Leaked report shows high civilian death toll from CIA drone strikes • Hacker News Board

Re: Leaked report shows high civilian death toll from CIA drone strikes

#121

Post by 6d0debc071 » Tue, Jul 23, 2013, 2:11 PM UTC

jaebrown wrote: post #49

Some of the comments on Salon are just sad. A death is a death. Whether it's 900 or 2, drone strikes that kill innocent civilians are unacceptable. Trying to justify it by saying that there is only a small death toll number is inhumane. We can not say are objective is to protect innocent life and then take innocent life. Giving precedent to American life makes us and NATO forces seem like evil pretentious bastards. W…

> Trying to justify it by saying that there is only a small death toll number is inhumane. We can not say are objective is to protect innocent life and then take innocent life.

You can.

I mean I don't agree with what they're doing, (because I don't think that they're instituting socio-economic changes that will have a long term positive effect,) but this is the old 'Is it better to imprison an innocent man than let a guilty one go free?' conundrum.

When you use force as an instrument of policy, innocent people are always going to get hurt. It even happens domestically with the police. What's the alternative? Become total pacifists - completely eschew force? The world where all good people are total pacifists does not look like somewhere I'd want to live.

So you have to reason: When do police become violent enough that their role is no-longer justified. What's the line, what numbers for what benefit?

It's a horrible, disgusting thing to have to say, I don't like the idea that people will get hurt, but someone's got to:

Even if you were totally self interested, if you were reasoning from behind Rawl's veil of ignorance, then you'd always choose to live in the world where force had been used by the 'good' side and where the numbers had worked out better for more people as a consequence.

Re: Leaked report shows high civilian death toll from CIA drone strikes

#122

Post by ianstallings » Tue, Jul 23, 2013, 2:15 PM UTC

mpyne wrote: post #29

rdtsc wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I grew up in the 80s in the Soviet Union. And the thing is, we never believed their propaganda because it was too ridiculous. Everyone was laughing at the bullshit they heard on the radio and TV. True believers have disappeared probably the the mid 60s or so. Even defecting spies had stopped using "ideology" as the reason for their defection it was too unbelievable. Likewise might happen in US. It seems two things ha…

> It is just the pesky Internets that lets "domestic terrorists" like Occupy organize and share idea. Pesky little extremists forums like /r/news lets people discuss issues outside the mainstream media. Why does everyone blame the evil MSM? Fox News was started because the MSM was 'too liberal'. I mean, I sort of agree with your overall point, but if you want to see what 'domestic terrorists' could do before the Inte…

Why do people blame the MSM? Because they fail to do their job correctly, it's pretty simple. They get caught up in eyeballs instead of exposing the truth. Why break a big story about drones when you can rehash your thinly veiled opinion on some more popular topic?

Re: Leaked report shows high civilian death toll from CIA drone strikes

#123

Post by Amadou » Tue, Jul 23, 2013, 2:19 PM UTC

sampk wrote: post #94

knodi wrote: post #39

Its stuff like this that turns people into terrorist, also known as freedom fighters to others.

As a Pakistani, even though am an atheist, If one of those strikes killed one of my siblings I would totes go nuts and become a terrorist for sure and try to recruit as many others as possible. It's pretty obvious that U.S. is intentionally producing terrorists.

Don't confuse the end result with the intended result.

I think it is much more likely that the people making the decisions just don't give a damn. They see the situation from another perspective, one in which they have this really cool toy and they intend to use it as much as possible because as far as they know it doesn't have any downsides.

The reason they don't realize the downsides is because it is such a new toy that side-effects aren't well documented. It is kind of like the way we used to use x-ray machines for shoe-fittings - it's kind of obvious it would give people foot cancer but it took people actually getting foot cancer before they stopped doing it. People have a tendency to only see what is right in front of them - right now the blowback from indiscriminate drone usage isn't in their face so they can't see it.

Re: Leaked report shows high civilian death toll from CIA drone strikes

#124

Post by bloaf » Tue, Jul 23, 2013, 2:22 PM UTC

peterkelly wrote: post #47

bloaf wrote: post #44

Most people I see comfortably opining on drone strikes seem to be doing so without the discomfort of thinking the issue through. My thought process is this: Say the US were to find evidence that a Canadian terrorist group was planning an attack on the Joe Louis Arena. We would inform the Canadian government who would then go, arrest the terrorists and put them on trial. This seems to be what drone critics think shoul…

> "What sort of military intervention should we use? We could send in soldiers to try and arrest the terrorists, but that is slow, risky, and expensive (we need holding facilities, transportation, etc.) Drones are the obvious alternative. Not only are they cheap, they are pose about zero risk to US personnel" So what you're saying is that the lives of US personnel are more valuable than that of innocent Pakistani civ…

Yes.

