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

If a Drone Strike Hit an American Wedding We'd Ground Our Fleet

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 361 posts

Re: If a Drone Strike Hit an American Wedding We'd Ground Our Fleet

#221

Post by grecy »

threeseed wrote: post #78
k-mcgrady wrote: post #5

Not all that surpising. As was made clear during the Snowden leaks the USG doesn't consider human beings who aren't US citizens to have the same rights as Americans.

Here's something that will blow your mind. EVERY country considers its own citizens to have more rights than other countries. Otherwise we wouldn't have millions of people dying every year by preventable means. And there wouldn't be widespread despisement of refugees.

Lots of countries are passive in that they don't go out of their way to help people in other countries in the ways you suggest.

The US is active in that it's actively treating citizens of other countries as second class.

Re: If a Drone Strike Hit an American Wedding We'd Ground Our Fleet

#222

Post by grecy »

belorn wrote: post #25

> Five of those killed were suspected of involvement with Al Qaeda, but the remainder were unconnected with the militancy, Yemeni security officials said." > The New York Times reported in 2013 that the Obama Administration embraced a disputed method for counting civilian casualties, which in effect counts all military-age males in a strike zone as combatants. So 5 people were of military-age and male? Given a size o…

> The New York Times reported in 2013 that the Obama Administration embraced a disputed method for counting civilian casualties, which in effect counts all military-age males in a strike zone as combatants.

How fascinating.

Obviously we need to re-count the number killed during the 9/11 attacks - surely all military-age males killed were combatants - they were just fighting in a war they didn't know had started yet.

Re: If a Drone Strike Hit an American Wedding We'd Ground Our Fleet

#223

Post by brazzy »

mattlutze wrote: post #215
rdtsc wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is profitable. If terrorists disappeared tomorrow. Let's say we use our surgical strike weapons to target every cell every member, and in one hour they are gone. What would happen? Billions of dollars disappear from the pockets of everyone in the chain. Military contractors, drone maintenance, promotions, bonuses, career advancements, no more completed missions, medals, no job to go to. So the direct financial and…

I will continue to refuse to believe American military personnel choose to strike otherwise-collateral civilian targets. You're talking about moral humans, here. Our soldiers/airmen/marines/sailors are not soulless automatons, nor are officers that develop strategy and provide direction. Nor would I consider their pay to be either incentive or motivation.

You must have been very busy ignoring a lot of evidence then. Not that that's unusual.

Re: If a Drone Strike Hit an American Wedding We'd Ground Our Fleet

#224

Post by cglee »

cscurmudgeon wrote: post #211
glesica wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a simple economic analysis. People tend (this word is important) to follow their incentives. If a person on welfare faces a high effective marginal tax when they start working (due to paying taxes plus losing benefits) they will not start working. If a CEO is compensated exclusively based on short-term share price, they will ramp up the share price even if they have to hurt the company to do it. We have seen mou…

Arguments like this are logically wrong. I am glad you are not a judge in real life (hint: why is racial profiling wrong?)

Why is this logically wrong? I think it's a given that people/corporations follow economic incentives. We even have a legally binding phrase for that to protect shareholders. No one is making explicit accusations, just pointing out that privatizing certain industries (prisons, military, etc) can lead to perverse incentives.

Re: If a Drone Strike Hit an American Wedding We'd Ground Our Fleet

#225

Post by gaius »

josefresco wrote: post #183
gaius wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. Have you forgotten that we are supposed to be the good guys?

We (speaking as a US citizen) are not the good guys any more than we're the bad guys, we're just guys doing our best to protect the interests of the country as a whole. Just as one day the Japanese were the bad guys and are now one of our closest ally's, morality and the high ground change as time and circumstances change.

How do you think murdering civilians indiscriminately on the off-chance that there may be a terrorist amongst them advances your national interests?

How well did that approach work in Vietnam?

