Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
photopilot
Topic Author
Posts: 3101
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2002 11:16 am

Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sat Oct 04, 2014 12:50 am

[Fair Use Exerpt......]
"Why do Americans hate beheadings but love drone killings? What accounts for our irrational response to these two very different forms of illegal execution, one very profitable and high-tech, usually resulting in many collateral deaths and injuries, and the other very low-tech, but provoking fear and righteous condemnation from the citizens whose country prefers the high-tech?"

Beheadings v. Drone Assassinations
http://www.commondreams.org/views/20.../beheadings-v-drone-assassinations

So what is it that makes US backed murder completely acceptable to Americans no matter the law, not matter the collateral damage? Is it that Americans think the value of one US life is worth more than the value of a Muslim in the 2nd or 3rd World? Do the women and children killed mean nothing? Just more Ooooops, too bad for you?

An interesting article (by a former FBI Special Agent and FBI Legal Counsel no less) that looks on the psychology of how death is viewed.
 
PHX787
Posts: 7892
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:46 pm

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sat Oct 04, 2014 3:11 am

Neither should be happening. What makes you think Americans support these drone attacks? Libertarians like myself are against it.
 
Fiesta13
Posts: 256
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2014 11:28 pm

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sat Oct 04, 2014 3:15 am

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 1):
Neither should be happening. What makes you think Americans support these drone attacks? Libertarians like myself are against it.

I'm curious as to why you're against drone attacks.

It's directly lead to the death of some high-level terrorists. Anwar Al-Awlaki comes to mind.
It keeps American troops out of harms way.

I don't have a problem with it myself. And, I know, innocent people are and will be killed in those attacks sometime. But just about any kind of weapons platform kills innocent people in combat situations.

And I don't see how anyone can say a deliberate killing of an unarmed person, as in an ISIS beheading, is the same thing as someone who is killed in a drone attack, because they're most likely hanging out near known terrorists.

Just my 2 cents.
 
photopilot
Topic Author
Posts: 3101
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2002 11:16 am

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sat Oct 04, 2014 3:23 am

Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 2):
And I don't see how anyone can say a deliberate killing of an unarmed person, as in an ISIS beheading, is the same thing as someone who is killed in a drone attack,

Of course you also miss out on the one salient point that ties the two together. Both are Murder!!!
 
Fiesta13
Posts: 256
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2014 11:28 pm

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sat Oct 04, 2014 3:25 am

Quoting photopilot (Reply 3):
Of course you also miss out on the one salient point that ties the two together. Both are Murder!!!

Beheading someone who is tied up and defenseless is murder.

Soemone dying in a military strike who is innocent of anything is a tragedy, but even Churchs do not say it is murder.
 
blueflyer
Posts: 4352
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 4:17 am

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sat Oct 04, 2014 4:13 am

Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 2):
I don't have a problem with it myself. And, I know, innocent people are and will be killed in those attacks sometime. But just about any kind of weapons platform kills innocent people in combat situations.

Because it turns surviving relatives who until then didn't care much one way or the other into American haters. And one of these days, one such relative will blow themselves up in an American city or an American plane and we'll wonder why the world doesn't love us...

Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 2):
And I don't see how anyone can say a deliberate killing of an unarmed person, as in an ISIS beheading, is the same thing as someone who is killed in a drone attack, because they're most likely hanging out near known terrorists.

I certainly don't equate the two, I do believe there is a certain amount of thought and consideration done before launching a drone, but don't forget that one country's terrorist is another's freedom fighter. Some innocent victims are just that, innocent.
 
Mir
Posts: 19491
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sat Oct 04, 2014 4:48 am

When the US goes after someone with a drone, it's because there's concern about that person being a danger to the US, or that killing them will do damage to a group that could harm the US. Yes, they can result in collateral damage, but one of the reasons they do that is because the targets use civilians as cover as part of their modus operandi.

When ISIS beheads someone, who that person is doesn't make a difference. The people they've killed have been no threat to ISIS - they were killed because they happened to be the person that ISIS had as a prisoner at the time, and their death serves as nothing more than a propaganda piece.

Quoting blueflyer (Reply 5):
Because it turns surviving relatives who until then didn't care much one way or the other into American haters. And one of these days, one such relative will blow themselves up in an American city or an American plane and we'll wonder why the world doesn't love us...

I don't recall many drone strikes going on before September 2001, and 9/11 still happened. The impression that the drone strikes create is an important consideration and we shouldn't use them casually, but if we focused on keeping civilians safe at the expense of taking out people who are plotting to commit attacks against the US, then it's actually more likely that someone will blow themselves up in an American city, and what have we really accomplished then?

-Mir
 
PHX787
Posts: 7892
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:46 pm

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sat Oct 04, 2014 8:50 am

Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 2):
It's directly lead to the death of some high-level terrorists. Anwar Al-Awlaki comes to mind.

I would have loved to see that guy go to trial and then get sent to prison where he gets prison-raped every day by being placed in a cell with a bunch of neo nazi skinheads.

Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 2):
I'm curious as to why you're against drone attacks.

Well if you know who you're going after, and they are an active threat - as in, in the process of attacking our men and women over there - then go ahead and bomb the living crap out of them. but when it's a targeted killing of someone who is not a combatant but simply an organizer like Al-Awlaki, it completely takes out due-process. that sets a nasty precedent.

Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 2):
And, I know, innocent people are and will be killed in those attacks sometime.

That creates more enemies, i'm afraid.
 
BMI727
Posts: 11300
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sat Oct 04, 2014 9:40 am

Quoting photopilot (Thread starter):
So what is it that makes US backed murder completely acceptable to Americans no matter the law,

Because we're right and they're wrong.

Quoting photopilot (Thread starter):
not matter the collateral damage?

Nobody has ever said that it does not matter. It happens, unfortunately, but nobody believes it doesn't matter.

Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 2):
It's directly lead to the death of some high-level terrorists. Anwar Al-Awlaki comes to mind.
It keeps American troops out of harms way.

Precisely. I don't know why drone warfare is seen as something to be avoided when frankly keeping Americans safe is highly preferable. It is worth considerable amounts of time, money, and work to ensure that no American has to endure anything resembling a fair fight.

Quoting blueflyer (Reply 5):
Because it turns surviving relatives who until then didn't care much one way or the other into American haters.

We'll have a missile with their name on it too then.
 
Mir
Posts: 19491
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sat Oct 04, 2014 10:39 am

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 7):
I would have loved to see that guy go to trial and then get sent to prison where he gets prison-raped every day by being placed in a cell with a bunch of neo nazi skinheads.

I'd have liked to see him go to trial as well. On the other hand, doing so would have meant an operation similar to the one that went to get Bin Laden - difficult, dangerous and expensive, and with no guarantee that the target lives (in fact I think it much more likely that he would either do something that would force the troops to kill him, or he'd kill himself first). An airstrike just makes a whole lot more sense.

-Mir
 
PanHAM
Posts: 9719
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 6:44 pm

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sat Oct 04, 2014 11:20 am

The difference is between legal and illegal combattants. Terrorists are the latter. It is a very complicated matter of international law and the various conventions about wars.

IS is a hord of lawless murderers who base their killings on some 7th century ideology. They and their likes must be hunted down since they are posing a thread to society. Regardess where and which religion. The largest number of victims of Islamist terrorists are muslims, they should speak up and do away with the Islamists more than any other group.
 