The US government is not in charge of keeping Pakistanis safe, it is in charge of keeping US citizens safe. If the Pakistanis don't like this arrangement, they should deal with the terrorists themselves.

Re: Leaked report shows high civilian death toll from CIA drone strikes

#125

Post by ianstallings » Tue, Jul 23, 2013, 2:27 PM UTC

MarkMc wrote: post #59

I've never understood how these two positions are logically consistent: (1) We do not torture people on principle (2) We use drone strikes that sometimes kill innocent bystanders because the ends justifies the means In the case of torturing someone, you are inflicting only pain (which is not as bad as death) on someone who is probably guilty of a crime (which is not as bad as inflicting pain on someone who is complet…

When did we stop torturing people?

Re: Leaked report shows high civilian death toll from CIA drone strikes

#126

Post by noarchy » Tue, Jul 23, 2013, 2:29 PM UTC

ianstallings wrote: post #122

mpyne wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is just the pesky Internets that lets "domestic terrorists" like Occupy organize and share idea. Pesky little extremists forums like /r/news lets people discuss issues outside the mainstream media. Why does everyone blame the evil MSM? Fox News was started because the MSM was 'too liberal'. I mean, I sort of agree with your overall point, but if you want to see what 'domestic terrorists' could do before the Inte…

Why do people blame the MSM? Because they fail to do their job correctly, it's pretty simple. They get caught up in eyeballs instead of exposing the truth. Why break a big story about drones when you can rehash your thinly veiled opinion on some more popular topic?

These major media companies are just that. They are in the business of business, so what drives eyeballs to newspapers or television screens, or ears to the radio, is what will often take precedence.

They're essentially giving the public what they want. The public doesn't want to know about dead babies in Pakistan. They're much more at ease hearing news about the latest celebrity baby (royal, or otherwise).

The media could take responsibility for its lack of ethics, the population could decide that it wants those ethics, or things will just stay like they are.

Re: Leaked report shows high civilian death toll from CIA drone strikes

#127

Post by Roboprog » Tue, Jul 23, 2013, 2:33 PM UTC

foobarbazqux wrote: post #83

coldtea wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, it was not like Republican and Democrat parties were really apart in the first place. One is left of centre, the other is right of centre. The both agree on the centre. They have some token issues to ramp up their followers (gay marriage on one side, religion on the other, etc), but no matter who is in power the country works more or less the same for 90% of issues. Does anyone feel like a huge change is happen…

One is right of center, the other is even more right of center, if you consider parties in other countries.

Today, Richard Nixon would be booted out of the Democratic party as "too liberal". Go figure.

Re: Leaked report shows high civilian death toll from CIA drone strikes

#128

Post by ianstallings » Tue, Jul 23, 2013, 2:37 PM UTC

bloaf wrote: post #44

Most people I see comfortably opining on drone strikes seem to be doing so without the discomfort of thinking the issue through. My thought process is this: Say the US were to find evidence that a Canadian terrorist group was planning an attack on the Joe Louis Arena. We would inform the Canadian government who would then go, arrest the terrorists and put them on trial. This seems to be what drone critics think shoul…

I've thought the issue through. I'd rather not murder people. And yes it really is that simple.

Re: Leaked report shows high civilian death toll from CIA drone strikes

#129

Post by Andrew_Quentin » Tue, Jul 23, 2013, 2:47 PM UTC

derefr wrote: post #116

Andrew_Quentin wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fetish is quite a strange word to use. They put in practice anarchist principles and showed that such principles do actually work in practice as they managed to grab the focus of the world for maybe a month or two and communicated a very focused message, there is a difference between 99% of the people and a tiny 1%.

> they managed to grab the focus of the world for maybe a month or two and communicated a very focused message, there is a difference between 99% of the people and a tiny 1% This... wasn't the goal of the core group going into the "turn Occupy Wall Street into a movement" project, though, which was my point. It's sort of like setting out, in 0 A.D., to turn Christianity into a movement--but everyone who joins you end…

Its far from role playing. As I said they were putting anarchist principles in practice. You say they need a leader, they showed they did not need a leader.

I did not see them being hijacked by anything but the police force. They had a message, they communicated that message, everyone heard the message. That the people were unwilling to support them more vocally, but instead were successfully divided by the media, was not a failure on the part of occupy, but an example that propaganda is very, very effective against the masses.

Re: Leaked report shows high civilian death toll from CIA drone strikes

#130

Post by ianstallings » Tue, Jul 23, 2013, 2:48 PM UTC

What disturbs me about this issue the most is how it's rationalized because the previous administration also did the same thing. It's like we can't seem to see Obama for who he is because he's always compared to GWB. It's like saying a Pinto is a great car, because it's not a Yugo. People can't think straight because they've been blinded by partisanship. We can't even talk about the issues clearly, let alone determine the right course of action. I wish we could fix that.