Re: If a Drone Strike Hit an American Wedding We'd Ground Our Fleet

#226

Post by mseebach »

rdtsc wrote: post #85
sethbannon wrote: post #12

The way America is conducting the war on terror is both self-defeating and morally repugnant.

It is profitable. If terrorists disappeared tomorrow. Let's say we use our surgical strike weapons to target every cell every member, and in one hour they are gone. What would happen? Billions of dollars disappear from the pockets of everyone in the chain. Military contractors, drone maintenance, promotions, bonuses, career advancements, no more completed missions, medals, no job to go to. So the direct financial and…

> Military contractors, drone maintenance, promotions, bonuses, career advancements, no more completed missions, medals, no job to go to.

You forgot the one group of people who could actually stop this, literally overnight: Politicians.

Re: If a Drone Strike Hit an American Wedding We'd Ground Our Fleet

#227

Post by mikeash »

kitsune_ wrote: post #218
mikeash wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We won't see captured pilots being paraded in front of a camera with regular piloted aircraft either, not ones flown by the US against any likely current target.

I suggest googling F117 and Serbia.

I suggest googling "how to make points in a less irritating and confrontational way than telling people that you suggest googling something".

In any case, I remember it fairly well, no need to look it up. Which current likely target is a heavily-armed state with a strong air defense system?

(North Korea is a possibility, although I have to wonder just how good their air defenses are these days. It also strikes me as a target where drones would be a great idea if it ever comes down to a shooting war.)

I'd also like to note that the F-117 shootdown didn't involve the pilot being captured, much less paraded in front of a camera, although he certainly could have been.

Re: If a Drone Strike Hit an American Wedding We'd Ground Our Fleet

#228

Post by pygy_ »

mattlutze wrote: post #215
rdtsc wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is profitable. If terrorists disappeared tomorrow. Let's say we use our surgical strike weapons to target every cell every member, and in one hour they are gone. What would happen? Billions of dollars disappear from the pockets of everyone in the chain. Military contractors, drone maintenance, promotions, bonuses, career advancements, no more completed missions, medals, no job to go to. So the direct financial and…

I will continue to refuse to believe American military personnel choose to strike otherwise-collateral civilian targets. You're talking about moral humans, here. Our soldiers/airmen/marines/sailors are not soulless automatons, nor are officers that develop strategy and provide direction. Nor would I consider their pay to be either incentive or motivation.

> You're talking about moral humans, here.

I'm sorry to break it to you, but there are immoral individuals in the US army, especially in the high ranks (where sociopath usually meet), like everywhere else.

Re: If a Drone Strike Hit an American Wedding We'd Ground Our Fleet

#229

Post by brazzy »

aaronem wrote: post #208
pavlov wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's very easy to not agree with the way the North Korean government handles many things, but you have to give them the benefit of the doubt that they are not doing it for shits and giggles. After all, they have been at war for over 60 years now. It must be obvious to any patriotic Korean that the danger posed by American imperialists who still occupy the southern half of the country is ever-present and growing. Some…

Yes, of course. Because there is no meaningful difference between the government of the United States and that of North Korea.

The difference is getting smaller every day. That's what this is about.

Re: If a Drone Strike Hit an American Wedding We'd Ground Our Fleet

#230

Post by nickff »

RyanZAG wrote: post #217
cscurmudgeon wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You have made these accusations without any evidence. Be responsible and ethical and show us something real, if you have it. (note: I am not taking sides.)

Blowing up a wedding is not extraordinary? 'Not taking sides' doesn't cut it - you're either doing your bit to end drone strikes like these, or you are morally bankrupt. There is no fence sitting when civilians are being blown up.

Civilians are blown up in every war, drones did not create this problem, and eliminating UAVs will not end it. If you want people to be "doing your bit to end drone strikes", you should consider that the probable counter-factual is not an end to non-combatant (civilian) deaths; civilian mortality may increase, decrease, or stay the same, depending on what tactics are chosen to replace drones.
Post reply on HN