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

U.S. drone strike kills 30 pine nut farm workers in Afghanistan

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–319 of 319 posts

Re: U.S. drone strike kills 30 pine nut farm workers in Afghanistan

#311

Post by simplecomplex »

yakshaving_jgt wrote: post #42
simplecomplex wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Afghanistan never attacked the US. repeat that to yourself a couple times. Invading them isn’t defense or war it’s fucking murder you idiot.

The Taliban (who the drone strikes were targeting) are at war with Afghanistan. The US is allied with Afghanistan’s government. Wars aren’t as simple as good guys vs bad guys fighting between their own respective countries.

> The US is allied with Afghanistan’s government.

The US allied with the Northern Alliance after invading Afghanistan, and they had no say in whether we invaded or not.

The US asked the Taliban to extradite Osama Bin Laden, they refused, so the US invaded Afghanistan to bring him to justice and dismantle the Taliban.

The US killed Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban is just as powerful today as they were then. The conflict has also killed over 100,000 civilians, and almost the same number of US citizens have been killed in battle as on 9/11

Oh and let's not talk about how the officially stated purpose of the Taliban was to kick US armed forces out of Somalia and Saudi Arabia... We chose to get involved in Saudi Arabia's war with Pakistan in the first place! If it's a "war" then US military leadership's decisions are directly responsible for 9/11. The US military leadership has been actively endangering national security with their reckless support for Saudi Arabia's wars for decades, and continue to do so to this day.

US presidents and businessmen sold out their fellow citizens and soldiers to arm an absolute monarchy so Aramco could make money.

Re: U.S. drone strike kills 30 pine nut farm workers in Afghanistan

#313

Post by jacobush »

smcl wrote: post #299
jacobush wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Weird or not, that's the take in many places, Ireland and Afghanistan alike. A modest proposal, eh?

You're mistaken if you think that even the more recent atrocities like the great famine or the violent oppression of the Irish home rule (and ultimately independence) movement have informed the Irish response to Brexit negotiations. It is to their credit that they're pragmatic people, since they could easily dish out a black-eye to the UK if they wanted to.

If Éire had a few UK sponsored drone bombings I’d bet that would change real quick. Otherwise I take your point.

Re: U.S. drone strike kills 30 pine nut farm workers in Afghanistan

#314

Post by cies »

cies wrote: post #194
throwaway66920 wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you’re conflating morally worse with practically worse. It’s not propaganda to note that certain countries attacking each other spell out graver consequences

That fact that you distinguish between morally worse and "practically worse" make me thing you are already under the influence of the propaganda. But it does not mean you are right: Afganistan cannot attack the US over 30 dead civillians, the US can attack Iran for some Saudi property destruction by Yemenis who are being raped by Saudi using US weaponery on them.

> But it does not mean you are right

I meant: But it does not mean you not are right

Re: U.S. drone strike kills 30 pine nut farm workers in Afghanistan

#315

Post by Roboprog »

whiddershins wrote: post #218
Roboprog wrote: post #5

Why are we there? What’s the threat, again? I forgot.

The anniversary of 9/11 is a week ago and you forget?

Have they given up Bin Laden yet?

Isn’t it just a little ironic that one of our “allies” was harboring OBL?

Lesson learned: nukes are a VERY effective deterrent to foreign invasion. That’s what we’re teaching countries in the Middle East.

Re: U.S. drone strike kills 30 pine nut farm workers in Afghanistan

#317

Post by megous »

kmjg88nvf8 wrote: post #271
megous wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unlikely. There were massacres during the Taliban rule outside of war, but it was at much lower scale than in the current war, and US only helps taliban grow by its intervention, it seems, if you look at the numbers of fighters. It's not like killing a person with certain beliefs stops the beliefs from spreading.

So you think it would be OK to live under Taliban rule? They didn't come into power by democratic elections, it seems. Also, killing people with beliefs does stop beliefs from spreading. How much of Afghanistan do the Taliban control these days, anyway?

Quite a lot: https://thedefensepost.com/2019/05/01/afghanistan-resolute-s...

The idea was that "possible US engagement saves more civilians than it kills", and I was reacting to that, as it is very doubtful.

I didn't say it would be ok to live under Taliban. But there are other weird islamic countries, where I wouldn't want to live either. Do you propose US making war there, too?

Re: U.S. drone strike kills 30 pine nut farm workers in Afghanistan

#318

Post by matwood »

Consultant32452 wrote: post #288
matwood wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I usually avoid these conversations about the military, because it's such a hot button issue. I have many family members who were/are in the military. I have one family member who died in WW2, buried in a US cemetery in France. > but military training is mostly about obeying orders Not at all. The military wants individuals to think for themselves. Strictly obeying orders would never get the job done. In fact, the la…

>By the time a soldier is killing the enemy they are also going to be receiving fire. I think this is what concerns people so much about the drone strikes. Clearly drone strikes are one sided fire fights. And even by the government's own statistics their signal to noise kill ratio is abysmal. This is categorically different than a soldier on the ground returning fire even if we might disagree with the soldier having…

Yeah, drone strikes are a tricky situation. On one hand, it's great that no Americans are put in harms way (other than the philosophical question if war should be so 'easy'), but I think we have seen time and again that intelligence is not good enough to kill others without having people on the ground.

This is not a new problem though. Cruise missiles did this for years before drones. Drones are just more prolific now, and we are more likely to see the aftermath.

Re: U.S. drone strike kills 30 pine nut farm workers in Afghanistan

#319

Post by hn23 »

chmod775 wrote: post #64
stevenjohns wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it's not. These types of comments are extremely inappropriate. Your comment tries to suggest that: 1. Terrorists are people with legitimate grievances 2. Terrorists are representatives of oppressed people 3. Terrorists have genuine reasons for their actions All of these things are false. People do not turn into international, careless murderers just because they experience travesty. Terrorists exploit this concept…

Because your average farmer is obviously going to join up with a militia or terrorist group because of some abstract political thing like sanctions, which he probably has trouble even measuring in his day to life. As opposed to your elected politicians and your military having blown up his daughter at her wedding, scattering her remains over a wide enough area that it is hard even finding anything to bury. Makes sens…

> If the US imposed sanctions against my country, I'd just shrug.

You obviously do not understand that sanctions are usually a way to prepare for war with weapons. Sanctions bring up the cracks in societies that are otherwise hidden under a thin layer of comfort we call civilized behavior. With sanctions you get a black market and all that is related to it. Sanctions are a trade war at another level.

Post reply on HN