Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Leaked report shows high civilian death toll from CIA drone strikes

salon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 154 posts

Re: Leaked report shows high civilian death toll from CIA drone strikes

#111

Post by Andrew_Quentin »

mpyne wrote: post #29
rdtsc wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I grew up in the 80s in the Soviet Union. And the thing is, we never believed their propaganda because it was too ridiculous. Everyone was laughing at the bullshit they heard on the radio and TV. True believers have disappeared probably the the mid 60s or so. Even defecting spies had stopped using "ideology" as the reason for their defection it was too unbelievable. Likewise might happen in US. It seems two things ha…

> It is just the pesky Internets that lets "domestic terrorists" like Occupy organize and share idea. Pesky little extremists forums like /r/news lets people discuss issues outside the mainstream media. Why does everyone blame the evil MSM? Fox News was started because the MSM was 'too liberal'. I mean, I sort of agree with your overall point, but if you want to see what 'domestic terrorists' could do before the Inte…

What killed occupy was the police forcibly removing them.

Re: Leaked report shows high civilian death toll from CIA drone strikes

#112

Post by DanBC »

rayiner wrote: post #110
spodek wrote: post #3

Growing up in the 70s, we looked at news from the Soviet Union and other authoritarian regimes as blatantly untrue propaganda. By comparison, our press and government practiced transparency -- they may have lied, but not on the scale the others did. I keep slipping back into believing the United States government believes in honesty and transparency, at least relatively more than other governments. In some areas it m…

I don't remember anyone denying that drone strikes result in civilian causalities. But guess what we did before we had drone strikes? We did cruise missile attacks, targeted bombings, arming of rebels, and often full scale proxy wars. Drone strikes kill a lot fewer civilians than the alternatives we used during the Cold War.

Yes. I'm uneasy about drone strikes, but they're a lot better than cluster bombs, which not only kill people during the bombing but which leave bomblets around for years.

The bomblets are visually appealing to children, causing considerable harm to them.

UNICEF works hard in this area.

(http://www.unicef.org/eapro/media_14458.html)

(http://www.unicefusa.org/campaigns/public-policy-advocacy/ke...)

Re: Leaked report shows high civilian death toll from CIA drone strikes

#113

Post by Amadou »

jakejake wrote: post #24
rdtsc wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I grew up in the 80s in the Soviet Union. And the thing is, we never believed their propaganda because it was too ridiculous. Everyone was laughing at the bullshit they heard on the radio and TV. True believers have disappeared probably the the mid 60s or so. Even defecting spies had stopped using "ideology" as the reason for their defection it was too unbelievable. Likewise might happen in US. It seems two things ha…

That's really interesting to hear the "other side" as it were. I think the US mentality is to simply not tell you anything about the other county so that you don't develop any sort of personal feelings. I was a child during the cold war, but I actually could not tell you one thing about any Russian person that I was told during that time, aside from the "evil" leaders hated our way of life and how they desperately wa…

I was a child during the cold war, but I actually could not tell you one thing about any Russian person that I was told during that time,

I still remember Sting's song Russians with the rhetorical lyric, "Do the Russians Love their Children Too?"

Which is kind of the opposite of your point, since it wasn't Big Evil propaganda.

Re: Leaked report shows high civilian death toll from CIA drone strikes

#114

Post by Andrew_Quentin »

derefr wrote: post #88
smky80 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You know what killed Occupy? Occupy! No goal, no purpose, Occupy was subverted from the inside much like the Tea Party. The fact that George Soros was involved is a big clue. The aim went from something fairly specific, like lets bring Goldman Sachs to justice for starters, the other major investment banks and the Federal Reserve ... to "let's get those one percenters!". Yeah, let's bring the dentists of the world…

> The aim went from something fairly specific, like lets bring Goldman Sachs to justice for starters, the other major investment banks and the Federal Reserve ... to "let's get those one percenters!". Yeah, let's bring the dentists of the world to justice for their role in the housing crisis. Don't attribute to malice, stupidity. Dissolution of purpose is just what tends to happen when a movement gets popular as a fa…

Fetish is quite a strange word to use. They put in practice anarchist principles and showed that such principles do actually work in practice as they managed to grab the focus of the world for maybe a month or two and communicated a very focused message, there is a difference between 99% of the people and a tiny 1%.

Re: Leaked report shows high civilian death toll from CIA drone strikes

#115

Post by Amadou »

CoffeeDregs wrote: post #13
spodek wrote: post #3

Growing up in the 70s, we looked at news from the Soviet Union and other authoritarian regimes as blatantly untrue propaganda. By comparison, our press and government practiced transparency -- they may have lied, but not on the scale the others did. I keep slipping back into believing the United States government believes in honesty and transparency, at least relatively more than other governments. In some areas it m…

Agreed. For me, the most depressing part is that I, as a Republican [not a retard "movement" conservative, but a non-Progressive [yes, I believe in Climate Change]], voted for Obama and his message of transparency. I shouldn't have "believed" in a politician, but I did. Crazy time: liberal friends are now defending the NSA's actions... Cats and dogs are living together in peace. WTF?

Crazy time: liberal friends are now defending the NSA's actions...

