be used at all?

[Mr Right Wing]

http://counterterror...rica.net/drones

I thought I'd post this so a discussion could be engaged over the USE of drones in modern warfare. From other threads I've sensed real animosity against the US for using these aircraft to kill combatants as well as "suspected" combatants. I believe that the collateral losses associated with the drone program is acceptable in a war time situation. Others think every individual who is targeted needs the due process of law rendered prior to killing them. Can anyone offer suggestions how the "process" of target selection and execution can be made more foolproof? Should drones just not be used at all?

I think during conflicts like Afganistan the population shoud be temporarily chipped.

Everyone should be given one month to get chipped and informed that each chips has GPS and a microphone to communicate what they're saying back to the authorities.

Terrorism would end over night. For the odd IED instance that still occurs records will reveal which Afgans to arrest. Also the drones could be programmed to kill all without a chip.

After the war they can be deactivated and reused later if violance starts back up thereby returning freedoms to the population.

[+OverSword]

_{Personally I am opposed to using weaponized drones. Too much disconnect from the act of killing makes it a thing too easily done.}

_{Also, I'm sick of my government killing people in my name, as I do not associate many actions or words spoken by our leaders with integrity.}

[+OverSword]

I think during conflicts like Afganistan the population shoud be temporarily chipped.

Everyone should be given one month to get chipped and informed that each chips has GPS and a microphone to communicate what they're saying back to the authorities.

Terrorism would end over night. For the odd IED instance that still occurs records will reveal which Afgans to arrest. Also the drones could be programmed to kill all without a chip.

After the war they can be deactivated and reused later if violance starts back up thereby returning freedoms to the population.

By what right or authority??? Would you get chipped? Crazy. Get chipped or be killed by NATO. Stupid.

Edited June 4, 2012 by OverSword

[Mr.United_Nations]

_{Personally I am opposed to using weaponized drones. Too much disconnect from the act of killing makes it a thing too easily done.}

_{Also, I'm sick of my government killing people in my name, as I do not associate many actions or words spoken by our leaders with integrity.}

So what would you do?

[+OverSword]

So what would you do?

Collapse the empire and dismantle most of the military. I really don't believe that any of the wars in which we are currently involved are about protecting our citizens.

And that includes the so called war on drugs.

Edited June 4, 2012 by OverSword

[Farmer77]

It should be international law that weaponized drones will A. only be used in an officially declared war and B. Never be used in any capacity domestically - whether they are armed or not.

[Mr Right Wing]

It should be international law that weaponized drones will A. only be used in an officially declared war and B. Never be used in any capacity domestically - whether they are armed or not.

I think drones are good idea.

You seem to forget if we werent sending drones it would be people who could lose their lives.

[Mr.United_Nations]

Collapse the empire and dismantle most of the military. I really don't believe that any of the wars in which we are currently involved are about protecting our citizens.

And that includes the so called war on drugs.

Would that mean USA being part of the UK? member of the common wealth? It would casue more people unemployed, more trouble and encourage more terrorism.

[Farmer77]

I think drones are good idea.

You seem to forget if we werent sending drones it would be people who could lose their lives.

Exactly!!! Maybe if we have to put people in harm's way we'll think a little longer about using them. But I'm not saying dont use them Im just saying we shouldn't be using them unless there is a declared war . If there is no declared war then there is no reason to put anyone in harm's way and if the president cant get congressional approval to declare war then we probably shouldnt be killing people.

Edited June 4, 2012 by Farmer77

[+OverSword]

Would that mean USA being part of the UK? member of the common wealth? It would casue more people unemployed, more trouble and encourage more terrorism.

Part of the UK?? How would that work?

You say it would cause more unemployment, I believe it would have the opposite effect by promoting growth within instead of giving jobs away to foriegn slave labor. What's that got to do with drones?

Drones are for cowards. Drones create too much dissasociation with the act of killing. Killing is wrong and before you say they did it first, we did it more. Two wrongs don't make a right as my mother was fond of pointing out when I was a child.

Edited June 4, 2012 by OverSword

[Mr Right Wing]

Part of the UK?? How would that work?

You say it would cause more unemployment, I believe it would have the opposite effect by promoting growth within instead of giving jobs away to foriegn slave labor. What's that got to do with drones?

Drones are for cowards. Drones create too much dissasociation with the act of killing. Killing is wrong and before you say the did it first, we did it more. Two wrongs don't make a right as my mother was fond of pointing out when I was a child.

It could work if we ever got rid of the Monarchy however I suspect it would be the US system that expand to include us not the other way around.

[ThePhantomFlanFlinger]

Drones are just the next stage of progression in technical warfare.I see nothing wrong in using them if its warranted.

[+OverSword]

It could work if we ever got rid of the Monarchy however I suspect it would be the US system that expand to include us not the other way around.

Pity for you if that happens. You'll just love our version of social medicine!

[Babe Ruth]

If one assumes that the US Constitution is the supreme law of the land, then we are not in a state of war. We are in a 11 year old UNDECLARED war, the hallmark of which is military aggression in contravention of international law.

What we have here is The Unitary Executive acting in a manner similar to King George back in 1776. What's sad about it is that so many ordinary citizens, utterly ignorant of the Constitution and certain legal principles, support the illegal actions by our Assassin-In-Chief.

The Global War On Terror is a fraud of epic proportions, based upon fraud and deception. Yep, we have the government we deserve.

[+OverSword]

Drones are just the next stage of progression in technical warfare.I see nothing wrong in using them if its warranted.