User avatar
Kiwirob
Posts: 13757
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sat Oct 04, 2014 12:04 pm

Quoting photopilot (Thread starter):
Is it that Americans think the value of one US life is worth more than the value of a Muslim in the 2nd or 3rd World?

Bingo we have a winner.

Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 2):
It's directly lead to the death of some high-level terrorists.

Plus a whole lot of women and children who were not targets, the US never pay compensation for these deaths, they just don't care.

Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 2):
But just about any kind of weapons platform kills innocent people in combat situations.

But not a solitary man with a knife.

Quoting Mir (Reply 6):

When ISIS beheads someone, who that person is doesn't make a difference.

So you would be fine with AQ or ISIL striking targets in the US with a drone?
 
photopilot
Topic Author
Posts: 3101
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2002 11:16 am

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sat Oct 04, 2014 1:25 pm

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 10):
The difference is between legal and illegal combattants. Terrorists are the latter.
Quote:
(article) "Nearly two-thirds of Americans (65%) think the U.S. government should use drones to launch airstrikes in other countries against suspected terrorists. Americans are, however, much less likely to say the U.S. should use drones to launch airstrikes in other countries against U.S. citizens living abroad who are suspected terrorists (41%)"

The problem is who you (Americans) define as a terrorist. That definition has slid and slid until now, even the most flimsy of excuses is enough to target someone. Extra-judicial killing has become a matter of US Gov't policy, without regard to International law or what other countries think. That makes it murder, no different than a simple beheading is.
 
Chaostheory
Posts: 1191
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:09 am

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sat Oct 04, 2014 1:47 pm

Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 2):
It keeps American troops out of harms way.

It doesn't keep Americans or their 'interests' out of the way though does it?

Remember 9/11? Dar us salam embassy bombing?

Though there were little or no drone strikes pre 9/11, the meddling was still there. Just one example would be the tomahawk strikes in the Sudan which ended up destroying a vital pharmaceutical plant.

Quoting photopilot (Thread starter):
So what is it that makes US backed murder completely acceptable to Americans no matter the law, not matter the collateral damage? Is it that Americans think the value of one US life is worth more than the value of a Muslim in the 2nd or 3rd World? Do the women and children killed mean nothing? Just more Ooooops, too bad for you?

I would replace US with the West. They're not alone in engaging in acts of folly.
 
PanHAM
Posts: 9719
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 6:44 pm

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sat Oct 04, 2014 2:17 pm

Quoting photopilot (Reply 12):
The problem is who you (Americans) define as a terrorist. That definition has slid and slid until now, even the most flimsy of excus

I'm not American but I am glad that the world has this super power which is the only one that can control lawless terrorists. If it wasn't for the US and the allies, IS would spread in no time across the Middle Eastand likely to Europe as well.

I will not spark a discussion whether the lawless can be defeated by the law. Probably not and that is the justification to use drones to kill those who do not respect any progress and achievement the world has gained since the 7th century.

Barbarians who slaughter innocent people and upload the footage on the net cannot be defeated with our legal standards. They do not accept these standards any how and we cannot wait for 1300 years to educate them.Why should go that developments, human rights and enlightenment down the drain just because a couple of brainless morons are on aa rampage?.
 
L410Turbolet
Posts: 6350
Joined: Wed May 05, 2004 9:12 am

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sat Oct 04, 2014 2:38 pm

Quoting photopilot (Thread starter):
Is it that Americans think the value of one US life is worth more than the value of a Muslim in the 2nd or 3rd World?

The lesser value has been set by the mohammedans themselves.
 
blueflyer
Posts: 4352
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 4:17 am

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sat Oct 04, 2014 3:16 pm

Quoting Mir (Reply 6):
I don't recall many drone strikes going on before September 2001, and 9/11 still happened. The impression that the drone strikes create is an important consideration and we shouldn't use them casually, but if we focused on keeping civilians safe at the expense of taking out people who are plotting to commit attacks against the US, then it's actually more likely that someone will blow themselves up in an American city, and what have we really accomplished then?

For one thing, back then the drones were called tomahawk missiles; for another, terrorism has been around since times immemorial and has always, always, had more than one casus belli. We just added a new one to a long list. I understand where you come from about civilians dying "over there" as opposed to "over here" and it's not a bad calculation, but it isn't one that the rest of the world will agree with.

At the same time, you reason as though drones were the only option. I don't agree with Israel very often, but I do think they handle their strategic killing far better than we do. They send a mossad team for a far more targeted strike, with significantly less collateral damage.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 8):
We'll have a missile with their name on it too then.

Hopefully.
 
Fiesta13
Posts: 256
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2014 11:28 pm

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sat Oct 04, 2014 3:38 pm

Quoting blueflyer (Reply 5):
Because it turns surviving relatives who until then didn't care much one way or the other into American haters.

If we used boots on the ground, or fighter jets, or cruise missiles, and the same thing happens, they become enemies anyway. Well, unfortunately, sometime the price of protecting the Homeland and your national interests are going to make enemies. There's 7 billion people on this planet, and all of them aren't going ot like you. Besides, those people are predisposed to hate the U.S. before anything happens. If they're haning around known Al Qaeda or ISIS members, you think they're friends of ours?

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 7):
Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 2):
It's directly lead to the death of some high-level terrorists. Anwar Al-Awlaki comes to mind.

I would have loved to see that guy go to trial and then get sent to prison where he gets prison-raped every day by being placed in a cell with a bunch of neo nazi skinheads.

So would have I, but if you find a guy like that, who as an American who turned on his country, and you have him in your sights, you don't let him out of your sights, even if it means killing him. Circumstances don't always allow capture. And we did the right thing taking him out.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 7):
Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 2):
I'm curious as to why you're against drone attacks.

Well if you know who you're going after, and they are an active threat - as in, in the process of attacking our men and women over there - then go ahead and bomb the living crap out of them. but when it's a targeted killing of someone who is not a combatant but simply an organizer like Al-Awlaki, it completely takes out due-process. that sets a nasty precedent.

Again, due process is preferable, but you don't always have that choice. I mean, these guys aren't just going to offer themselves as a target for capture, are they? We found that mutt, we had him in our gunsights, and in that case you do NOT let him out of there alive, if that's the choice that is offered to you. He deserved what he got. He was a traitor, and justice was served on him.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 11):

Quoting photopilot (Thread starter):
Is it that Americans think the value of one US life is worth more than the value of a Muslim in the 2nd or 3rd World?

Bingo we have a winner.

From the prespective of the President of the United States, and his military chiefs, of course the value of the American is higher! They've been sworn to preserve this nation, protect it, and defend its people. That is paramount. You don't think Britian or Australia or Germany or Russia or China do the same thing? Of course your people come first.

Here's an analogy for you: I've often heard the argument from people who aren't Americans that the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki should not have taken place. But I believe they're wrong. Harry Truman was presented with a weapon that his chiefs thought COULD end the war, and make an invasion of Japan unnecessdary. Truman had seen the projections for U.S. casualties in such an invasion. They were appalling. He chose to try The Bomb to see if Japan would surrender. They did. Some argue that Truman should have been thinking of the Japanese people, and not just Americans in that case, but they're wrong. His SOLE RESPONSIBILITY was to American lives, American soldiers, and American interests, which he was sworn to protect. He owed nothing to the enemy. Same in this case. These people are the enemy. Those who make the decisions have to put American lives first. I would expect nothing different from any nation to do the same for their citizens.

