Live data from Hacker News

The casualties at the other end of the remote-controlled kill

nytimes.com

11–20 of 150 posts

Re: The casualties at the other end of the remote-controlled kill

#11
post #9

It's behind a paywall, but I was able to find it here. https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/uw-grads-story-rev... Looks like it was more the drug policy of the U.S. Air Force that lead this man to fall apart more than the droning of people far away.

Quoted post unavailable.

> What, you want a druggie at the controls of lethal weapons?

I've got some bad news, ...

Re: The casualties at the other end of the remote-controlled kill

#12

> There were missile strikes so hasty that they hit women and children, attacks built on such flimsy intelligence that they made targets of ordinary villagers, and classified rules of engagement that allowed the customer to knowingly kill up to 20 civilians when taking out an enemy. Why is the article focusing on the goon pulling the trigger, as opposed to these actual killed-dead casualties?

Hence the problem was how to overcome not so much their conscience as the animal pity by which all normal men are affected in the presence of physical suffering. The trick used by Himmler--who apparently was rather strongly afflicted with these instinctive reactions himself--was very simple and probably very effective; it consisted in turning these instincts around, as it were, in directing them toward the self. So t…

Wow this is interesting. Is that a hypothesis or is that according to Himmler's own account?

Re: The casualties at the other end of the remote-controlled kill

#13
post #6

I have no sympathy for the cowards who murder with drones. They know that what they're doing is wrong and nobody is forcing them to murder.

I do not know how to put it into words, but the simplistic morality expressed here makes me uncomfortable. While I also find remote controlled war to be abhorrent, nevertheless this attitude seems… overly simplistic?

Re: The casualties at the other end of the remote-controlled kill

#14
post #8
post #6

I have no sympathy for the cowards who murder with drones. They know that what they're doing is wrong and nobody is forcing them to murder.

Remember that half the population has an IQ under 100 and half of those live in places where the American Soldier is still venerated as a paragon of virtue and sacrifice. They’re not victims like the Yemeni kids they’re killing, but they are being manipulated into the situations they choose for themselves.

McNamara’s Project 100,000 did not stop at 100,000.

Re: The casualties at the other end of the remote-controlled kill

#15
post #13
post #6

I have no sympathy for the cowards who murder with drones. They know that what they're doing is wrong and nobody is forcing them to murder.

I do not know how to put it into words, but the simplistic morality expressed here makes me uncomfortable. While I also find remote controlled war to be abhorrent, nevertheless this attitude seems… overly simplistic?

Of course it is overly simplistic -- which is also why it bears repeating.

Anyone can be made to commit atrocities in an environment shaped the right way. If I grew up like these people, I'm sure I would pull the trigger in exactly the same situations.

But it still would take my cooperation. I can only pull the trigger if I'm somehow made to want it, at some level. Or at least if I'm made to think I have no choice.

By emphasising our individual ethical responsibilities -- the simple fact that it takes some amount of cooperation for a person to do anything at all, we are creating a small obstacle in the way of creating a dangerous environment that can turn me into an assassin.

Re: The casualties at the other end of the remote-controlled kill

#16
post #11
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

> What, you want a druggie at the controls of lethal weapons? I've got some bad news, ...

Nobody tell him about the last Commander in Chief of our military…

Re: The casualties at the other end of the remote-controlled kill

#17
post #9

It's behind a paywall, but I was able to find it here. https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/uw-grads-story-rev... Looks like it was more the drug policy of the U.S. Air Force that lead this man to fall apart more than the droning of people far away.

Quoted post unavailable.

> What, you want a druggie at the controls of lethal weapons?

I don’t care in slightest what someone does in their own time if it does no direct harm to anyone else.

As long as he’s not under the influence on the job, I don’t care.

Re: The casualties at the other end of the remote-controlled kill

#20
post #9

It's behind a paywall, but I was able to find it here. https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/uw-grads-story-rev... Looks like it was more the drug policy of the U.S. Air Force that lead this man to fall apart more than the droning of people far away.

Quoted post unavailable.

I would strongly prefer someone who takes mushrooms and MDMA occasionally behind lethal weapons. It indicates I can trust them to reflect on their own decisions.

In fact, I have little trust in people who don't take psychedelics, unless I have very good evidence that they have explored the dark recesses of their minds by some other means.

Post reply on HN