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

471–480 of 491 posts

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

#471

Post by dragonwriter »

macspoofing wrote: post #470
dragonwriter wrote: post #468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What war are we in currently?! The one initiated by the 9/11 attacks and declared by Congress via Pub.L. 107-40 (September 14, 2011)

It wasn't a declaration of war. It was an authorization of military force against targets that that committed or aided in the 9/11 attacks. Using this Act almost 15 years later to justify drone attacks against targets that had nothing to do with 9/11 stretches the interpretation a little. No? I mean, surely, you're not suggesting that this act means the office of the president has perpetual authorization and apparent…

> It wasn't a declaration of war.

It most emphatically was a conditional declaration of war.

> It was an authorization of military force against targets that that committed or aided in the 9/11 attacks.

"An authorization of military force" is an exercise of Congress' power to declare war. And it was against those "nations, organizations, or persons" that the President of the United States determines to have committed or aided, or harbored those who have committed or aided, in the 9/11 attacks.

> Using this Act almost 15 years later to justify drone attacks against targets that had nothing to do with 9/11 stretches the interpretation a little. No?

The attacks are against al-Qaeda, an organization which did not have "nothing to do with 9/11".

> I mean, surely, you're not suggesting that this act means the office of the president has perpetual authorization and apparently such a huge leeway in its interpretation.

Until and unless it is repealed, yes, by its plain language the AUMF gives the President perpetual authorization with very broad discretion -- which is why a number of people (including Barack Obama) have called for it's authority to be conclusively sunsetted by Congress -- though the continuing attacks against al-Qaeda aren't really any kind of a stretch.

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

#472

Post by unclebucknasty »

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…

>We need to make sure we're not being manipulated

That's a strange takeaway. Manipulated into what? Not liking drones? Not liking war? Being skeptical about drones? Opening to other points of view beyond the official narrative (or non-narrative)?

And, "manipulation" would imply that there is something untrue in the article. It's irresponsible to assert as much without any substantiation on your part.

The article is out now. If there is something to refute, then the powers-that-be can do so.

>We all know war is hell.

War is hell, but the distinction here is that drone activity is not "sold" as such.

>Given this is an article about drones it should be very drone specific.

If it was offered in a vacuum, then yes. But, it is being offered as a counter-argument to the current drone-narrative. Or, perhaps more accurately, a counter to the lack of information being made public.

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

The military may be aware, but this article is specifically addressing public awareness. Part of the title reads "The public should know what really goes on".

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

#473

Post by unclebucknasty »

ultimatedelman wrote: post #469
sleepyK wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bravo! All human rights violations aside, what the US doesn't realize is that every new drone strike is creating new cadres for Al Qaeda and others to recruit from.

I may not think the same way as a terrorist, but if joining some "club" made a really powerful country with really advanced weaponry want to kill me, I would probably be disincentivized from joining said "club". At first it may be like, "Screw those bastards for killing us! Let's try to get them back!" but then after watching basically everyone I know who is a part of this group I joined get killed without us really…

>I would probably be disincentivized from joining said "club".

What if you felt that you might be killed irrespective of whether you joined the club? Further, what if you believed that joining the club was your only hope (no matter how slim) of preventing yourself and others from being killed?

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

#474

Post by e12e »

dragonwriter wrote: post #462
e12e wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 (...) > We all know war is hell. Yes, but the drone attacks are unlawful systematic assasinations that are turning peace time living into hell. As there are no declared war zones (afaik, as I understand it the situation in Iraq is in a peculiar state of limbo, and t…

> Yes, but the drone attacks are unlawful systematic assasinations that are turning peace time living into hell. Its not peace time living. Its a war -- on which seems to be permanent and global, which is a problem, but a different one than you describe. > As there are no declared war zones Wars -- even the most formally declared ones -- rarely have declared zones. They have declared belligerents.

Well, there might be global conflict, but global war is a little disingious - at least when the casualities and effects are so extremely polarized. I've never felt afraid of retaliation even if Norwegian forces have shot up some kids or guided a missile down on an illegal target somewhere. Even with the few attacks on the US it would be hard to say that it would be rational to live in fear of attack orchestrated by foreign nations when on US soil?

As for declared war zones (vs declared wars), that was an unfortunate slip in editing on my part (text fields and smart phones don't mix well imo).

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

#475

Post by unclebucknasty »

jeswin wrote: post #450
gnufied wrote: post #416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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. The line of argument is so simplistic it boggles my mind. Lets get few facts straight: a. Goal of terrorists is not to topple US government. You can't draw parallels be…

"The line of argument is so simplistic it boggles my mind. Lets get few facts straight": 1. Operation cyclone: This was part of the cold war, both countries fought proxy wars across the world. The Soviet Union actively aided anti-american forces in other parts of the world. 2. Sure, everybody detests improper detentions (and killing, but I haven't seen much evidence). If a country is fighting home-grown terrorism wit…

>it is likely that a few people from that particular religion will get illegally arrested.

And killed. Taken together, I would be hesitant to call it a few.

>Now as rational people, the important point is whether this is happening at some scale and whether this is a statistically significant number. But it will never be zero.

This is nauseating. It never ceases to amaze me how cavalier people have become about other people's lives. If we are going to be so confident that we are just, then we should start by looking at the root cause. These dim-witted platitudes about pure religious fervor and hating us for our freedom are ridiculous. The fact that a sitting president could conduct a war over such pablum and not be roundly ostercized and impeached is testament to how little we seem to invest in determining what's really happening and whose interests are being served in our name.