If Jimmy Carter can't convince them, then they really are lost.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/18/jimmy-carter-edward...

Re: Leaked report shows high civilian death toll from CIA drone strikes

#116

Post by derefr »

Andrew_Quentin wrote: post #114
derefr wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The aim went from something fairly specific, like lets bring Goldman Sachs to justice for starters, the other major investment banks and the Federal Reserve ... to "let's get those one percenters!". Yeah, let's bring the dentists of the world to justice for their role in the housing crisis. Don't attribute to malice, stupidity. Dissolution of purpose is just what tends to happen when a movement gets popular as a fa…

Fetish is quite a strange word to use. They put in practice anarchist principles and showed that such principles do actually work in practice as they managed to grab the focus of the world for maybe a month or two and communicated a very focused message, there is a difference between 99% of the people and a tiny 1%.

> they managed to grab the focus of the world for maybe a month or two and communicated a very focused message, there is a difference between 99% of the people and a tiny 1%

This... wasn't the goal of the core group going into the "turn Occupy Wall Street into a movement" project, though, which was my point.

It's sort of like setting out, in 0 A.D., to turn Christianity into a movement--but everyone who joins you ends up evangelizing for Scientology (or whatever the equivalent at the time was), because that's what they think you're talking about, and that's easier to sell. So, you've spawned a successful movement... to evangelize Scientology. Not a success.

Also, the word choice was deliberate; every piece of literature you can find on movements throughout history would suggest that there is a strong correlation between success in spreading awareness/change, and having charismatic leadership: a "face" to put to the movement, and a person that could be looked to--either for guidance, or just as a role-model--when one is confused about what the movement should be focusing on. This is important not for any sort of top-down leadership/command role--it's not a 1% hegemon--but rather the "face" exists so that new members have someone to base their understanding on what the movement "is for" off of, instead of just looking at what the people around them are doing (usually nothing.) To know this, and persist in attempting to use a self-defeating "no one is special; we are all of us together" approach, goes past ideology and into role-playing. They weren't trying to accomplish anything; they just wanted to enjoy the feeling of doing something anarchic, even if it wouldn't accomplish anything.

Re: Leaked report shows high civilian death toll from CIA drone strikes

#117

Post by selter01 »

ferdo wrote: post #75
anigbrowl wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never argued for supporting Occupy. The problems isn't about occupy, the problem is that FBI and their corporate partners thought they are dangerous enough to label them as "domestic terrorists". Think about it. A bunch of people without a goal, disorganized, non-violent, and they bothered to label them as terrorist. Good Lord. What if they were more organized. What would those watching them be doing? Assassinating…

That's not quite accurate. “These documents show that the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security are treating protests against the corporate and banking structure of America as potential criminal and terrorist activity. These documents also show these federal agencies functioning as a de facto intelligence arm of Wall Street and Corporate America.” > http://www.justiceonline.org/commentary/fbi-files-ows.html

"Potential"

Re: Leaked report shows high civilian death toll from CIA drone strikes

#118

Post by 6d0debc071 »

I've never really understood why they don't arm drones with cannon rather than missiles. Under computer control, those could be incredibly accurate. Can't imagine there'd be much collateral damage from them.

When you have a stock of air to ground missiles, everything looks like a tank?

Then again the entire drone command system strikes me as laughably badly designed, I dare say that's responsible for a hell of a lot of unnecessary deaths from bad situational awareness.

Re: Leaked report shows high civilian death toll from CIA drone strikes

#119

Post by Amadou »

jehovahrova wrote: post #104
mladenkovacevic wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The scary part is that this line of thinking is not entirely untrue seeing as civilian casualties have a way of radicalizing young men in search of revenge. The REALLY scary part where America goes from being a misguided but well-intentioned brute to a completely evil, opportunistic warmonger is when you think about the data that the US intelligence and military complex has access to. Don't they know that their war i…

"The scary part is that this line of thinking is not entirely untrue seeing as civilian casualties have a way of radicalizing young men in search of revenge." I do not expect to convince you to change your opinion, but I would like to let you know that this is not an opinion well verified by fact. It's a supposition made by chaps like Noam Chomsky without serious data behind it. It is also counter to what we know is…

I wouldn't call them intellectuals - more like college students. But I also don't think that applies in the general case, like Al Qaeda in Iraq. Attacks on western soil, like 9/11, it has definitely been stablished has mainly middle to upper-class college educated guys - engineers, dentists, that sort of thing. But in the middle east and south asia I don't think the rank file qualify.

Re: Leaked report shows high civilian death toll from CIA drone strikes

#120

Post by toble »

hoggle wrote: post #103
toble wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Problem is, the USA is geared towards those sorts of aggressive methods because of the huge military infrastructure. The solution is to constantly cut the budget and make that aspect less influential.

When you have approximately 1/3 of the population being somewhat dependent on that stream of income, is it still feasible to "go back"? Economically it's also far less risky to be the bully as long as you can. It would be great to see the US believe more in their productive nerds than in their bullies but at the moment they are playing it safe by somewhat (aside from populist immigration policies - probably not the b…

Fully understand that point. I can only suggest that lots of Western countries have slowly reduced their military budgets over decades. They seem to have adapted to the change.
Post reply on HN