If a Drone Strike Hit an American Wedding We'd Ground Our Fleet • Hacker News Board

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

#341

Post by Coincoin » Mon, Dec 16, 2013, 10:46 PM UTC

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.

Go watch one of those helicopter/drone/warthog strike video and listen to the guys talk. There is no compassion, no remorse, nothing. They are kids playing a video game, chuckles and trash talk included. If they could teabag them, they would.

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

#342

Post by nickff » Mon, Dec 16, 2013, 11:03 PM UTC

peterashford wrote: post #331

nickff wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you have an army shooting at people in a foreign country, there is a war; call it whatever you want.

So, as a New Zealander, I can hire some people to gun down innocents in the US and be on the moral high ground because I'm conducting a 'war' and not terrorism? Neato.

I have never said that war is virtuous.

'Some people' do not make an army.[1]

[1] http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/army

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

#343

Post by nickff » Mon, Dec 16, 2013, 11:19 PM UTC

peterashford wrote: post #330

nickff wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

If you were actually at war with Pakistan, then civilian deaths there might be explainable as collateral damage. But last time I checked, they're a US ally. Killing innocent citizens of your allies is not an act of war, it's terrorism.

It is possible to be fighting a war in an allied country, (i.e. England in France throughout WWI).

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

#344

Post by dobbsbob » Mon, Dec 16, 2013, 11:28 PM UTC

samstave wrote: post #308

gdilla wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

surprising they'd forget the Korean war on there.

Ha, didnt notice that! Korea really was the Forgotten War.

Because it didn't end technically N and South are still at war

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

#345

Post by vdaniuk » Mon, Dec 16, 2013, 11:39 PM UTC

EpicEng wrote: post #313

wutbrodo wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not that I necessarily buy in to the idea of "a coherent Military-Industrial Complex", but this doesn't really debunk much. It seems to me that peacetime profits for military contractors are dependent on the assumption that there's going to be wartime usage of the research they're doing in the short- to medium-term. Surely if we went a significant period without any military engagements, there would be far less of a…

Except we don't live in that fantasy world. In reality there always is, and always has been, war looming on the horizon. Maybe we'll someday achieve a utopian, Star Trek like existence, but I don't imagine it will be anytime soon.

US doesn't have a looking war on its horizon. I will be happy to hear arguments if you don't agree.

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

#346

Post by EpicEng » Tue, Dec 17, 2013, 12:03 AM UTC

vdaniuk wrote: post #345

EpicEng wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except we don't live in that fantasy world. In reality there always is, and always has been, war looming on the horizon. Maybe we'll someday achieve a utopian, Star Trek like existence, but I don't imagine it will be anytime soon.

US doesn't have a looking war on its horizon. I will be happy to hear arguments if you don't agree.

It's not a matter of knowing that a specific war is coming, it's a matter of preparing for what may come. Wars (or, at least, situations which require military intervention) happen all of the time. As such, we will always be preparing for the next one.

The point is that humans are always fighting with one another. Until that stops there will always be a war looming.

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

#347

Post by samstave » Tue, Dec 17, 2013, 12:03 AM UTC

dobbsbob wrote: post #344

samstave wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ha, didnt notice that! Korea really was the Forgotten War.

Because it didn't end technically N and South are still at war

True, but this is in reference to the US at war...

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

#348

Post by baddox » Tue, Dec 17, 2013, 12:29 AM UTC

aroch wrote: post #335

baddox wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious what your definition of "nutjob" is, given that you would apparently apply it even to people who are correct about all of their theories.

>I'm curious what your definition of "nutjob" is I don't really have one but if you must, it's probably someone with a dissociative disorder. I'm just noting that you don't have to be sane to be right. >given that you would apparently apply it even to people who are correct about all of their theories. When exactly did I say that?

You clearly implied that nutjob status is not correlated to the correctness of one's claims.

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

#349

Post by wutbrodo » Tue, Dec 17, 2013, 12:38 AM UTC

EpicEng wrote: post #313

wutbrodo wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not that I necessarily buy in to the idea of "a coherent Military-Industrial Complex", but this doesn't really debunk much. It seems to me that peacetime profits for military contractors are dependent on the assumption that there's going to be wartime usage of the research they're doing in the short- to medium-term. Surely if we went a significant period without any military engagements, there would be far less of a…

Except we don't live in that fantasy world. In reality there always is, and always has been, war looming on the horizon. Maybe we'll someday achieve a utopian, Star Trek like existence, but I don't imagine it will be anytime soon.

You misunderstand my comment. I'm not talking about a world in which war doesn't exist, but one in which a given country doesn't have constant military engagement. There's no need to think about whether this is possible, because there are plenty of countries for whom this is already true. Obviously many of these countries (Europe et al) are able to do this in large part _because_ of the US military, so I'm not suggesting that it's as simple as "we should stop having military engagements entirely". It's naive to think that we don't also reap benefits from being in a position of what's essentially military hegemony. But this doesn't really debunk the theory one might have about industry's role in ensuring that the US stays in this position.

EDIT to add: The binary way you're looking at it is also way off from reality; It seems self-evident that the more often one has military engagements, the easier it is to convince those in charge that more money should flow to military expenditures (which includes peacetime research). It's not the simple case of "constant war = military spending" vs "utopia = no military spending" that you're describing.

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

#350

Post by glesica » Tue, Dec 17, 2013, 1:36 AM UTC

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?)

Please explain why it is logically wrong, and also explain why an economic analysis of a situation has anything to do with being a judge. Judges don't use pure logic, they apply logic, and a whole bunch of other tools, to the law. My comments had nothing, repeat NOTHING, to do with the law. I was merely commenting on the reasonableness of assuming that certain things are happening behind (intentionally) closed doors within the military community.