Quoting ChaosTheory (Reply 13):

Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 2):
It keeps American troops out of harms way.

It doesn't keep Americans or their 'interests' out of the way though does it?

Of course not. Your nation has its own interests too, doesn't it, and it will do what it needs to do to protect those interests. In this case, our interest is getting high-value terrorist targets, while minimizing danger to Americans. I don't see what's wrong with that. Every nation looks out for their own first. You cannot say you have an obligation to people who are your enemy if it puts your own people in danger. That's just stupid.
 
SuperCaravelle
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2012 8:04 pm

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sat Oct 04, 2014 4:01 pm

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 8):
Because we're right and they're wrong.

So right that you need to use land from arch enemy number one to circumvent the law.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 8):
Precisely. I don't know why drone warfare is seen as something to be avoided when frankly keeping Americans safe is highly preferable. It is worth considerable amounts of time, money, and work to ensure that no American has to endure anything resembling a fair fight.

Something somewhat resembling a fair fight is the only way some ethical questions will keep being asked. Drone warfare is post-moral warfare and it's dangerous, for the countries affected in the short term and for the US in the medium to long term. Let's not forget that US army soldiers signed up for a job that could get them killed in combat, civilians in Pakistan/Yemen/wherever didn't sign up for anything.

Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 17):
From the prespective of the President of the United States, and his military chiefs, of course the value of the American is higher! They've been sworn to preserve this nation, protect it, and defend its people. That is paramount. You don't think Britian or Australia or Germany or Russia or China do the same thing? Of course your people come first.

And bingo, this is why you guys have so many (perceived) enemies.

I'm not anti-American, far from it, but one thing I'd like you guys to learn is that you create your own enemies with the egoistical, arrogant and post-imperial type of behavior. Ever wondered why France doesn't have as many enemies in Northern and Western Africa, for example?



[Edited 2014-10-04 09:03:17]
 
Fiesta13
Posts: 256
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2014 11:28 pm

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sat Oct 04, 2014 4:15 pm

Quoting SuperCaravelle (Reply 18):
And bingo, this is why you guys have so many (perceived) enemies.

If you're suggesting that by putting Americans intentionally in harms way will help us gain friends, then I don't want us to have any friends, sorry to say. You take care of your own first and foremost.

Using what you said, Harry Truman doesn't use The Bomb in 1945. And if that's the case, we go on to a year, maybe two more years of incredibly bloody war in Japan, where it was estimated that the U.S. would suffer at least a million casualties, if not more. And the Japanaese numbers would have been horrific.

Guess what happens to old Harry had the American people found out in 1947, for example, that he had a weapon that could have ended the war? He'd been impeached by the House, convicted by the Senate, and thrown in jail for betraying his oath to "preserve, protect and defend" the United States. And he would have deserved it.

Sorry, my friend, but in a conflict, the people from your nation come first. If the leaders of The Netherlands doesn't do that in a similar situation, they should be thrown out on their butts. That is their prime responsibility.
 
SuperCaravelle
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2012 8:04 pm

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sat Oct 04, 2014 4:30 pm

Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 19):
If you're suggesting that by putting Americans intentionally in harms way will help us gain friends, then I don't want us to have any friends, sorry to say. You take care of your own first and foremost.

Using what you said, Harry Truman doesn't use The Bomb in 1945. And if that's the case, we go on to a year, maybe two more years of incredibly bloody war in Japan, where it was estimated that the U.S. would suffer at least a million casualties, if not more. And the Japanaese numbers would have been horrific.

Guess what happens to old Harry had the American people found out in 1947, for example, that he had a weapon that could have ended the war? He'd been impeached by the House, convicted by the Senate, and thrown in jail for betraying his oath to "preserve, protect and defend" the United States. And he would have deserved it.

Sorry, my friend, but in a conflict, the people from your nation come first. If the leaders of The Netherlands doesn't do that in a similar situation, they should be thrown out on their butts. That is their prime responsibility.

Second World War is a different issue, not comparable to the discussion about drones versus beheadings. Moreover, it's pretty well documented that the US government knew the war in the Pacific would be over soon, bomb or no bomb. Ignoring that, I'm willing to go along with the argument that the bomb was the best solution at the time. I'm also not against the usage of drones for military purposes. They do have their value, they are a "clean" way of targetting hard-to-get-to places and they can provide vital and cheap intelligence. That's not the point though.

It's the attitude displayed in your last paragraph that's the cause of so many problems: we versus them. Why are Iranian people fly to Europe and not to the US? Why can European airlines fly to and from Cuba without any trouble? Why was Chavez and is Maduro (however wrong they both are) able to sell the story of American imperialism to their people? It's precisely because of this attitude of "we do our utmost to protect our own people". Yes, that's the job of your government, but there are multiple ways to go about that. The fact of the matter is that most of the nations the US has set foot in are not a threat to US safety.
 
Fiesta13
Posts: 256
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2014 11:28 pm

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sat Oct 04, 2014 4:48 pm

Quoting SuperCaravelle (Reply 20):
Second World War is a different issue, not comparable to the discussion about drones versus beheadings.

Different issue, but the same exact principal: you take care of your own first. In a conflict, you ow nothng to the enemy who has said they want to harm you. Nothing. From a perspective of the Constitution of the United States, and preserving, protecting and defending this naiton, there's no difference at all. And whatever oath they take in The Netherlands, the exact same principal should apply: protect your own first and foremost.

Quoting SuperCaravelle (Reply 20):
Moreover, it's pretty well documented that the US government knew the war in the Pacific would be over soon, bomb or no bomb. I

The United States had set a firm date to invade Japan. It was Nov 1, 1945. Up until Hiroshima and Nagasaki, there was absolutely no indication Japan had any idea of surrender. They had gone out and trained literally every man, woman and child for a to-the-death defense of the home islands should an invasion come. Based on the Bushido Code, surrender was unthinkable at the time. Note that code is what led to Japanese soldiers fighting til they died in places like Iwo Jima, Okinawa, Palau, The Philippines. It's the same code that led to the Kamakazee aircraft attacks on U.S. ships. From every indication on August 5th, 1945, Japan was not going to surrender.

Now, in 2014, you and I can debat the merits of such an invasion, but the fact remains if the status quo had remained, the invasion was going to happen. That's why Truman used The Bomb, because he saw a chance to end the war without such a massive loss of life, far greater than happened in those two bombings.

Quoting SuperCaravelle (Reply 20):

It's the attitude displayed in your last paragraph that's the cause of so many problems: we versus them.

But it's a conflict!! It's warfare! It IS us vs. them! ISIS and Al Qaeda have made it clear they're our friends, and will attack us if given a chance. And that includes The Netherlands on the "us" side of the equation. You cannot be naive about such things. Sadly, this can be a brutal world. It would be nice if we all got along, but we don't. We have thugs and barbarians like ISIS who care nothing about humanity, and are willing to kill both you and I because it's what they desire.

So I don't see how that can bother you. What is going on isn't a gentleman's club, where everyone treats everyone with respect. This is warfare. And in any level of warfare, it is "Us vs. Them". There's no other way to put it.