Warranted huh? OK. I guess that depends on what you call warranted.

I'll tell you what. If there was a foriegn army enforcing thier brand of martial law in the USA, IUD's would be the least that they would have to worry about from many Americans. Would those Americans be in the wrong, or the right? Would they be freedom fighters of terrorists? Would the invading army be justified in remotley attacking homes in which suspected insurgents lived with thier familys and destroying not only those homes but likely the homes around them as well?

[+and-then]

I think we are at the precipice of a potentially REALLY bad situation with drones. I agree that their use in combat situations is inescapable at this time. They work and they save lives of coalition forces as well as enabling very fast targeting of high value targets that otherwise would be untouchable. But such power can and probably will quickly be turned against civilian populations in many countries. Even just surveillance would be an awful misuse of the technology. But I believe they are here to stay. Vigorous attempts should be started in congress to limit the use of them domestically. And prior to the screams of "HYPOCRITE" that I'm certain to hear - the current use of these weapons is in warfighting. People die when they initiate wars. Tough old world.....

[+and-then]

If one assumes that the US Constitution is the supreme law of the land, then we are not in a state of war. We are in a 11 year old UNDECLARED war, the hallmark of which is military aggression in contravention of international law.

What we have here is The Unitary Executive acting in a manner similar to King George back in 1776. What's sad about it is that so many ordinary citizens, utterly ignorant of the Constitution and certain legal principles, support the illegal actions by our Assassin-In-Chief.

The Global War On Terror is a fraud of epic proportions, based upon fraud and deception. Yep, we have the government we deserve.

So if we strike the colors and just come home, reduce forces and weapons building projects we should be better off? By your logic we will be safe at home as soon as we leave these illegal conflicts that WE initiated . Sound about correct? Maybe we should admit the wrongs and pay reparations? Yeah...I'm sure that would make them all love us...

[ranrod]

Just pointing out for those who do not know. Drones are controlled by people when attacking. They don't decide themselves. A human being still "pulls the trigger". That human being gets clearance to take action from his chain of command. Not much different than if that human was flying the plane himself, without endangering his/her life.

[ThePhantomFlanFlinger]

Warranted huh? OK. I guess that depends on what you call warranted.

I'll tell you what. If there was a foriegn army enforcing thier brand of martial law in the USA, IUD's would be the least that they would have to worry about from many Americans. Would those Americans be in the wrong, or the right? Would they be freedom fighters of terrorists? Would the invading army be justified in remotley attacking homes in which suspected insurgents lived with thier familys and destroying not only those homes but likely the homes around them as well?

Sorry...i see no wrong in using them if warranted,no matter what you say...i just dont see a problem.

edit to add...im not looking to get into an argument with you oversword...i have my view and you have yours..

Edited June 5, 2012 by BrianPotter

[Babe Ruth]

AND THEN

Maybe a Biblical reference will help. Remember "one cannot make a silk purse from a sow's ear"?

That is what you and the government are trying to do. Pure rationalization in an effort to excuse criminal actions.

Firstly, this all came from one staged event, one False Flag Operation--the events of 11 September.

Secondly, while we have no constitutionally required Declaration Of War more than 10 years later, you guys are on very thin ice, regarding legal activities. In fact, the drone attacks are military aggression, and for those who care (few, I know) that makes them illegal too.

I could go on, but it still blows my mind to see all these "kind and loving Christians, following the teachings of Jesus", thoroughly and happily supporting assassination and torture.

[Bama13]

AND THEN

Maybe a Biblical reference will help. Remember "one cannot make a silk purse from a sow's ear"?

That is what you and the government are trying to do. Pure rationalization in an effort to excuse criminal actions.

Firstly, this all came from one staged event, one False Flag Operation--the events of 11 September.

Secondly, while we have no constitutionally required Declaration Of War more than 10 years later, you guys are on very thin ice, regarding legal activities. In fact, the drone attacks are military aggression, and for those who care (few, I know) that makes them illegal too.

I could go on, but it still blows my mind to see all these "kind and loving Christians, following the teachings of Jesus", thoroughly and happily supporting assassination and torture.

I am sorry but most people do not believe that 9/11 was a "false flag" event. Always remember: Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but no one is entitled to their own reality.

[+OverSword]

Sorry...i see no wrong in using them if warranted,no matter what you say...i just dont see a problem.

edit to add...im not looking to get into an argument with you oversword...i have my view and you have yours..

Define "warranted"

edited to add, I know, you can't.

Think about that.

Edited June 5, 2012 by OverSword

[+OverSword]

I am sorry but most people do not believe that 9/11 was a "false flag" event. Always remember: Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but no one is entitled to their own reality.

False flag or not, and I really don't have a definite opinion on that one, as it was mind bogglingly complicated to be a false flag, and yet tower 7 is pretty blatantly fishier that a school of tuna, don't you think mission pretty much accomplished like 7 years ago? At this point we've done more to fatten the ranks of various terrorist organizations than every radical mullah combined.

Edited June 5, 2012 by OverSword

[ThePhantomFlanFlinger]

Define "warranted"

edited to add, I know, you can't.

Think about that.

If the only way to flush out a well dug in,known enemy then that is what i would call warranted.If our forces would lose lots of operatives in flushing out the enemy then again i would say it would be warranted.I'm not here to say that we should use drones to drop bombs on just anyone,just where our losses would not be worth the effort.One interesting thing is that reports are coming out that the drone attack has possibly killed a high ranking Al Qaeda operative....go figure.

Again i have my view and you have yours..

Edited June 5, 2012 by BrianPotter