Live data from Hacker News

Human Rights Watch says drone strikes in Haiti have killed nearly 1,250 people

haitiantimes.com

61–70 of 128 posts

Re: Human Rights Watch says drone strikes in Haiti have killed nearly 1,250 people

#61
post #59
post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Much more frequent conflicts, yes. Much less total death and dying as well, though. Battles were short and small scale until the Civil War (maybe the Napoleonic Wars prior? Debatable). The largest battles of history prior to the industrial revolution were in the thousands, 10s of thousands of people. Forces were usually broken and defeated or fled after brief engagements. Brutal in experience, but smaller in scale. I…

Ghenghis khan?

A different model of war and Empire.

Yes brutal, for the defenders of the castles and fortified cities they conquered.

But again, very targeted at key sites so as to assert an Imperial-vassal relationship. Not to really to metamorph the populace, and run the day to day, which was left to local leadership.

Their point was to demonstratively subjugate for the purposes of control and tribute, not to kill, replace, or even miscegenate. They were the mob-bosses of Eurasia, not the crusaders or jihadis.

Re: Human Rights Watch says drone strikes in Haiti have killed nearly 1,250 people

#62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

No, not dozens of Innocents. About 1500, which is a lot more. You should read the comment that you replied to again. You're railing against a fact, not an opinion.

People don't think anymore, they just react... Im pretty sure Im done engaging on this platform for that reason. Nearly every comment is met by some crass remark that clearly demonstrates the person didn't actually understand the comment, just reacted to the trigger words within it.

Re: Human Rights Watch says drone strikes in Haiti have killed nearly 1,250 people

#63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, not dozens of Innocents. About 1500, which is a lot more. You should read the comment that you replied to again. You're railing against a fact, not an opinion.

People don't think anymore, they just react... Im pretty sure Im done engaging on this platform for that reason. Nearly every comment is met by some crass remark that clearly demonstrates the person didn't actually understand the comment, just reacted to the trigger words within it.

This is best exemplified by all the comments (on varying posts) saying: 'I misread the title, and interpreted as X, haha!'. HN has unfortunately slid in the direction of Reddit (despite the HN Guidelines' denial of this).

Re: Human Rights Watch says drone strikes in Haiti have killed nearly 1,250 people

#65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the other guys have child soldiers, you don't need child soldiers of your own to defeat them. If the other guys have an army of killer robots and you don't, you are going to die.

Do not succumb to "we have to win the race" reasoning and escalation, when the race is leading off a cliff. It is, in fact, possible to stop things via international cooperation. Treat it the way we do nuclear proliferation. (Efforts to stop nuclear proliferation have not been perfect , but they've been incredibly effective and made it much more difficult to make the problem worse than it already is.)

Nukes are intrinsically complex and require a high degree of skill, time, and resources to pull off.

Attack drones can be as easy as strapping an off the shelf grenade to an off the shelf drone.

Re: Human Rights Watch says drone strikes in Haiti have killed nearly 1,250 people

#66
post #36
post #27

> Human Rights Watch (HRW) said Tuesday that drone strikes carried out in Haiti over the past year have killed at least 1,243 people, including 17 children, many of whom had no apparent links to the criminal groups the attacks seek to squash. > Launched by Haitian law enforcement forces and private contractors working for Vectus Global between March 1, 2025, and Jan. 21, 2026, the strikes also injured at least 738 pe…

My understanding that 100% were killed extrajudicially. Only hope that when it comes to US the drones would carry Tasers.

I have no idea how Haitian law looks at it, but the UN Security Council grants the Gang Suppression Force a pretty clear mandate. They specifically authorized to neutralize, isolate, and deter gangs, search for and siege weapon, and prevent the loss of life and within the limits of its capacities and areas of deployment, adopt urgent temporary measures on an exceptional basis.[0] While emphasizing the need to apply arrests and detain offenders, they are allowed to strike back. Drones are useful as indirect fire support so if proper rules of engagement are followed, maybe some of those killing are lawful.

[0] https://docs.un.org/en/S/RES/2793(2025)

Re: Human Rights Watch says drone strikes in Haiti have killed nearly 1,250 people

#67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

No, not dozens of Innocents. About 1500, which is a lot more. You should read the comment that you replied to again. You're railing against a fact, not an opinion.

Dozens of innocents (5% of 1250 = 63) killed "extrajudicially" (i.e., illegally) by the drones that are the subject of the article, and those deaths were dismissed by the rationalization in the comment they replied to.

Re: Human Rights Watch says drone strikes in Haiti have killed nearly 1,250 people

#68
post #17
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Atomic bombs, probably. Drones? I’m not so sure I’ve heard that specific discussion point before. Why would drones be any different than machine guns or fighter jets?

Whose going to participate in ethnic cleaning (or gangs) when they can be zapped from anywhere? It's a much larger deterrent

[dead]

Re: Human Rights Watch says drone strikes in Haiti have killed nearly 1,250 people

#70
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People don't think anymore, they just react... Im pretty sure Im done engaging on this platform for that reason. Nearly every comment is met by some crass remark that clearly demonstrates the person didn't actually understand the comment, just reacted to the trigger words within it.

This is best exemplified by all the comments (on varying posts) saying: 'I misread the title, and interpreted as X, haha!'. HN has unfortunately slid in the direction of Reddit (despite the HN Guidelines' denial of this).

It always has been.
Post reply on HN