Left to how you look at it, I'm afraid it would lead to even more bloodshed, not less. If you try to appease an aggressor, it only makes them more aggressive, not less. They aren't our friends; they can't be bargained with; they won't be made to see reason. In that case, you either kill them or risk being killed. It's that simple.
 
photopilot
Topic Author
Posts: 3101
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2002 11:16 am

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sat Oct 04, 2014 5:52 pm

Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 17):
Again, due process is preferable, but you don't always have that choice.

So what I hear you saying is that The End Justifies the Means". That you're prepared to waive the law, waive due process whenever you Americans decide that you want to. If that's the case, no matter what argument you make, you as a country have sunk just as low into depravity as the IS. Which is why drone strikes and beheadings are exactly the same.
 
Fiesta13
Posts: 256
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2014 11:28 pm

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sat Oct 04, 2014 6:15 pm

Quoting photopilot (Reply 22):
So what I hear you saying is that The End Justifies the Means".

Are you telling me that if you have a high-value target like Anwar Al-Alwaki in your sights, using drones, you let him go, because of your insistence that we capture him and nothing else? So he can plan more attacks? So he can kill more people? Is that what you're telling me? Because that's just not being intelligent in dealing with someone like that.

Are you saying the only acceptable means of getting guys like that is capturing them? Because it's not. This isn't debating society we're talking about. This is warfare, and warfare is brutal and deadly.

Again, left to your devices, the U.S. during World War II would have been in the wrong for taking out Admiral Yamamoto because or intel knew where he'd be flying. War doesn't work that way.

If the opportunity to capture someone like that presents itself, you take it. But if it doesn't, and you find him in the middle of a Sudanese desert in a vehicle, and you KNOW it's him, you don't let him simply drive away.

I don't understand that kind of logic.

Quoting photopilot (Reply 22):
If that's the case, no matter what argument you make, you as a country have sunk just as low into depravity as the IS.

LOL, you're dead wrong. We aren't beheading someone and sending the video out worldwide. Now, if we torture people, and do start beheading people, then yes, we've stooped to their level and they win. I've argued that for years. I've argued that on here against people who say that torture or any method is acceptable, and that's not true.

But you seem to not realize that if you don't kill these guys, they will try to kill you. So that's why when a military option-a MILITARY OPTION-presents itself to take them out, as in a drone strike, or like in the case of OBL via Special Forces, you take it. It's a no-brainer.

Again, I find your mindset naive, as it simply doesn't take reality into account here. This isn't a nice business, and you don't let a terrorist get away if you have him in your sights.
 
SuperCaravelle
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2012 8:04 pm

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sat Oct 04, 2014 6:31 pm

Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 21):
Different issue, but the same exact principal: you take care of your own first. In a conflict, you ow nothng to the enemy who has said they want to harm you. Nothing. From a perspective of the Constitution of the United States, and preserving, protecting and defending this naiton, there's no difference at all. And whatever oath they take in The Netherlands, the exact same principal should apply: protect your own first and foremost.

I don't want my government to go gung-ho in any area of the world where there might or might not be terrorists or anti-my country people. Firstly, I think it's countereffictive in a lot of cases, secondly my default position is anti-war (partly because of the first reason, partly because I think killing people is not something that should be done indiscriminately). I'm willing to switch to a pro-war stance, for example I am happy with the current American-led coalition bombing IS, but despite the fact that I recognize that my government should protect my country, it is not my default opinion that they should do that with arms.

Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 21):
The United States had set a firm date to invade Japan. It was Nov 1, 1945. Up until Hiroshima and Nagasaki, there was absolutely no indication Japan had any idea of surrender. They had gone out and trained literally every man, woman and child for a to-the-death defense of the home islands should an invasion come. Based on the Bushido Code, surrender was unthinkable at the time. Note that code is what led to Japanese soldiers fighting til they died in places like Iwo Jima, Okinawa, Palau, The Philippines. It's the same code that led to the Kamakazee aircraft attacks on U.S. ships. From every indication on August 5th, 1945, Japan was not going to surrender.

Now, in 2014, you and I can debat the merits of such an invasion, but the fact remains if the status quo had remained, the invasion was going to happen. That's why Truman used The Bomb, because he saw a chance to end the war without such a massive loss of life, far greater than happened in those two bombings.

Read this article for example, there is quite some debate among historians whether it was the bomb that caused the surrender: http://www.foreignpolicy.com/article...nt_beat_japan_nuclear_world_war_ii

Some historians will also argue that the bomb fits more in the narrative of the cold war than of the second world war. In any case, it's not really what we're debating here since I gave my stance on that already. Moreover, I think the usage of the atomic bomb in 1945 saved, perhaps inadvertedly, many many lives later on.

Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 21):
But it's a conflict!! It's warfare! It IS us vs. them! ISIS and Al Qaeda have made it clear they're our friends, and will attack us if given a chance. And that includes The Netherlands on the "us" side of the equation. You cannot be naive about such things. Sadly, this can be a brutal world. It would be nice if we all got along, but we don't. We have thugs and barbarians like ISIS who care nothing about humanity, and are willing to kill both you and I because it's what they desire.

So I don't see how that can bother you. What is going on isn't a gentleman's club, where everyone treats everyone with respect. This is warfare. And in any level of warfare, it is "Us vs. Them". There's no other way to put it.

Left to how you look at it, I'm afraid it would lead to even more bloodshed, not less. If you try to appease an aggressor, it only makes them more aggressive, not less. They aren't our friends; they can't be bargained with; they won't be made to see reason. In that case, you either kill them or risk being killed. It's that simple.

Why is Al-Qaeda against the US? It's not that much of a stretch to ask another question: why is Poland apprehensive about the Soviet Union and not about Germany? I'm not comparing nations here, just comparing situations: in case of Poland, Germany has not given any indication that it is looking beyond it's borders for any kind of gain with means other than diplomacy. Russia has. It stands to reason then that Poland is more negative about Russia than about Germany, despite the history between these three nations.

After 9/11, the US wanted to punish the perpetrators. They came on US soil to kill American citizen and it wasn't possible to fight back. Turn that around: families living in Iraq that didn't have anything to do with Al-Qaeda (as virtually no-one in Iraq had anything to do with Al-Qaeda I might add) were displaced, killed, separated because the US waged a war. Are you surprised they are angry? Turn that up a notch: it are not troops any longer, who might still give some impression that they will rebuild the country, but just drones. What if you live in a village and half the village gets killed by a drone because the US thought some terrorist was hiding there? There's no troops to ask the fighting to stop, to fight back against, but the destruction is very real. Are you surprised that the people still alive will hate the US, that some of them will think of fighting back, that 1 or 2 of that group will actually join a terrorist organization in future?

I'm not naive, I don't doubt there will still be some us versus them if Western governments do not fight in the Middle East, but I am absolutely sure there will be much less of it. Once again you have to ask yourself the question, why is it that the French are not hated in Mali but the US is hated in Iran? Don't you think part of the reason is past action?

I simply do not believe that continuous bloodshed in the nations we think are against us will help them make less against us. That's got nothing to do with not wanting my country to defend me, quite the opposite.

Quoting photopilot (Reply 22):
So what I hear you saying is that The End Justifies the Means". That you're prepared to waive the law, waive due process whenever you Americans decide that you want to. If that's the case, no matter what argument you make, you as a country have sunk just as low into depravity as the IS. Which is why drone strikes and beheadings are exactly the same.

