This guy has it right: Drone strikes, and 'bug splats'.

Catfish · 02-21-13, 04:29 AM

.. because there is not even a firm accepted guideline, the evaluation of the legal aspect is a "work in progress".

Listen to what he says, exactly.

Now the question is, sure it was not an idea of the government, but of course the Pentagon and CIA. Politicians that change every few years cannot be molested (and trusted) with the nation's survival, which is known and planned best by more or less clandestine organisations being in charge for the 'greater good' and long-lasting policies.
They will not even tell you whether it was a "personality strike", or a "signature strike" (those words alone are as disgusting and atrocious), when the media ask how much civilians and US citizens have been killed by "collateral damage" in the latest attack abroad, because of course this is all a military secret.
Without Wikileaks, no one would even know about it. What exactly does that tell about the democracy ?
(I can only imagine of what public and propaganda outcry would have happened, had Germany used this method at whatever time - but your people KNEW about that, why didn't you DO something. But i guess i'm just falling for Godwin's law)

So, did Pentagon and CIA give good advice to the government, or may this decision how to kill backfire at the nation, because of international ostracism and undermining the own constitution.

Of course, the right of the stronger to do what he wants - but that may be a bad idea: Drones are cheap, and can be produced by any nation on earth. No expensive air force needed, and no airports.
Those drones will be used by anyone soon, to spy on neighbours in small scale, but there is no need to think terrorists will not also use them, along with nations like North Korea. So, apart from all humanistic and legal discussion (no trials), is using drones and taking killing civilians deliberately a good example ?

I found already the Apache attack disgusting, clearly the pilot did not know what to do, and got the order to kill the Reuters correspondent and a lot of bystanders, which of course he followed. Now it has become a habit, using dones alone ?

And please, listen to the videos before you explode in your self-righteous

(ahem) self defense. He does not say that drone killings do not have merits against terrorists, along with the advantage of not exposing the life of soldiers. It is not about that, at least not alone.
The video game conduct, killing civilians as collateral damage and calling this a 'bug splat' ?

OT:
Oh, and now they want to give medals to drone 'pilots', for 'bravery'

:

02-21-13, 04:29 AM	#1
Catfish Dipped Squirrel Operative Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: ..where the ocean meets the sky Posts: 16,897 Downloads: 38 Uploads: 0	Drone strikes still without legal base, but no one cares .. .. because there is not even a firm accepted guideline, the evaluation of the legal aspect is a "work in progress". Listen to what he says, exactly. Now the question is, sure it was not an idea of the government, but of course the Pentagon and CIA. Politicians that change every few years cannot be molested (and trusted) with the nation's survival, which is known and planned best by more or less clandestine organisations being in charge for the 'greater good' and long-lasting policies. They will not even tell you whether it was a "personality strike", or a "signature strike" (those words alone are as disgusting and atrocious), when the media ask how much civilians and US citizens have been killed by "collateral damage" in the latest attack abroad, because of course this is all a military secret. Without Wikileaks, no one would even know about it. What exactly does that tell about the democracy ? (I can only imagine of what public and propaganda outcry would have happened, had Germany used this method at whatever time - but your people KNEW about that, why didn't you DO something. But i guess i'm just falling for Godwin's law) So, did Pentagon and CIA give good advice to the government, or may this decision how to kill backfire at the nation, because of international ostracism and undermining the own constitution. Of course, the right of the stronger to do what he wants - but that may be a bad idea: Drones are cheap, and can be produced by any nation on earth. No expensive air force needed, and no airports. Those drones will be used by anyone soon, to spy on neighbours in small scale, but there is no need to think terrorists will not also use them, along with nations like North Korea. So, apart from all humanistic and legal discussion (no trials), is using drones and taking killing civilians deliberately a good example ? I found already the Apache attack disgusting, clearly the pilot did not know what to do, and got the order to kill the Reuters correspondent and a lot of bystanders, which of course he followed. Now it has become a habit, using dones alone ? And please, listen to the videos before you explode in your self-righteous (ahem) self defense. He does not say that drone killings do not have merits against terrorists, along with the advantage of not exposing the life of soldiers. It is not about that, at least not alone. The video game conduct, killing civilians as collateral damage and calling this a 'bug splat' ? OT: Oh, and now they want to give medals to drone 'pilots', for 'bravery' : Last edited by Catfish; 02-21-13 at 06:27 AM.