Live data from Hacker News

Confessions of a Drone Warrior

gq.com

31–40 of 172 posts

Re: Confessions of a Drone Warrior

#31
post #27

This is the future of warfare and it's a good thing. Way better than back when you would firebomb an industrial city or lob cruise missiles at poorly defined targets. No boots on the ground means none of our people at risk and drones are much more precise than bombs. The reactions in this thread demonstrate the classic uneasiness with killing a few people while being okay with killing lots of people. The people compl…

classic uneasiness with killing a few people while being okay with killing lots of people.

What a smug remark. And who is okay with killing lots of people? Citation please!

Re: Confessions of a Drone Warrior

#32
post #27

This is the future of warfare and it's a good thing. Way better than back when you would firebomb an industrial city or lob cruise missiles at poorly defined targets. No boots on the ground means none of our people at risk and drones are much more precise than bombs. The reactions in this thread demonstrate the classic uneasiness with killing a few people while being okay with killing lots of people. The people compl…

Drone warfare isn't inherently bad. The issue is that it makes warfare safer and more convenient for us, which raises the odds that we'll do it more often and use it for more questionable means.

Re: Confessions of a Drone Warrior

#33
post #28
post #5

Killing distant people in a foreign country is most people's definition of a terrorist attack. A declared war is one thing but this type of terror weapon is likely to backfire some day, if it hasn't already.

Congratulations, you've just described all warfare outside of civil conflicts as terrorist attacks. All non-civil wars involved killing distant people in a foreign country.

You skipped the part where he said "declared war". We have international laws and convention nowadays. But certain country is ignoring them just because it can.

Re: Confessions of a Drone Warrior

#34
The worst human beings on the planet are the ones:

1) Building the guns/drones 2) Pulling the trigger of the guns/drones 3) Telling others to pull the trigger.

No one in that chain is less responsible than the other.

Re: Confessions of a Drone Warrior

#35
post #29

Considering Bryant is one of the only operators speaking out, his conscience seems to bother him more than the average. Here's a comparison (an IAMA thread from reddit). http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1ghkm7/iama_drone_sens... Q: Have you ever had to strike a target that you were not comfortable with? sensor_operator: No, I trust our JTACs 1000000% they really know their stuff. While this was the top voted com…

> I think this shows a fundamental truth about humans which is that they'll kill without losing too much sleep.

I don't think you can deduce that from the AMA. It could just as well be a PR campaign and wouldn't necessarily represent what an actual drone operator really believes.

Re: Confessions of a Drone Warrior

#36
post #27

This is the future of warfare and it's a good thing. Way better than back when you would firebomb an industrial city or lob cruise missiles at poorly defined targets. No boots on the ground means none of our people at risk and drones are much more precise than bombs. The reactions in this thread demonstrate the classic uneasiness with killing a few people while being okay with killing lots of people. The people compl…

It's not a good thing. Only a handful of nations are capable of producing weaponized drones, and that's not likely to change anytime soon. This is very susceptible to abuse. The numbers here show my point exactly: http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/category/projects/drone...

Re: Confessions of a Drone Warrior

#37
post #17

I couldn't finish this article. It just makes me too angry. Warrior? How dare anyone involved in this dignify themselves with such an honour-laden term. They're just murderers, and the fact they hide behind so many layers of technology just makes it all the more cowardly and despicable.

Before you get too angry, consider that this experience is common of soldiers in war, not many of whom would after combat use terms like warrior. I doubt he chose the headline himself or was even asked about it, and it is contradicted by the tone of the article. There are far more important questions here than which labels are used to describe the people who carry out the killings.

This one guy (part of the largest group ever inducted as drone pilots) killed 1,626 people, and that figure won't include the civilians near the targets, who were often at home or travelling with their families. The real figure is probably 2-3 times that.

“We’re gonna shoot and collapse the building. They’ve gotten intel that the guy is inside.”...Bryant stared at the screen, frozen. “There’s this giant flash, and all of a sudden there’s no person there.” He looked over at the pilot and asked, “Did that look like a child to you?” They typed a chat message to their screener, an intelligence observer who was watching the shot from “somewhere in the world”—maybe Bagram, maybe the Pentagon, Bryant had no idea—asking if a child had just run directly into the path of their shot. “And he says, ‘Per the review, it’s a dog.’ ”Bryant and the pilot replayed the shot, recorded on eight-millimeter tape. They watched it over and over, the figure darting around the corner. Bryant was certain it wasn’t a dog.

What I find most troubling about this is that:

This program has been expanded to Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan already, and the same legal justification given for killing in Pakistan with no trial or even proper investigation could be given for a drone killing in Idaho. There is no limit to this war in time or space.

Even if you are on a battlefield, killing of non-uniformed and unarmed combatants is illegal under the Geneva conventions - you're supposed to avoid civilian casualties - clearly targeting houses and markets etc doesn't do that.

People who have not been positively identified as combattants and are away from any battlefield are killed without trial, without counsel, without charges and without official remorse if there was a mistake or they were innocent.

The distance created by the drone and the lack of risk to US personnel gives a very real risk that substantial abuse of this method of killing will occur. What if the US withdraws from Afghanistan/Pakistan/Iraq, but continues to kill from a distance? What if they expand the war to other countries and don't tell anyone (JSOC is in 100 countries)? All this has been done without even declaring war.

This drone pilot deserves to be recognised for at least having the courage to speak up about what he was asked to do, about the mistakes made.

The book Dirty Wars is definitely worth reading if you are interested in finding out more about US drone programs.

http://dirtywars.org/

Re: Confessions of a Drone Warrior

#38
When I hear drone warfare, I always wonder what would happen if someone puts on his uniform and guns down a drone operator in a crowded shopping mall. Obviously he distinguished himself as a combatant and engaged in a act of war.

Re: Confessions of a Drone Warrior

#40
post #29

Considering Bryant is one of the only operators speaking out, his conscience seems to bother him more than the average. Here's a comparison (an IAMA thread from reddit). http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1ghkm7/iama_drone_sens... Q: Have you ever had to strike a target that you were not comfortable with? sensor_operator: No, I trust our JTACs 1000000% they really know their stuff. While this was the top voted com…

Keep in mind that the JTAC is usually an enlisted soldier embedded with a ground unit. He is highly trained on ROE and positive ID, and generally has a good first hand perspective on what is happening on the ground. He is responsible for protecting the lives of the unit he is embedded with, and air assets are tasked to support him. From my experience, these are not warmongers, just guys doing their jobs, trying to protect lives.
Post reply on HN