Agreed. And the problem is that the reaction from the other side will be the same: if America is attacked, they will fight. The same holds for the people that are attack by America.

Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 23):
LOL, you're dead wrong. We aren't beheading someone and sending the video out worldwide. Now, if we torture people, and do start beheading people, then yes, we've stooped to their level and they win. I've argued that for years. I've argued that on here against people who say that torture or any method is acceptable, and that's not true.

But your nation is doing that (or at least was until recently, I don't have enough evidence to say they're still up to it). That's the thing, the way the US conducts war creates enemies out of friends or neutrals.

Do you seriously believe that, if there were say 10,000 terrorist who have plans to kill people in the US and the US could kill all of them, but at the cost of 50,000 innocent (nevermind the fact that people who only think about killing are still innocent) civilians, that should be done because all problems will be over after that?

[Edited 2014-10-04 11:35:30]
 
Fiesta13
Posts: 256
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2014 11:28 pm

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sat Oct 04, 2014 6:44 pm

Quoting SuperCaravelle (Reply 24):
I don't want my government to go gung-ho in any area of the world where there might or might not be terrorists or anti-my country people.

Well, if the lives of your citizens are on the line, and your government does what you suggest, they they're going to die anyway, because unlike you, the terrorists don't have a conscience. I would rather my government fight for me and any of my fellow citizens in that scenario, then to have some Utopian mindset that if we are nice to these terrorists, they won't kill our people. That's pacifism, and pacifism only gets more people killed, not less.

Quoting SuperCaravelle (Reply 24):
Why is Al-Qaeda against the US?

They don't like our freedom.

They don't like our tolerance of different religious faiths.

They don't like the fact that women are for the most part seen as equal to men.

They don't like our support for Israel.

And as we have seen on many occasions, 9/11 being the starkest example, they're willing to kill, destroy and maim because of their hatred. And you want to appease them? No way.

I do understand that part of your position and those that take your side is you really don't give a flying flip about American lives, or else you wouldn't take the naive position that the leadership of my nation should just let a terrorist go who is in our sights, on the off chance that someday, somewhere, somehow, down the road, maybe years from now, we can put handcuffs on them. Warfare isn't like that, and this is what is going on: warfare. In warfare you kill or be killed. You don't give the other side a chance. You send them to Hell, or they'll send you there.
 
User avatar
AirPacific747
Posts: 9891
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 9:52 am

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sat Oct 04, 2014 7:30 pm

Quoting photopilot (Thread starter):
Is it that Americans think the value of one US life is worth more than the value of a Muslim in the 2nd or 3rd World?

Yes. Who are you closest to? Your own family or a strangers' family?

Quoting photopilot (Thread starter):
Do the women and children killed mean nothing?

Yes, but not as much as killed women and children in the West which is why we must protect ourselves first and foremost.
 
photopilot
Topic Author
Posts: 3101
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2002 11:16 am

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sat Oct 04, 2014 7:33 pm

Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 23):
Now, if we torture people......

Ahhhh, but you already do. One only has to look at how the US has globalized torture with CIA Secret Detention and Extraordinary Rendition.

Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 23):
If the opportunity to capture someone like that presents itself, you take it. But if it doesn't, and you find him in the middle of a Sudanese desert in a vehicle, and you KNOW it's him, you don't let him simply drive away.

Oh, you mean like the CIA's capture and torture of German citizen Khaled El-Masri. German national Khaled El-Masri was seized in Macedonia because he had been mistaken for an Al Qaeda suspect with a similar name. He was held incommunicado and abused in Macedonia and in secret CIA detention in Afghanistan. On December 13, 2012, the European Court of Human Rights held that Macedonia had violated El-Masri’s rights under the European Convention on Human Rights, and found that his ill-treatment by the CIA at Skopje airport in Macedonia amounted to torture.

Abu Omar, an Italian resident, was abducted from the streets of Milan, extraordinarily rendered to Egypt, and secretly detained for fourteen months while Egyptian agents interrogated and tortured him by subjecting him to electric shocks. An Italian court convicted in absentia 22 CIA agents and one Air Force pilot for their roles in the extraordinary rendition of Abu Omar.

The CIA’s Office of Inspector General has reportedly investigated a number of “erroneous renditions” in which the CIA had abducted and detained the wrong people. A CIA officer told the Washington Post: “They picked up the wrong people, who had no information. In many, many cases there was only some vague association” with terrorism.

The trouble with drone strikes is that you can't go back and say... Ooops, sorry, wrong guy we just blew away. And without judicial oversight, the rights of law, you're abandoning all semblance of civilized behaviour to the turds at CIA who have been proven to be wrong, again and again.
 
SuperCaravelle
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2012 8:04 pm

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sat Oct 04, 2014 7:40 pm

Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 25):
Well, if the lives of your citizens are on the line, and your government does what you suggest, they they're going to die anyway, because unlike you, the terrorists don't have a conscience. I would rather my government fight for me and any of my fellow citizens in that scenario, then to have some Utopian mindset that if we are nice to these terrorists, they won't kill our people. That's pacifism, and pacifism only gets more people killed, not less.

I already said I'm not pacifist. All I'm saying is action causes reaction. Doesn't mean all action is off the charts, but as much as you'd hate to think about it, if you fight someone, that someone will fight back. He will fight you back where he can find you, and if you're using drones, he'll have to look further.

Simple question: do you agree with me that attacking somewhere will increase the dislike for the attacker?

Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 25):
They don't like our freedom.

That's just not true. I'm free in my country but most terrorists don't care about it. I've never ever heard a terrorist say that he attacked because you're free.

Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 25):
They don't like our tolerance of different religious faiths.

Maybe, in part. Glad to learn that the uproar in part of the media when the possibility whether Obama was a muslim was being discussed was fake though  
Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 25):
They don't like the fact that women are for the most part seen as equal to men.

Partly. I'd say that differs per region and time period though.

Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 25):
They don't like our support for Israel.

With reasons. Not always good reasons, but once again this is also a case of action causes reaction.

Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 25):
And as we have seen on many occasions, 9/11 being the starkest example, they're willing to kill, destroy and maim because of their hatred. And you want to appease them? No way.

Many, or at least some, terrorists who are already terrorists will not be discouraged in their hate anymore. I think it is justified to kill (but preferably capture) them if it is sufficiently (and the debate on sufficiently is important) clear they are indeed terrorists planning to kill others. I don't necessarily want to appease them. I want to be very cautious so as not to invoke others to follow the same path.

Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 25):
I do understand that part of your position and those that take your side is you really don't give a flying flip about American lives, or else you wouldn't take the naive position that the leadership of my nation should just let a terrorist go who is in our sights, on the off chance that someday, somewhere, somehow, down the road, maybe years from now, we can put handcuffs on them. Warfare isn't like that, and this is what is going on: warfare. In warfare you kill or be killed. You don't give the other side a chance. You send them to Hell, or they'll send you there.

You don't understand evidently because I do. ALL I'm saying is that violence is not always the answer. But since you ignored most of my message you're gonna have to read back, I'm not going over this again.

In addition to the practical disadvantages of using drones at will, there are moral and ethical concerns. A country that is willing to kill any amount of civilians in order to kill terrorists needs to have a debate on that, a moral debate.