Then, when the next generation of drone-terrorized and, hence, militarized individuals takes up arms against us, we will all sit back in shock and discuss how barbaric they are and how they also hate our innoncent, peace-loving populace for our freedom.

Of course, that will justify the next round of rationalized illegal detentions and collateral damage.

When you buy into this thinking, you become complicit. It is no longer being done in your name. It is being done at your behest. And, you don't even know why.

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

#476

Post by Houshalter »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #460
Houshalter wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But there is no reason it has to be that way. For most of human history we lived in small tribes of a hundred people or so, and everyone pretty much cared only for the people in their own tribe. But then we moved on to entire cities of thousands, where you likely didn't know everyone else, but it was still possible to care for strangers because they were still part of your "tribe". Then we moved on to nations with mi…

The reality is, your brain cannot process that many close connections so you are inevitably limited.

Well the same is true for countries, but nationalism seems to work.

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

#477

Post by madaxe_again »

philwelch wrote: post #458
madaxe_again wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's how people with an inadequate exposure to multiple cultures during childhood work.... such as most Americans, sadly, who remain fantastically insular. As a British kid in US school for a year, I was astounded to find that of this group of "elite" children, only two (other than myself) had ventured beyond Illinois, and one abroad - to Canada.

Did you not also perceive that Illinois is in the middle of nowhere? If you're in England you might end up in Paris just on a bender (citation: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2509837/Teenager-wen... ). Still, judging from the actions of the democratically elected UK government, you lot don't seem to do much better...

Oh, indeed. Geography is no small part of it. Folks from corners of the world in proximal contact with other cultures end up with far more cultural cross-talk and the ensuing ability to understand other cultures... or they have the inverse reaction, of outright xenophobia.

Our government isn't democratically elected - had they enacted the electoral reforms that they said they would, the next might have been - but they won't, and it won't be.

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

#478

Post by dinkumthinkum »

mark_l_watson wrote: post #350
jusben1369 wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi Mark. I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion that I have a calloused view towards civilian casualties? I'm really confused by drones. In one camp you could argue that without them there would be a much greater loss of life and more horrors of war. We would still be going after various members of the Taliban in the Afghanistan/Pakistan mountains only now it would be fighter jets and boots on the ground and the…

Sorry if I misinterpreted your post. In any case, I fail to see why our government needs to spend as much money as all other countries combined on our military. I don't think we need boots on the ground when there is little real threat to people inside the USA. I am in favor of almost all of our military being redeployed back inside our country. I saw a statistic last week that bathroom accidents kill 100 times more…

You're argument is a bit silly and childish though. Couldn't your silly statistic be explained by the fact that we do "fight terrorists." I'm not saying it is but logically you leave that pretty wide open.

That said, I do agree that much of the "war on terrorism" has led to huge financial wastes with no practical benefit and even corruption with these large contractors. But I don't think I agree in a fantasy conception of the world in which terrorism, or whatever you want to call it, does not exist.

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

#479

Post by jessaustin »

rayiner wrote: post #447
jessaustin wrote: post #441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe we should stop buying Saudi oil first? I mean, we've pretended to stop buying Iranian oil, so we could pretend that about Saudi as well. I hear good things about fracking. From an ethical standpoint, you violate the Categorical Imperative, to say nothing of the Golden Rule. We also have schools (religious and otherwise) that demonize Islam, Arab nations, Iran, etc. Does that fact justify violent action on the p…

First, drawing false equivalence is never a compelling mode of argumentation. I don't know of any federal program to build schools that "demonize" Islam or Arab nations. That message certainly exists, but it's not a government-sponsored message. Second, it's not just schools that teach anti-Western statement. It's a concerted effort by Saudi Arabia to aggrandize its influence over the Islamic world while undermining…

You consider the equivalence false, but would a visitor from another planet agree with you? More to the point, do average Muslims agree with you? I realize that Islam has its faults; it is a human activity after all. I realize that the ways in which some Muslims demonize "the West" differs in important respects from the ways in which some westerners demonize Islam. I'll stipulate that "Saudi" Islam has been a bad influence in your home country. But what the hell does that have to do with USA military action?

If Bangladeshis want to kick Saudis out of Bangladesh, they can damn well do it themselves. How pathetic would the USA have to be to fight a proxy war with that objective? Please, even though you find your personal opinions happen to coincide with the slogans of the USA military-industrial complex, don't imagine that entity ever has you or your home country's well-being in mind.

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

#480

Post by mark_l_watson »

dinkumthinkum wrote: post #478
mark_l_watson wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry if I misinterpreted your post. In any case, I fail to see why our government needs to spend as much money as all other countries combined on our military. I don't think we need boots on the ground when there is little real threat to people inside the USA. I am in favor of almost all of our military being redeployed back inside our country. I saw a statistic last week that bathroom accidents kill 100 times more…

You're argument is a bit silly and childish though. Couldn't your silly statistic be explained by the fact that we do "fight terrorists." I'm not saying it is but logically you leave that pretty wide open. That said, I do agree that much of the "war on terrorism" has led to huge financial wastes with no practical benefit and even corruption with these large contractors. But I don't think I agree in a fantasy concepti…

I believe the statistic hiliting the relatively few deaths from terrorism is valid, and supports my contention is that the USA probably spends an order of magnitude too much fighting terrorism. It is unclear, but I think it is possible that programs like global NSA hoovering and drone attacks in other countries might put us in more danger of terrorist acts.

BTW, I never stated that terrorism doesn't exist.

Post reply on HN