I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on
1–10 of 491 posts
Re: I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on
#2>Recently, the Guardian ran a commentary by Britain's secretary of state for defence Philip Hammond. I wish I could talk to him about the two friends and colleagues I lost, within one year leaving the military, to suicide. I am sure he has not been notified of that little bit of the secret UAV program, or he would surely take a closer look at the full scope of the program before defending it again.
I doubt he gives a shit, and the reason we are in this mess is because most people think people like him do give a shit, they are just "misinformed."
Re: I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on
#3Any tl;dr?
Re: I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on
#4The feed is so pixelated, what if it's a shovel, and not a weapon? I felt this confusion constantly, as did my fellow UAV analysts. We always wonder if we killed the right people
If this question even comes up once, drones should never, ever be armed.
Why is is okay to repeatedly kill the wrong person in another country? Can you imagine if that happened even just once in the USA?
We need an international ban on armed drones before it is too late.
Re: I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on
#5Any tl;dr?
The article is not that long, and worth reading in its entirety.
Re: I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on
#6I think that one thing we 'normals' don't seem to understand, is that when you are in the business of killing, murdering, maiming other human beings, you're no longer really part of society. Society is determined by the survival of its members - start removing them, and you get a lesser society. That is obvious.
But we in the 'normal' society don't have a clue what those in the 'murdering business society' really think about us. More often than not, you'll find that the 'official killers' really don't care about human life - or else they wouldn't be devoting their time on earth to the singular purpose of killing, maiming, destroying life.
Its a simple fact that if you get up in the morning with the intention of taking a human life, if ordered to do so, then you no longer belong to the human race. You belong to something else. Not a single one of us in the 'normal society' can entertain the thought of killing someone, on a daily basis, and not suffer consequences. How is it then for those who spend their entire lives working to be the best possible killers they're allowed to be?
Re: I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on
#7> The UAV's in the Middle East are used as a weapon, not as protection, and as long as our public remains ignorant to this
Honestly, it has always been seen as a weapon. The whole point of drone is to carry out mission 24/7 as much as possible, because a pilot can't fly back and forth without sleeping. Also, humans have emotions they don't always follow orders.
> incredibly difficult for the best analysts to identify if someone has weapons for sure
I have always thought the military fly drones to carry out specific mission, such as taking photos or launching an attack. And the latter is usually confirmed by some "intelligence". I want to see how many drone attacks were performed without a single human intelligence confirmation.
> But here's the thing: I may not have been on the ground in Afghanistan, but I watched parts of the conflict in great detail on a screen for days on end
This is best seen in the movie Black Hawk Down (2001), based on true story.
Re: I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on
#8> "the video provided by a drone is a far cry from clear enough to detect someone carrying a weapon, even on a crystal-clear day with limited clouds and perfect light"
I wished she had pushed the questioning even further:
Even if it's a weapon, that doesn't mean the person is a threat. I mean it's full of people carrying weapons in the U.S., they are not presumed a threat.
And even if the person is deemed a threat, maybe the he would surrender, but now he is not even offered this choice.
Re: I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on
#9Side note, I am excited for the application of all of this drone technology into things other than killing. War seems to be one of the few things that the US is unapologetically willing to go into debt to fund. Lots of cool possibilities with high resolution sensor technology.
Re: I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on
#10The feed is so pixelated, what if it's a shovel, and not a weapon? I felt this confusion constantly, as did my fellow UAV analysts. We always wonder if we killed the right people If this question even comes up once, drones should never, ever be armed. Why is is okay to repeatedly kill the wrong person in another country? Can you imagine if that happened even just once in the USA? We need an international ban on armed…
Not to justify any of this business, but why on earth wouldn't they apply 'beyond reasonable doubt' in their own minds when summarily executing somebody in the first place?