Because you ignored it, I'm gonna repeat my question: Do you seriously believe that, if there were say 10,000 terrorist who have plans to kill people in the US and the US could kill all of them, but at the cost of 50,000 innocent (nevermind the fact that people who only think about killing are still innocent) civilians, that should be done because all problems will be over after that?

In addition. If you can kill a terrorist, but you know you are going to kill 10 Afghani civilians who have nothing to do with it, would you still kill the terrorist?

And what if these 10 civilians are not Afghani, but French?

[Edited 2014-10-04 13:21:09]
 
Fiesta13
Posts: 256
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2014 11:28 pm

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sat Oct 04, 2014 9:26 pm

Quoting photopilot (Reply 27):
Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 23):
Now, if we torture people......

Ahhhh, but you already do. One only has to look at how the US has globalized torture with CIA Secret Detention and Extraordinary Rendition.

We already HAVE. Abu Gharib being a prime example, and it was wrong, and it was against the traditions of the American people. Unfortunately, when you put a George W. Bush and Dick Cheney in charge, two men who were so spooked by 9/11 that anything was justified, that's what happens. I fiind it appalling, and I'm not for it. And I think anyone in this nation who supports it should be put in a prison.

But that doesn't change the fact that you don't let a terrorist walk away, or drive away, or fly away, if you have them in your gunsights. You kill them, plain and simple.

Quoting photopilot (Reply 27):
The trouble with drone strikes is that you can't go back and say... Ooops, sorry, wrong guy we just blew away.

The trouble with letting them walk free because people like you want to only put handcuffs on them is that you can't go back and say to the familes of anyone they kill after that that "Oh, we're sorry, but we only want to arrest those terrorist, not kill them when we have the chance. So sorry for your lost."

Look, I wish we lived in a better world, where we didn't have groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda, and that we could all just get along. But you want this to be a utopia where everything is prim and proper and that rules are never broken, and that a bad guy always gets a day in court. I doesn't work that way, and I won't pretend it does.

You DO NOT let a terrorist go if you have him; that means if you can arrest him, you do, but it also means that if you see him on a mountain in Afghanistan by using a drone, and you don't know when you'll see him again, you blow his ass to Kingdom Come, and you don't think twice about it. War and terrorism are brutal, and it isn't made for the feint of heart. You kill or be killed in many cases. You may not like that, but it's the way of the world. It's time you accept it and move on.
 
photopilot
Topic Author
Posts: 3101
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2002 11:16 am

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sat Oct 04, 2014 11:44 pm

Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 29):
The trouble with letting them walk free because people like you want to only put handcuffs on them is that you can't go back and say to the familes of anyone they kill after that that "Oh, we're sorry, but we only want to arrest those terrorist, not kill them when we have the chance. So sorry for your lost."

If you actually had read all my post #27, one of the points made was when the turds at CIA had THE WRONG PEOPLE arrested, rendition and tortured.

So if the CIA can't even get THAT correct, and they have been criminally charged and CONVICTED in a court of law, what is your opinion on the same kind of mistake when you KILL someone you think is a terrorist, but that turns out not to be. Is it just "tuff-shit" for the guy you kill, never mind possible innocent bystanders?

And just who is it that makes those decisions to kill someone? Without judicial oversight. Without the right by anyone to cross-examine the evidence of the CIA? Some CIA desk-puke thinks, Yup, looks like a terrorist to me and issues a kill order?

You need to address and not sidestep the issue of extra-judicial killing (which is murder) of people without oversight. Explain that if you can.

[Edited 2014-10-04 17:42:08]
 
Fiesta13
Posts: 256
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2014 11:28 pm

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sun Oct 05, 2014 12:16 am

Quoting photopilot (Reply 30):
If you actually had read all my post #27, one of the points made was when the turds at CIC had THE WRONG PEOPLE arrested, rendition and tortured.

I wasn't referring to the arrest. Didn't you read what I responded to? It was this beauty from you:

Quoting photopilot (Reply 27):
The trouble with drone strikes is that you can't go back and say... Ooops, sorry, wrong guy we just blew away.

It cuts both ways. You say you can't go back and say "Oops, we got the wrong guy", and I replied that you also can't go to the familes and say "Well, we had him in our sites once, but since certain people only think arresting them is good form, we let them walk, and then they killed your family member. Too bad."

Quoting photopilot (Reply 30):
So if the CIA can't even get THAT correct, and they have been criminally charged and CONVICTED in a court of law, what is your opinion on the same kind of mistake when you KILL someone you think is a terrorist, but that turns out not to be. Is it just "tuff-shit" for the guy you kill, never mind possible innocent bystanders?

What you're basically saying that if CIA or someone else makes a mistake, then the shouldn't do ANYTHING when it comes to other terrorists, because, gosh, they might make a mistake again. That's what it sounds like to me.

Mistakes are going to happen in anything. If your litmus test for the CIA is no mistakes, then you're got a bar set so high no one can live up to it. Or perhaps that's your intention in the first place? But making a mistake on something doesn't mean you stop pursuing the terrorists. And that includes killing them with a drone strike when they're right in front of your eyes.

Quoting photopilot (Reply 30):
d just who is it that makes those decisions to kill someone? Without judicial oversight. Without the right by anyone to cross-examine the evidence of the CIA? Some CIA desk-puke thinks, Yup, looks like a terrorist to me and issues a kill order?

Again, you're being incredibly naive. THIS IS WAR. This isn't selling drugs on a street corner, where you arrest a perp, take him downtown, book him and give him his day in court. Warfare isn't like that. Again, if you capture one of these mutts, great. But if you can't, you kill them if you need to. Why do you insist on trying to make this so antiseptic, when it's a brutal thing to begin with.

And who makes that decision? In the United States, the Rules of Engagement are set by the chain-of-command, which includes the President of the United States, The Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff. And in some cases, it also includes the Director of the CIA. They set the rules and relay the R.O.E. to the commanders in the field.

You think some career guy at Foggy Bottom makes that decision? Or over at the Pentagon? You think they don't put time and effort and intel into either capturing or killing a terrorist? You make it sound like no thought or work goes into this. You act like mistakes should never take place. In a perfect world, they wouldn't, but if mistake-free is your litmus test, no one on earth can live up to it.

I'm sorry, but I'm beginning to think that you simply don't WANT to take on these thugs. That you're more worried about the rights and due process of terrorists than you are getting them out of circulation and keeping them from killing people. It seems to me that if we kill them it's wrong, but if we have them in our sights and DON'T kill them, and they kill again, that oh, well, at least your folow due process. This isn't a judicial process, in the end it's a military process. As long as that fact escapes you, you won't ever understand what is going on.
 
User avatar
pu
Posts: 1364
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 1:08 am

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sun Oct 05, 2014 12:32 am

Death by drone or by angry unemployed youth with a big knife is equally murder or a righteous act of war, depending on which side you're on.

It is entirely correct to forcefully confront the backwards anti-civilization, anti-democratic forces like ISIS. But neither ISIS deaths nor European/American deaths are less moral or more criminal than the other.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 11):
Quoting photopilot (Reply 12):

We'd love to know what happened along the way to create a multi-year US hatred and pathological disturbance. Denied a visa? Denied employment/school/family success because of America? Your favorite country blames America for their troubles?

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 14):
am glad that the world has this super power which is the only one that can control lawless terrorists.

