Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. Is Often Unsure About Who Will Die in Drone Strikes

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 60 posts

Re: U.S. Is Often Unsure About Who Will Die in Drone Strikes

#31

Post by bane »

jjoonathan wrote: post #23
bane wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how is that different from any air strike?

It's not, but I doubt that the people complaining about drone strikes are perfectly OK with air strikes. Drones are the most visible and most rapidly expanding facet of the problem so it's not unreasonable to focus the discussion around them.

Right, so it seems like a distraction to me to focus on one facet of something not to agree with rather than the whole problem.

Turned around the problem with this argument is that it's solved by getting to know the people you are about to kill.

Which sounds rather silly if the point is to protest killing people at all.

Or if we stay focused on drones, just kill them with one of the other dozen remote methods we have at our disposal.

Re: U.S. Is Often Unsure About Who Will Die in Drone Strikes

#33

Post by eli »

mc32 wrote: post #26
lostcolony wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because they're concerned that the lack of a pilot, and thus, pilot risk, means the US is more willing to order attacks, since there is no political risk to themselves should something be shot down? Because they're concerned with the change in warfare this heralds, that we're moving to using technologies that explicitly and autonomously target civilian areas, and deciding who 'enemy combatants' are based on president…

You bring up great points, but I don't think the nyt actually cares. They bring this up because it will resonate and people will read it and that brings them money and it gives them 'Intellectual credibility'. If they actually cared they'd lobby against they'd donate their profits, etc. They pretend to care about this change in warfare. And, realistically, even if they could affect US policy, there is absolutely no p…

I think you're just plain wrong. The story is about drones because that is the story. If manned jets had dropped the bomb or paratroopers shot hostages by mistake, there would certainly be a story about that.

Re: U.S. Is Often Unsure About Who Will Die in Drone Strikes

#34

Post by poof131 »

mauricemir wrote: post #21
lostcolony wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because they're concerned that the lack of a pilot, and thus, pilot risk, means the US is more willing to order attacks, since there is no political risk to themselves should something be shot down? Because they're concerned with the change in warfare this heralds, that we're moving to using technologies that explicitly and autonomously target civilian areas, and deciding who 'enemy combatants' are based on president…

what risk does the average pilot in the USAF face - its not like they are facing any! air assets and any ground assets will have been obliterated.

There is definitely some risk.[1][2] Aviation is inherently a risky endeavor. Operations in war zones make it even more so.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aviation_shootdowns_and... [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aviation_accidents_and_...

Re: U.S. Is Often Unsure About Who Will Die in Drone Strikes

#36

Post by mc32 »

brosefstalin wrote: post #5
NateDad wrote: post #2

Why do people single out drones? It's not like it would be different if there were a pilot in the thing. I guess it's just good old FUD.

Maybe because it's so impersonal to pilot a remote-controlled toy on a screen thousands of miles away that when you see little black and white pixels moving on your TV, you have less moral qualms about pushing the little red button on your joystick? Maybe because you're so far away from that reality -- literally and figuratively -- that you're not experiencing your conscience and the fear of consequences quite the sa…

A drone pilot is apt to make fewer errors and more time to think before unloading. This removal from immediate reality is a double edged sword, there is less immediate harm to them but that also affords the remote pilot to consider things more coldly and calculatedly. There is more Tim to think before unloading, so that means fewer mistakes. When you have humanned aircraft, you get lots more collateral and unintended casualties.

People intrinsically have a problem with the clinicality of technological enhancement.

Imagine an algorithm which could tell a police force who is likely out to commit crimes given observed parameters (time, route, familiarity in area, vehicle, passengers, origin, destination, income, education, criminal history, etc) people would be freaked out. I'm sure some day well have this and people will wish for good old police walking the beat, mistakenly stopping the wrong person, but at least its not an impersonal algorithm targeting you.

Re: U.S. Is Often Unsure About Who Will Die in Drone Strikes

#37

Post by tomjen3 »

lostcolony wrote: post #7
NateDad wrote: post #2

Why do people single out drones? It's not like it would be different if there were a pilot in the thing. I guess it's just good old FUD.

Because they're concerned that the lack of a pilot, and thus, pilot risk, means the US is more willing to order attacks, since there is no political risk to themselves should something be shot down? Because they're concerned with the change in warfare this heralds, that we're moving to using technologies that explicitly and autonomously target civilian areas, and deciding who 'enemy combatants' are based on president…

>what recourse would we have on the international stage

An army bigger than the rest of the world, combined?

Winners to what winners want, losers suffers as they must.

Re: U.S. Is Often Unsure About Who Will Die in Drone Strikes

#38

Post by dalke »

happyscrappy wrote: post #29
dalke wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no reason to go from one extreme - the 'cops of the word' to quote Ochs - to extreme isolationism on the other. There are many stages in between. FWIW, I believe many residents of Okinawa Prefecture would be interested in having US military off of their island, should the US withdraw. Should we do that, I suspect Japan would quickly develop nuclear weapons. I also strongly believe many in Latin America would…

No it won't happen. Europe being America's hand puppet is the cornerstone of US power.

You said it wasn't in the interest of anyone, other than ISIS, Russia, and China, for the US to withdraw.

I pointed out some other examples of people who probably would like the US out of the international stage.

Your reply here makes it sound either like you didn't understand your original point - the hope that the US might withdraw - or that you believe the only people who are relevant are the US and those the US considers to be its opposition.

I am certain there are people in Bolivia who would like the US to stop protecting US business interests in that country, and who will not be negatively affected by possible growth in Russian, Chinese, or ISIS power should the US become the isolationist state you says was "tempting to hope".

Re: U.S. Is Often Unsure About Who Will Die in Drone Strikes

#39

Post by mc32 »

eli wrote: post #33
mc32 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You bring up great points, but I don't think the nyt actually cares. They bring this up because it will resonate and people will read it and that brings them money and it gives them 'Intellectual credibility'. If they actually cared they'd lobby against they'd donate their profits, etc. They pretend to care about this change in warfare. And, realistically, even if they could affect US policy, there is absolutely no p…

I think you're just plain wrong. The story is about drones because that is the story. If manned jets had dropped the bomb or paratroopers shot hostages by mistake, there would certainly be a story about that.

Tell me, what's a viable alternative the US or world constituency will accept as viable? I'd like to know what you think might work better, given where we are today.

don't seek out enemies (let bag guys and gals do as they will)

support a network of ground troops and supporting intelligence with consequent monetary and cost in lives and perhaps effectiveness

a multi-decade effort to socially engineer people (address their grievances, if possible, not clear it is, but lets suppose it

good old fashioned carpet bombing

Re: U.S. Is Often Unsure About Who Will Die in Drone Strikes

#40

Post by rdtsc »

skywhopper wrote: post #18

I'm mostly depressed that the President only apologizes to the families and promises an investigation when it's American and Italian innocents who were killed. Hundreds of innocent Pakistanis, Afghans, Iraqis, Yemenis, and Somalis have been killed by US drones. And only the worst of those cases has even a mention been made of any review of policy or procedure. In summary: :(

Good point.

Also you'll notice the American and the Italian have names -- Warren Weinstein and Giovanni Lo Porto.

That is very important, especially because all the Pakistani, Afghan, Iraqi women, children, elderly, by-standers, and other innocents never have names. They are just "collateral damage" or whatever the current PR terminology is.

Post reply on HN