321–330 of 491 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is, you don't realize what you are saying can be used by those who wish to murder to continue to do so. Yes, your point of view, since it is used tirelessly as a justification, is responsible for continued crimes against humanity.
The way you express your point of view will never change a single person's mind.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Imagine if the resources being used to develop drones and bombs and other killing robots were instead being used to develop tools that would improve the lives of your average Afghani child. This would be a far more honorable investment than the current situation. Yes, I'm not sure I know what it would look like, but I'm pretty sure that its possible to develop the "B1 bomber" of education systems. I'm quite sure that…
What you describe is an incredibly difficult and completely unsolved problem. While I agree with the sentiment , I disagree with talking about it as if it were something you could just decide to do one day, and then it would get done. I would love to see more effort put into making peace. But making peace isn't simply a matter of declaring that you will "make peace, not war".
Why should resolving to make peace not war require more thoughtfulness than waging war?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What military objectives - we are not at war with any of these countries.
Why must war be against countries? The types of activities being carried out in Yemen, Pakistan, etc, if state sanctioned, would be justification for war. Does the fact that Yemen and Pakistan can't police themselves internally enough to stop these activities make military retaliation unjustified? Would you feel better if we just declared war on Yemen and Pakistan?
Yes, real war please.
These seem like compelling arguments against our "war" in the middle east, but I'm not sure why we should be singling out UAVs. People die in wars. Sometimes they are enemies, sometimes they are friends, and sometimes they are innocent bystanders. Do drones really make war worse than it already is?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your use of "us" is adorable. There have always been more of "you". Who else would make up the wave assaults, mass labour pools, and factory employees? War may not be necessary from an emotional standpoint, but from a technological standpoint it is the only game in town. The recent developments in peaceful IT are unique in human history, and they themselves are predicated on war technology and research. In fact, i ch…
What war was Genetics (Device: Micro Arrays, PCR Machines, etc) built off of and applicable to? Or do you count that as 'medicine'? In that case you can reduce everything all the way down to cave men battling over fire. I don't disagree that war time has pushed science for the vast majority of history... But there are fields that were not created initially with offensive or defensive purposes in mind. Edit: Added dev…
The bulk of all modern medicine (western at least) owes its regimen and SOP to military medicine. Just as i have seen ligatures (tourniquet) go from a no-no to standard practice in the last 10 years, each generation has watched medical science be advanced by martial situations. Epidemiology, rehabilitation, prostheses, surgery; they all are where they are now because of war and the responses to war. Modern sensing equipment is a grandchild of the tech build up of the cold war. Fracking super glue was a Vietnam War Era advancement.
I do not like it, as i think human on human war is an obsolete expression of very small groups of wealthy folk colluding to expand (ditto for racism), but i think it is a bit naive to assume we can just carry on with the march to the stars on the assumption that peaceful means of technological advancement are superior/ will be adequate. Humanity requires a challenge to be its best self. I grow tired of the challenge being an artifice of business (which is the predicate for all wars. all.), and if Global Climate Shift is in any way alterable, i sincerely hope that humanity's response will be the next "war", or concerted conflict if you will.
War is not the key ingredient, but it is by far the best catalyst known to people thus far.
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…
I try to put myself in the shoes of the potential drone targets. I live in Los Angeles, which seems to be the official city of the police helicopter (always followed closely by the news helicopter, because the possibility of violence is entertainment). Over the years it's gotten to the point where multiple times a week they're buzzing around the neighborhood, stabbing the backyard with their searchlights. I've never…
How many lives of soldiers would be risked and how much money would be spent for operations to 'capture' the terrorists in foreign nations? And will nations like Pakistan allow military (or law enforcement) operations on their soil by foreign govts to capture the terrorists? No of course not. Drone operations take place in Pakistan/Yemen and other nations because of the inability of such nations to police their population adequately.
The real problem is NOT the drones but the failed (or almost failed) nations where groups of terrorists can operate in OPEN essentially, whose goal is to hurt/topple another nation.
If some Chinese or Russian 'freedom' fighters decide to train militarily in US with the goal of toppling current govt of China/Russia and did actually cause deaths/damage in China/Russia, would US govt sit back and let them train in US? Probably not.
All this 'omg, the drones are terrible' is useless. You don't want to see drones operating in foreign nations? Use your energy helping NGO and the local govt overcome corruption, ignorance, and backbone shattering poverty. Give no space for terrorists to operate in. Sure it's near impossible task. But that's the only real solution, and real solutions take real work.
The drones are a 'perfect' tool for rich nations for warfare whose population don't want to see their own getting hurt/killed. It's not going to go away.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why must war be against countries? The types of activities being carried out in Yemen, Pakistan, etc, if state sanctioned, would be justification for war. Does the fact that Yemen and Pakistan can't police themselves internally enough to stop these activities make military retaliation unjustified? Would you feel better if we just declared war on Yemen and Pakistan?
So let's send drones to Saudi Arabia. Most of the 9/11 attackers were Saudis, and it was done in response to our presence there. This is anti-national security -- all this does is pour gasoline on the fire of anti-American sentiment. People like you supporting this madness is the reason the world is going to hell. Ugh.
We will need some source on that because it is evident 9/11 was an inside job.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Look, take the amount of technology developed to murder, kill and maim - and instead use that same degree of technology to educate, enlighten, and liberate. How hard is it to understand this concept? It was once very, very difficult to drop a bomb on a childs head from afar - you used to have to do a lot more. Now its 'easy', relatively speaking. Imagine if that same scale of efficacy were applied, instead, to educat…
Most Americans think we already spend too much on foreign aid. So, politically what you are proposing isn't going to work. Perhaps a privately funded solution. The "Three Cups of Tea" author was doing some of this but it turned out he wasn't completely honest. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Cups_of_Tea
I've yet to meet an American who thinks the Trillion dollar military-industrial debt that they owe has been worth it.
At all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You do realise the Taliban are specifically opposed to Western education, especially the education of women. You have groups like Boko Haram (literally "Western education is sinful"). Dropping books on villages when the security situation hasn't been established is akin to dropping landmines - anyone who picks one up and takes it home risks being killed. There is a very good reason the Afghan campaign was about provi…
Do you realis that the US presence in the Midle East is fundamental for the empowering of the Taliban, don't you? Of course, if not for the US, some other bully would be there, I perfectly understand that. Thus, no need of answering anything along those lines.
cf Boko Haram - the Nigerian group whose name is literally "Western education is sinful".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Imagine if the resources being used to develop drones and bombs and other killing robots were instead being used to develop tools that would improve the lives of your average Afghani child. This would be a far more honorable investment than the current situation. Yes, I'm not sure I know what it would look like, but I'm pretty sure that its possible to develop the "B1 bomber" of education systems. I'm quite sure that…
What you describe is an incredibly difficult and completely unsolved problem. While I agree with the sentiment , I disagree with talking about it as if it were something you could just decide to do one day, and then it would get done. I would love to see more effort put into making peace. But making peace isn't simply a matter of declaring that you will "make peace, not war".
Yes it is. Because the same is true of war: you have to decide to do it. The problem is, the American people have subjugated all their decision-making responsibilities to people who are too lazy, stupid, or just plain evil to think that anything other than non-stop war is their solution. This has been the case in America for 80 years now - so its a generational thing as well, at this point..