The difference between 1899 and 1999, especially the export of Democracy beyond the English speaking nations, is almost entirely because of America. Their mistakes are huge. Their successes changed and are still changing the world for the better.....no Hong Kong protests eccept for America's role in the world...



Pu
 
YVRLTN
Posts: 2349
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 1:49 pm

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sun Oct 05, 2014 12:38 am

Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 29):
But that doesn't change the fact that you don't let a terrorist walk away, or drive away, or fly away, if you have them in your gunsights. You kill them, plain and simple.

And if you kill 50 innocent women and children at the same time that is perfectly OK because you killed the terrorist?
 
User avatar
WarRI1
Posts: 14195
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:51 am

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sun Oct 05, 2014 12:41 am

I have to say that we in the US are happy to provide freedom of speech and a freedom of choice to all for and against the US while we defend our freedom. I know it is just an unintentional by-product of our selfishness. Enjoy it anyway. Feel free to act outraged at our conduct. Feel free to accept all the side benefits of our willingness to step up. It is how we roll. Someone just said that recently. I think it was an American.

We will endure, we will continue the fight to remain free. We will continue to hold our heads high and defend those who cannot, nor maybe will not do their part. We will sacrifice, it is our way when needed as it has in the past and continues today.
 
User avatar
pu
Posts: 1364
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 1:08 am

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sun Oct 05, 2014 12:53 am

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 33):
50 innocent women

Just how innocent are they?

Everyone has the government they deserve. All the worst governments in history govern only by consent of the governed. Many failed individuals and societies believe their fate is controlled by others, like foreigners or a bad local regime, when in fact they have chosen to accept what is happening. If you choose ISIS as your government - which they have, whether they realise it or not - you aren't just an innocent civilian.




Pu
 
User avatar
WarRI1
Posts: 14195
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:51 am

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sun Oct 05, 2014 12:56 am

Quoting pu (Reply 35):
Just how innocent are they?

Everyone has the government they deserve. All the worst governments in history govern only by consent of the governed. Many failed individuals and societies believe their fate is controlled by others, like foreigners or a bad local regime, when in fact they have chosen to accept what is happening. If you choose ISIS as your government - which they have, whether they realise it or not - you aren't just an innocent civilian.

Very well said. If you elect, or choose to follow a government of terror, or you freely participate, you are as guilty as the terrorists and deserve the same.
 
Mir
Posts: 19491
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sun Oct 05, 2014 1:16 am

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 11):
So you would be fine with AQ or ISIL striking targets in the US with a drone?

If they're military targets, sure. That's not to say that I'd be content to just sit back and let it happen without a response - I would expect the US to respond - but it would at least be a legitimate form of resistance.

Quoting blueflyer (Reply 16):
I understand where you come from about civilians dying "over there" as opposed to "over here" and it's not a bad calculation, but it isn't one that the rest of the world will agree with.

Every country in the world values the lives of its own citizens more than the lives of foreign nationals. That's just the way it is, and there's nothing wrong with that. I don't expect the rest of the world to agree with it, but I do expect them to understand it, since it's a very basic principle and everyone adheres to it.

Quoting photopilot (Reply 22):
So what I hear you saying is that The End Justifies the Means". That you're prepared to waive the law, waive due process whenever you Americans decide that you want to. If that's the case, no matter what argument you make, you as a country have sunk just as low into depravity as the IS.

The US and ISIS are in no way comparable. None. We don't force people onto mountaintops and try and starve them because of their religion. We don't force people to change their religion under penalty of death. We believe in the rights of women. I could go on.

-Mir
 
Fiesta13
Posts: 256
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2014 11:28 pm

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sun Oct 05, 2014 1:46 am

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 33):
Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 29):
But that doesn't change the fact that you don't let a terrorist walk away, or drive away, or fly away, if you have them in your gunsights. You kill them, plain and simple.

And if you kill 50 innocent women and children at the same time that is perfectly OK because you killed the terrorist?


As our esteemed member pu from Sweden said, just how innocent ARE THEY if they're hanging around a known terrorist? Did that ever cross your mind? Or could it be that they're being held close to said terrorist as a human shield because if certain timid people had their way, they wouldn't attack them because, gosh, there are INNOCENT people around them.

Explain that one to us? It's a legitimate question. Whose guilty of what here?

Let's be brutally honest here: this IS a brutal thing, and someone has to make some extremely tough decisions day in and day out on questions like that. Someone has to weigh the evidence of seeing a terrorist on a live feed; confirming the percentages are high that it is that person; evaluating the enviornment that terrorist is currently in; evaluating whether taking him out, and perhaps some innocent or not so innocent people around him is worth the price of someone like you complaining (that's an exaggeration. He or she doesn't really care if you complain). But they have to be able to go home at night with a clear conscience and be confident they did the right thing.

How would YOU like that kind of pressure on you day after day? Do you think for most people it doesn't come without a physical and/or psychological cost? I bet it does. It's easy for you to sit in the comfort of your home in Canada and gripe and criticize, when you're a half world away from what is going on, and your butt isn't on the line, either figuratively or literally.

Again, one part of a conflict is you take risks. A terrorists who tries to use human beings as a shield risks those peoples lives; if those "innocent" people freely hand around a terrorist, they'll take the risk that any combatant takes.
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sun Oct 05, 2014 3:13 am

I see confusion between the micro and the macro in this discussion. The question of the OP is framed on "drone strikes" which is a specific type of action, hence: micro.

How about if we moved this a step up to the macro and framed that question as "should the US use military force to counter the AQ affiliated groups in North Waziristan who are known to be plotting (followup) attacks on the US? Somali factions can be lumped in there too. I don't see how the answer could be anything but yes, but I welcome anyone here to try to make a case against the use of military force there.

If the answer to the above is yes, then it seems to me that quibbling about whether it is done with drones or some other way is merely delving into technical military issues; but it is a subject available for discussion, in that frame the discussion would belong in the military forum though.

It makes more sense to me to take this discussion to the strategic level. How does the US (or the west) find itself the mortal enemy of substantial number of people in the ME?

Does anyone here want to discuss that?
 
Fiesta13
Posts: 256
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2014 11:28 pm

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sun Oct 05, 2014 3:53 am

I hate to even remotely agree with BMI727 on anything, as I think he typifies the less-than-attractive side of Americans and how some of them think, but he was basically right in his observations. Unfortunately when you live in a free society, you have to suffer xenophobes and jingoistic types, but he pretty much summed it up succinctly.
 
flyguy89
Posts: 3503
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sun Oct 05, 2014 4:38 am

Quoting SuperCaravelle (Reply 18):
Ever wondered why France doesn't have as many enemies in Northern and Western Africa, for example?

Are you serious? One of your countrymen was just be-headed for crying out loud. You're detested in Western Africa and have had a number of deadly attacks carried out by Muslim extremists on your soil (the Toulouse and Montauban shootings??). Lest we forget the ire France drew from the Muslim world with the Burqa law?

More broadly, people have been assassinated on the streets of Amsterdam and extremists were even burning Danish flags and effigies during that whole cartoon fiasco...little Denmark for pete's sake!

The bottom line is that these Muslim extremist wouldn't skip a beat if they had the opportunity to behead a Frenchman instead of an American.
 
