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

I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 491 posts

Re: I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on

#251

Post by TruthElixirX »

rwmj wrote: post #26
TruthElixirX wrote: post #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…

The unfortunate truth is that any leader who orders soldiers to go to war should know that innocent and guilty people are going to die, women will be raped, property destroyed and looted, and so on. In WWII there was a deliberate policy of incinerating populated cities, but even if we don't go to that extreme the outcome is going to be grim. I hope any defence secretary both knows this, and considers it, but also con…

>but also considers what happens when you don't deploy soldiers/drones/etc.

Nothing happens. Nothing. The reason those people are pissed is because of the U.S. government constantly fucking with them and poking them. Over throwing governments, secret renditions, locking up loved ones in Guantanamo with no trial indefinitely. I'd be fucking pissed too.

Re: I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on

#252

Post by mark_l_watson »

melling wrote: post #36
ck2 wrote: post #4

The 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…

There you go again ck2. One of your classic comments. We used to napalm people. Lots of "wrong people" get killed in all wars. Flying in B-17's and B-52's was pretty ugly too, we just couldn't record the carnage on video. There's probably never going to be a war where innocent people aren't killed. Precision weapons probably kill fewer people but if you want a "clean" war, I don't think that's possible. The real solu…

You are referring to what I think was called Operation High Tower in the Vietnam War, which in retrospect was a low point in my country's actions. You have the benefit of hindsight so I find it disturbing that you sound OK with the napalming and massive high altitude bombing of mostly civilian populations.

Re: I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on

#253

Post by stcredzero »

k-mcgrady wrote: post #41
melling wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There you go again ck2. One of your classic comments. We used to napalm people. Lots of "wrong people" get killed in all wars. Flying in B-17's and B-52's was pretty ugly too, we just couldn't record the carnage on video. There's probably never going to be a war where innocent people aren't killed. Precision weapons probably kill fewer people but if you want a "clean" war, I don't think that's possible. The real solu…

>> "There's a high cost in both money and American lives" There's a high cost in both money and human lives - nationality should not be a consideration.

> There's a high cost in both money and human lives - nationality should not be a consideration.

Here's a sobering thought: The way super-villains are portrayed in movies is basically how leaders were expected to act up through the 1600's. Screw over and kill your neighbors to benefit your side? Just business as usual. Torture and gruesome and spectacular executions? Just business as usual. Kill prisoners and animals in large part because of the entertainment value? Just expected behavior.

I wonder if the way leaders and the national security apparatus behaves now will be viewed as super-villainy in the future? Probably.

Re: I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on

#254

Post by TruthElixirX »

jusben1369 wrote: post #112

We need to make sure we're not being manipulated. Here the Guardian is just serving up an emotional, unsubstantiated, one sided view of this discussion. I'm not sure how this is different to much of the chest beating I'd see on Fox News. I'm not here to argue for or against the drones. Just that if we pride ourselves on being educated and critical thinkers that we apply that to all sources of data we read. We all kno…

You're a sack of shit:

>I'm not here to argue for or against the drones.

Congrats on being a mediocre person who doesn't believe in anything or have any opinions. This is the most offensive thing I think, even more than me disagreeing with you. Just picking middle of the road bland boring contrariness.

>We all know war is hell.

Apparently "we" don't because people continue to wage war.

>We know using weapons to attack people creates horrific, real human harm.

No, making it into a game complete with an Xbox controller abstracts the realness from it.

> So starting off listing the effects of weaponry on humans tells us nothing about drones. It just tells us about the horrors of war. Given this is an article about drones it should be very drone specific.

It isn't about drones, its about killing people. Who gives a fuck if it is a drone or a spoon. It is clearly an article about shitty wars being pursued by shitty people, not about how technologically advanced drones are.

>Today if we make a mistake we bomb the wrong home and kill everyone. 25 years ago we bombed the entire village.

What a false fucking dichotomy. How about not bombing fucking anyone? And who the fuck is "we"? I didn't bomb anyone and will continue to not bomb anyone.

>"The view is so pixelated it makes decisions tough" Can you imagine military people who fight/fought on the ground in real combat and order in strikes reading that? Surrounded by smoke and fire and deafening noise and hoping (or maybe not caring) that the strike they call in hits the right target/s vs all the nearby civilians also hiding and cowering in a village?

Again, false dichotomy. It does not have to be grainy drone feeds or confused soldiers on the ground. There are more options than A or B.

>The military is aware of the impact on these operators.

That doesn't mean they give a shit. I am aware of the drug addict a few houses down. I don't care.

>Lastly, imagine how you'd feel reading a similar opinion piece on Fox News from a gun ho former operator talking about all the American lives he saved by observing and taking out "the bad guys".

I wouldn't care. I don't care about "American lives" and I don't care about insurgency lives. I care about people regardless of nationality. I feel bad for the jack asses on both sides that eat up the lies of their leaders and kill each other in the name of nothing.

>What's even better with drones we're not losing American solider lives and dramatically reducing the number of innocent civilians killed vs how we would have approached the same problem just 25 years ago.

Its amazing how redefining anyone that is an adult male who dies as an enemy combatant reduces civilian deaths as well.

>War is hell. The issues are complex. Trusted new sources add to the debate. Biased ones feed their viewership what they know they'll eat up and do little, maybe even damage, the search for truth.

Being a boring middle of the road stick in the mud does more damage than anything.

Re: I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on

#255

Post by haberman »

avenger123 wrote: post #217
sneak wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sort of attitude is not really constructive discussion, and I personally feel it's out of place here on HN. So, personally: please don't do that.

My original response was much more involved but I curtailed it to this. I believe I replied pretty much in the same manner as jusbin1369. My hope is that for people that look at comments only they will actually read the article instead of reading jusbin1369's comment and skipping it because they wouldn't want to be "manipulated" or consider the article another "propaganda" piece. I also get very wary of questioning t…

Your entire comment was sarcasm. Sarcasm is not a constructive or compelling way of making an argument.

Re: I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on

#256

Post by TruthElixirX »

mark_l_watson wrote: post #246
shiven wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

War is hell. --> War is a racket.[1] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Is_a_Racket

I agree, but to be a little more precise: throughout history the rich/elites have lied to civilian populations so they would go along with money making war activities. What is sad now in the USA is that there are very few politicians who speak the truth and very few news outlets that don't just cooperate in the propaganda.

>What is sad now in the USA is that there are very few politicians who speak the truth and very few news outlets that don't just cooperate in the propaganda.

There never were any. Name this mystical time when he U.S. government was some benevolent force for good and not constantly lying to the civilian population to push them to unwanted wars.

Re: I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on

#257

Post by jboydyhacker »

avenger123 wrote: post #195
jusben1369 wrote: post #112

We need to make sure we're not being manipulated. Here the Guardian is just serving up an emotional, unsubstantiated, one sided view of this discussion. I'm not sure how this is different to much of the chest beating I'd see on Fox News. I'm not here to argue for or against the drones. Just that if we pride ourselves on being educated and critical thinkers that we apply that to all sources of data we read. We all kno…

Thank you so much for reminding me that I should care about not being manipulated. Your comment is so full of really good unbiased views that I just wanted to tell you how much non-manipulated I felt by your comment. I especially enjoyed your notion that the Guardian is "serving up an emotional, unsubstantiated, one sided view of this discussion." You are so right. I always fell that the White House and the American…

Providing a counter point to the Guardian piece doesn't mean he's being misleading. New technology applications, military or otherwise often go through a pretty searing gauntlet of fear. To that end, pointing out the alternative pros and cons of the alternative scenario which is usually troops on the ground is helpful- not manipulative or misleading.

Re: I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on

#258

Post by TruthElixirX »

rayiner wrote: post #133
fit2rule wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is this story anything but a plea to the people to reign in their heinous military masters? You state 'we must be sure we're not being manipulated' - towards what end, exactly? The logical conclusion of this opinion piece (it is marked thus) is that we should not allow our elected representatives to get away with murder. How is that in any way a negative result?

Fewer drone strikes are not necessarily in the national interest. Taking the horrors of drone strikes out of context is manipulative if we don't also consider the horrors of the alternative ways of achieving military objectives.

>Fewer drone strikes are not necessarily in the national interest.

Oh no. Not the national interest. How about human interest?

Re: I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on

#259

Post by bicx »

mark_l_watson wrote: post #252
melling wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There you go again ck2. One of your classic comments. We used to napalm people. Lots of "wrong people" get killed in all wars. Flying in B-17's and B-52's was pretty ugly too, we just couldn't record the carnage on video. There's probably never going to be a war where innocent people aren't killed. Precision weapons probably kill fewer people but if you want a "clean" war, I don't think that's possible. The real solu…

You are referring to what I think was called Operation High Tower in the Vietnam War, which in retrospect was a low point in my country's actions. You have the benefit of hindsight so I find it disturbing that you sound OK with the napalming and massive high altitude bombing of mostly civilian populations.

I didn't at all get the impression he was okay with the napalm bombings

Re: I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on

#260

Post by jboydyhacker »

TruthElixirX wrote: post #254
jusben1369 wrote: post #112

We need to make sure we're not being manipulated. Here the Guardian is just serving up an emotional, unsubstantiated, one sided view of this discussion. I'm not sure how this is different to much of the chest beating I'd see on Fox News. I'm not here to argue for or against the drones. Just that if we pride ourselves on being educated and critical thinkers that we apply that to all sources of data we read. We all kno…

You're a sack of shit: >I'm not here to argue for or against the drones. Congrats on being a mediocre person who doesn't believe in anything or have any opinions. This is the most offensive thing I think, even more than me disagreeing with you. Just picking middle of the road bland boring contrariness. >We all know war is hell. Apparently "we" don't because people continue to wage war. >We know using weapons to attac…

Pointing out an opposing view, or the downside of the alternative to drones (boots on the ground) does not make the author a sack of shit.

War will be around until humans work harder to understand each others perspectives and evolve socially as quickly as we have with technology. You can help us all to that end by not being name calling anonymously on the internet.

Post reply on HN