BMI727
Posts: 11300
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sun Oct 05, 2014 5:38 am

Quoting SuperCaravelle (Reply 18):
Something somewhat resembling a fair fight is the only way some ethical questions will keep being asked. Drone warfare is post-moral warfare and it's dangerous, for the countries affected in the short term and for the US in the medium to long term.

Nobody should have to explain to an American mother that her son had to die for the sake of some fake moral high ground appeasing bleeding hearts like yourself and Photopilot.

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 33):
And if you kill 50 innocent women and children at the same time that is perfectly OK because you killed the terrorist?

Nobody says it's okay. It's an unfortunate cost of doing business sometimes, but it is not considered okay.
 
User avatar
Francoflier
Posts: 6010
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2001 12:27 pm

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sun Oct 05, 2014 5:46 am

On the face of it, the difference between a drone attack and a terrorist beheading is quite clear: intent.

The drone attack targets (ideally) terrorists members, while a beheading targets random, innocent civilians who have no part in the fight.

The execution of the former may be questioned, especially regarding the amount of civilian casualties (mostly due to the fact that civilians are used as human shields by terrorists), but the morality of the action is still a lot more justifiable than the latter.

Is there even a point debating the moral grounds for western actions against terrorists vs. terrorists actions against the west and the local populations? They are nihilistic, savage, backwards barbarians who seek nothing but repression and violence under their rule.

The only debate worth having is on how to take them out. Drones clearly aren't a perfect method, but then neither is anything else. Peace has a price.
 
SuperCaravelle
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2012 8:04 pm

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sun Oct 05, 2014 11:06 am

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 42):
Nobody should have to explain to an American mother that her son had to die for the sake of some fake moral high ground appeasing bleeding hearts like yourself and Photopilot.

Good job cherrypicking my post so you can make one-liners.

If you read carefully, I don't say that one should fight like that, I say it's the only way in which moral questions will be addressed. I completely understand and acknowledge the advantages of drones over boots on the ground as far as military casualties go (I don't think drones will contribute to world peace the way they're being used at the moment, that's another discussion), and I will repeat and repeat and repeat myself because everyone doesn't want to understand that I'm not opposing drone strikes or fighting terrorism or anything like that.

I just meet a disturbing amount of the "If you're not with me, you're against me" crowd here. If you try to argue in favor of any other approach than to blow everyone that doesn't agree with you to kingdom come, apparently you're siding against the US. Has anyone ever been in any business meeting where the most fundamental hardliners are the most successful at getting their cookies?

Quoting francoflier (Reply 43):
Is there even a point debating the moral grounds for western actions against terrorists vs. terrorists actions against the west and the local populations? They are nihilistic, savage, backwards barbarians who seek nothing but repression and violence under their rule.

Yes there is. Only by debating you can learn from mistakes.
 
Mir
Posts: 19491
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sun Oct 05, 2014 11:52 am

Quoting pu (Reply 35):
Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 33):
50 innocent women

Just how innocent are they?

They can be pretty innocent. It really depends. Which is why you have to be judicious about how you use the drones. If you've got a low-value guy in the middle of a city, probably best not to take the shot. If he's out in a jeep somewhere with his family around, that seems like a good time to take the shot. A very-high-value guy in the middle of a city and you've been trying to get an opportunity for a while? It might be best to take the shot when you can. This is stuff that the military and intelligence communities need to collaborate on and figure out the best course of action. Just because you can use a drone doesn't necessarily mean that you should, but sometimes there's no question that you should.

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 36):
If you elect, or choose to follow a government of terror, or you freely participate, you are as guilty as the terrorists and deserve the same.

That's the same logic used to justify 9/11, so I can't subscribe to it. There's a reason that international law separates civilian targets from military and government targets.

-Mir
 
User avatar
Kiwirob
Posts: 13757
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sun Oct 05, 2014 12:27 pm

Quoting pu (Reply 32):
We'd love to know what happened along the way to create a multi-year US hatred and pathological disturbance.

I don't hate the US, far from it, I just can't stand a lot of the things the fools running the US do. People like Bush, Cheney and co should be locked up, they should have stood trial for what they have done in Iraq, yet people like you appear to think what they did was justified.

Quoting pu (Reply 35):
Just how innocent are they?

Lets just say you're an ISIL sleep agent in Sweden (must be some there are enough Muslims in the country) the US read something on Airliners.net don't like the cut of your gybe, assume you're up to no good so target your home with a drone, you're wife and kids, family are all around for a visit, it's one of your kids birthdays, so you would say the deaths of al you're family are justified because they know you? They were all innocent they knew nothing of your murderous anti McDonald's thoughts, but they all died anyway. To make matters worst the Swedish govt decides the US should be held accountable for the death of the PU family, hold a trial and sentence know US drone operators and the CIA agent targeting your home, yet the US govt does what they always do in cases like this, gives Sweden the finger, tells them to F off and everyone gets away with a free pass, expect your dead family and the family in the house next door who died by mistake.
 
Fiesta13
Posts: 256
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2014 11:28 pm

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sun Oct 05, 2014 3:18 pm

I think the point that mystifies me from several posters is their belief that somehow the American Government shouldn't value an American life more than a life of one of these terrorists or the poeple who associate with them. It baffles me that anyone would think that.

The job of the American Government is to protect Americans, and to bring to justice, via arrest or drone strike or bombings, any terrorist who is a threat to Americans. The job of the Dutch government is the same for the Dutch people; the Spanish government for the Canadian people, etc etc etc.

Why is that concept so hard for some of you to understand? When someone declaresd they're your enemy, by killing or injuring one of your own, you don't play nice with them. You send them to meet their Maker if you can, or the inside of a small prison cell if you can.

Maybe you as an individual have this touchy-feely, Utopian mindset that you don't hold your countrymen any higher than anyone else, and if we lived in a Utopian world, that'd be swell. But we don't. A government is tasked to protect its citizens, and when their citizens are harmed, to find those that harmed them and bring them to justice.
 
photopilot
Topic Author
Posts: 3101
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2002 11:16 am

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sun Oct 05, 2014 3:42 pm

Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 47):
I think the point that mystifies me from several posters is their belief that somehow the American Government shouldn't value an American life more than a life of one of these terrorists or the poeple who associate with them. It baffles me that anyone would think that.

Because you're playing loosey-goosey with what others are saying.
It's fine to take out a PROVEN terrorist, but that's not what's happening. The USA's definition of "terrorist" has gotten so loose that far too many mistakes are being made.
Also, the US, despite protestations here, kills far too many innocent people when they try to take out a "terrorist".
 
User avatar
pvjin
Posts: 3586
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 4:52 pm

RE: Beheadings Vs Drone Assassinations

Sun Oct 05, 2014 4:11 pm

Quoting photopilot (Reply 48):
It's fine to take out a PROVEN terrorist, but that's not what's happening. The USA's definition of "terrorist" has gotten so loose that far too many mistakes are being made.

Anyone fighting for ISIS is a terrorist as ISIS is an organization guilty of many terrorist attacks and crimes against humanity. I hope the coalition does European tax payers a favour by getting rid of all "Europeans" fighting for ISIS.

Quoting Fiesta13 (Reply 47):
Also, the US, despite protestations here, kills far too many innocent people when they try to take out a "terrorist".

Collateral damage, unavoidable.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], davidjohnson6, extender, FLDrifter, skyservice_330, tmu101 and 32 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos