Support NeoGAF

[Darklord]

I wish Dems would hold Obama to account over this instead of just glossing over it.

I'm just amazed at how weak the democrats are over there. Why the fuck does no one have a spine in American politics?

 

[jorma]

So you would argue that there is no strategic or tactical value to them and that the US is attacking just because it can?

I would argue that stopping the drone strikes is better than not stopping them.

 

[dabig2]

but the GOP was in favour of bombing. The Dems campaigned against it when Bush was in office and now it's their guy they don't even talk about the issue.

Were the Dems ever against drone strikes? They were of course against the war in Iraq, but other than that...

 

[rCIZZLE]

I hope Americans can understand why certain countries hate them...
If not, pride is clouding something there...

It's not about flags or beliefs,
but compassion for your fellow humans...

What is the average American going to do? Do you guys actually think everyone here knows exactly what's going on AND supports it?

 

[Jackpot]

Were the Dems ever against drone strikes? They were of course against the war in Iraq, but other than that...

to narrow it down, a lot of PoliGAF are but they're never as vocal about it as they were with Bush's indiscriminate attacks.

 

[speedline]

This is American foreign policy. The party in the White House makes no difference.

 

[Randdalf]

This is American foreign policy. The party in the White House makes no difference.

Yeah I was going to say, seems like the military in America would do what they like regardless of the President.

 

[Salvor.Hardin]

Yeah I was going to say, seems like the military in America would do what they like regardless of the President.

I don't think that's what he was trying to say.

 

[Randdalf]

I don't think that's what he was trying to say.

Well I suppose not, but I think that you don't get much experience in warfare if you're a politician and if you become President you get thrust into a situation where you have all these military advisors telling you what the right move to make is.

 

[Hindle]

How would people in this thread suggest we fight Al Qaeda? Let them come to us and just hope they don't slip through the cracks? Please I'd like to hear your alternatives.

 

[Hindle]

In an ideal world the People of Pakistan would take on the millitants alongside the government, but instead they make deals and allow them to go about thier business. Not to mention hiding senior ranking commanders in thier country.

 

[enewtabie]

How would people in this thread suggest we fight Al Qaeda? Let them come to us and just hope they don't slip through the cracks? Please I'd like to hear your alternatives.

No one is going to have a idea. If they think America leaving the middle east solves
the AQ/Taliban problem, they are naive. Everyone is too busy calling people war criminals
and bashing the US. Nothing new there.

 

[BocoDragon]

This is American foreign policy. The party in the White House makes no difference.

Yup.

But in a backward way it does.... if the party is Democrat (publicly more peace-leaning), then they have more of a motivation to use a more clandestine method like a drone strike. Better to ramp up the drones than start another public war..

 

[Jackpot]

How would people in this thread suggest we fight Al Qaeda? Let them come to us and just hope they don't slip through the cracks? Please I'd like to hear your alternatives.

Well my first suggestion would be to not bomb civilians and first responders with drones.

Yeah I was going to say, seems like the military in America would do what they like regardless of the President.

Something as big as the drone campaign? Not even close.

 

[Kenshin001]

Well my first suggestion would be to not bomb civilians and first responders with drones.

Something as big as the drone campaign? Not even close.

What would be your second suggestion?

 

[MightyHealthy]

Haven't there been questionable drone strikes since the Bill Clinton years?

 

[Angry Fork]

How would people in this thread suggest we fight Al Qaeda? Let them come to us and just hope they don't slip through the cracks? Please I'd like to hear your alternatives.

Issue a formal apology from US government for everything fucked up in the past, offer to make things right via humanitarian aid/treaties and so on, get troops out of middle eastern countries or places where we're not wanted in general. Dramatically reduce military/CIA budget and get rid of NSA/TSA.

Get rid of whatever dramatically harms or has the potential to harm civil liberties. Downsize the US in general so we don't have to be the world police super power anymore, focus on making things right here in our country.

There then we won't have to do all this anymore. But none of this will happen because they're not interested in our security but preserving US dominance.

.

 

[jchap]

Dropping missiles on them with drones does serve the purpose of keeping them disorganized and on the run which is part of the reason there have been no major terror attacks on US soil since 911.

 

[syko de4d]

he really earned it... lol

 

[coldvein]

he really earned it... lol

what a disgrace.

 

[Angry Fork]

Dropping missiles on them with drones does serve the purpose of keeping them disorganized and on the run which is part of the reason there have been no major terror attacks on US soil since 911.

At the expense of thousands of civilians and the middle east continuing to hate us. Drones are short term gain because Obama doesn't want to deal with live prisoners/due process and Americans won't kick up a fuss because it isn't happening here or losing soldiers lives.

If we're serious about long term gain in fighting terror it's a horrible policy because it assumes the next generation of people are going to act like nothing wrong happened. As if kids in pakistan growing up now who see their parents die are not going to hate the US and want to join al quaida. A huge mountain of shit will be on the doorstep of the 2016/2020/2024 administrations because of what we're doing now.

Unless you planned to use drones indefinitely all over the world on everyone who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time regardless of how many innocent people are killed. If the US doesn't care about innocent deaths or time limits/discretion then why not just drop a nuke and kill everything in the middle east?

 

[FACE]

No one posted a picture of Obama looking cool or a video of him saying something funny. Seems like we're improving

 

[twobear]

Dropping missiles on them with drones does serve the purpose of keeping them disorganized and on the run which is part of the reason there have been no major terror attacks on US soil since 911.

Drone attacks have increased the recruitment to violent/terrorist organisations among the populations being targetted:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/sep/25/study-obama-drone-deaths

Pretty much exactly what you'd expect to happen if you start bombing civilian populations, really.

 

[Codeblue]

In an ideal world the People of Pakistan would take on the millitants alongside the government, but instead they make deals and allow them to go about thier business. Not to mention hiding senior ranking commanders in thier country.

No one needs to offer any solutions because having compassion for innocent people getting shot at for being in the wrong place at the wrong time is only human regardless of how necessary their deaths were.

In an ideal world militants and the US would leave the people of Pakistan alone. Neither one is though and the civilians are going to continue to carry the heaviest burden for something the majority have nothing to do with.

I don't know how we should be doing this if we should at all. I do know that sacrificing so many civilians, changing the definition of militant to hide the actual death toll, and striking first responders who have an obligation to help human beings regardless of creed is heartbreaking. Further, you can't engage in these sorts of activities then turn around and claim moral superiority. Aren't we supposed to be better than that? We certainly pretend to be.

Even if this is the absolute only way to do this, it still doesn't make it any less frustrating.

 

[Dead Man]

How would people in this thread suggest we fight Al Qaeda? Let them come to us and just hope they don't slip through the cracks? Please I'd like to hear your alternatives.

How about not killing civilians? That seems a good first step.

 

[Vilix]

That's a little hard to do since they like to mingle amongst civilians.

 

[The Elite]

How about not killing civilians? That seems a good first step.

Yup.

I imagine killing more civilians is only going to fuel the fires that breed militants and terrorist cells.

That's a little hard to do since they like to mingle amongst civilians.

So we should kill them all and hope we got the bad apples in the bunch?

 

[Vilix]

That's a little hard to do since they like to mingle amongst civilians.

Yup.

I imagine killing more civilians is only going to fuel the fires that breed militants and terrorist cells.




So we should kill them all and hope we got the bad apples in the bunch?

Yep. Collateral damage is a killer.

 

[Dead Man]

That's a little hard to do since they like to mingle amongst civilians.

Well then you don't unliaterally and extrajudicially kill them, especially with methods that are almost guaranteed to casue civillian deaths. It's really not complicated.

 

[travisbickle]

USA: where a shooting in a mall that kills a few justifiably has a day of mourning, but where the weekly blowing up of 100s of innocent people by US drones isn't even questioned.

 

[Unregistered007]

I cannot even comperhend how Pakistanis could tolerate such a traitoruous regime for so long. Allowing CIA to slaughter your own people? GTFO.

Pakistani Government is bunch of motherfucking sons of bitches who accept money and let anything happen.

Pakistan has been done for since the 1970s.

Yes I am from Pakistan.

 

[theignoramus]

its a cold, cold world out there man. is the US doing this same double tap and "oh, anyone killed over the age of 18 is a terrorist after the fact" in Yemen too?
as a short term strategy I guess it works. someone pointed out there havnt been any major terrorist attacks on american soil since 9/11 and it keeps the command and control structure of these groups in a state of dissarray. but as a long term solution, it seems awful with all kind of negative probabilities that loom in the near future.

 

[Norua]

Not this shit again.

More than 230,000 people died for nothing and no one got sentenced for it. So yeah, this "shit" again.
Meanwhile, everyone is still horrified by 9/11.

 

[Kinyou]

Disgusting. Absolutely disgusting.

That's a little hard to do since they like to mingle amongst civilians.

Targeting first responders has nothing to do with human shields.

 

[cameron]

I wonder if decades from now we'll have an accurate historic record of these drones strikes and the 'war on terror'. Or will it be filtered to make it look less barbaric? Even now it's being obscured with the broad or fluid definition of the word 'militant'.

 

[Veezy]

More than 230,000 people died for nothing and no one got sentenced for it. So yeah, this "shit" again.
Meanwhile, everyone is still horrified by 9/11.

Do you know the death rates during WW2 of soldiers per day, the amount of deaths that would occur had we actually stormed the mainland, the attempts to end the war with Japan before the bombs were dropped, the number of soldiers that died total during WW2, what was done before the bombs were dropped, etc.

Stop running your mouth about the bombs in WW2 in comparison with this. Drone strikes are being used in a sovereign nation that we have not declared war on. This is an entirely different situation than Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Entirely.

If you want to discuss that, make a thread, but don't come into this thread and discuss those bombs in here as if it's the same situation as these drone strikes.

 

[DY_nasty]

One of the lesser known facets of the CIA's drone program is that any male killed by these missiles is reported as (by the Pentagon and echoed, but rarely expanded upon, by the media) a militant irrespective of whether or not he was a combatant much less a target. And that's not even to mention were those in the near vicinity to come to tend to the wounded from this apparent explosion, they too would be labelled as combatants and fired upon.

Its a loophole because non-uniformed combatants are treated differently under the Geneva Convention. It works both ways as well. A guy shoot and kill 3 NATO soldiers, run around a corner, then drop his weapon and if the people responsible for apprehending him follow the law to the letter - they have to give him nearly the same rights as a civilian.

I don't think a lot of people understand the laws and their applicability regarding "soldiers" that aren't from an organized, conventional military. And because of that, it leads to a lot of talking out of asses. The U.S. is definitely guilt of not giving a fuck though.

I wonder if decades from now we'll have an accurate historic record of these drones strikes and the 'war on terror'. Or will it be filtered to make it look less barbaric? Even now it's being obscured with the broad or fluid definition of the word 'militant'.

Its not even filtered. Back when there were reports on the war every day for every single casualty, the masses got sick of it and wanted to look away.

Short term memories and a society that generally doesn't give a fuck because its convenient.

 

[Vilix]

Disgusting. Absolutely disgusting.


Targeting first responders has nothing to do with human shields.

Where did I say it did?

 

[Norua]

Do you know the death rates during WW2 of soldiers per day, the amount of deaths that would occur had we actually stormed the mainland, the attempts to end the war with Japan before the bombs were dropped, the number of soldiers that died total during WW2, what was done before the bombs were dropped, etc.

Stop running your mouth about the bombs in WW2 in comparison with this. Drone strikes are being used in a sovereign nation that we have not declared war on. This is an entirely different situation than Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Entirely.

If you want to discuss that, make a thread, but don't come into this thread and discuss those bombs in here as if it's the same situation as these drone strikes.

First of all, I spent my life studying history and archeology and making a living out of it, so to answer your question, yes I know most of these things.

I also know it was useless to end the war. And, if you want to talk about military justifications, how come no high officer of the US army was for the bombing to begin with?
Dwight D. Eisenhower, Douglas MacArthur, Carl A. Spaatz (US Air Force Chief of Staff), Chester Nimitz (Fleet Admiral and Commander in chief in the Pacific), admirals William Leahy and Ernest King, Carter Clarke (brigadier general of military intelligence), etc (I could go on).

All these men with the highest authority on the subject believed that it wasn't the right thing to do. The US government had reasons to drop these bombs, but they weren't military ones. You're fooling yourself if you believe that.
If you are a US citizen, maybe that's what they teach you in middle school in the US, I don't know. If so, then I don't blame you.

I was discussing war crimes. The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki have their place in such a discussion. Along with these drone strikes.
Also, may I remind you that I merely mentioned it in one of my sentence as an example. My intent wasn't to start a discussion about Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Dresden specifically. I was just responding to another gaffer. So if you don't want a discussion about it, don't drag me into one.

 

[DY_nasty]

Where did I say it did

First responder doesn't always mean civ ambulance.

I'm not a fan of employing the same tactics as the people we're fighting, but it all comes from learning how to fight an unconventional war. Creating havoc at high levels and killing money. They're going to hate us for generations even before we kick in doors so the go-to strategy is making sure anything they shoot at us is made of crap and the shooter is untrained.

 

[Phoenician_Viking]

How would people in this thread suggest we fight Al Qaeda? Let them come to us and just hope they don't slip through the cracks? Please I'd like to hear your alternatives.

It´s easy to find a solution but the hard to go through said solution. My solution would be

1- Stop backing all these dictatorship regimes who oppress and kill their own people, just so the US can protect its own interest.

2- Stop bombing what´s perceived as Muslim countries and educate the American public that Muslims like every other religion have its bad rotten members.

3- Use a big amount of money to educate Afghans and Pakistanis and broaden their minds.

4- The US should no longer support any corrupt regime, because these corrupt individuals are hated by the majority of their own populations and these corrupt individuals divulge in money and luxuries while their own people are poor, hungry and angry, for lack of opportunities and job options.

5- Back up an NGO that helps the people, and make sure they know that the US is helping the people.

Those are a very good start to make the hate very limited and the influence of the extremists and their arguments would be almost none existent.

 

[Hari Seldon]

Haven't there been questionable drone strikes since the Bill Clinton years?

Back when Bill Clinton was president, there was seriously agonizing discussions to send a fucking missiles to target Osama Bin Laden. Osama Bin Laden!!

Today we send drones after any poor bastard who has ever even held an AK.

 

[Zapages]

It´s easy to find a solution but the hard to go through said solution. My solution would be

1- Stop backing all these dictatorship regimes who oppress and kill their own people, just so the US can protect its own interest.

2- Stop bombing what´s perceived as Muslim countries and educate the American public that Muslims like every other religion have its bad rotten members.

3- Use a big amount of money to educate Afghans and Pakistanis and broaden their minds.

4- The US should no longer support any corrupt regime, because these corrupt individuals are hated by the majority of their own populations and these corrupt individuals divulge in money and luxuries while their own people are poor, hungry and angry, for lack of opportunities and job options.

5- Back up an NGO that helps the people, and make sure they know that the US is helping the people.

Those are a very good start to make the hate very limited and the influence of the extremists and their arguments would be almost none existent.

Agrees...

Help find a solution concerning Muslim concerns all around the world in a pragmatic fashion.

I.e.: Kashmir, Palestine,

Also stop supporting Saudi Arabia! Saudi Arabia is the source for the Al Qeada ideology!

 

[Razgriz-Specter]

It´s easy to find a solution but the hard to go through said solution. My solution would be

1- Stop backing all these dictatorship regimes who oppress and kill their own people, just so the US can protect its own interest.

2- Stop bombing what´s perceived as Muslim countries and educate the American public that Muslims like every other religion have its bad rotten members.

3- Use a big amount of money to educate Afghans and Pakistanis and broaden their minds.

4- The US should no longer support any corrupt regime, because these corrupt individuals are hated by the majority of their own populations and these corrupt individuals divulge in money and luxuries while their own people are poor, hungry and angry, for lack of opportunities and job options.

5- Back up an NGO that helps the people, and make sure they know that the US is helping the people.

Those are a very good start to make the hate very limited and the influence of the extremists and their arguments would be almost none existent.

So only attack caucasian enemies(& innocents)...
Other points id agree with but #2 is just dumb.

 

[Kurtofan]

Also stop supporting Saudi Arabia! Saudi Arabia is the source for the Al Qeada ideology!

unfortunately it's also the source of lots of oil.

 

[Vilix]

First responder doesn't always mean civ ambulance. .

You mean they could look like civilians who can't be told apart from taliban hiding in plain sight?

 

[Phoenician_Viking]

So only attack caucasian enemies(& innocents)...
Other points id agree with but #2 is just dumb.

What? No. I mean things like Libya which was not a threat to the US, drone attacks, and of course supporting Israel unconditionally. If any country attacks America regardless of race/religion etc.... America should retaliate. But the US should not start preemptive strike shit ever again.

 

[Hindle]

It´s easy to find a solution but the hard to go through said solution. My solution would be

1- Stop backing all these dictatorship regimes who oppress and kill their own people, just so the US can protect its own interest.

2- Stop bombing what´s perceived as Muslim countries and educate the American public that Muslims like every other religion have its bad rotten members.

3- Use a big amount of money to educate Afghans and Pakistanis and broaden their minds.

4- The US should no longer support any corrupt regime, because these corrupt individuals are hated by the majority of their own populations and these corrupt individuals divulge in money and luxuries while their own people are poor, hungry and angry, for lack of opportunities and job options.

5- Back up an NGO that helps the people, and make sure they know that the US is helping the people.

Those are a very good start to make the hate very limited and the influence of the extremists and their arguments would be almost none existent.

Trying to educate them would anger the extremists even more, they're very against it. A pointless waste of money and it would never work.

The dictatorships are often the lesser of two evils, as we're going to find out with Syria whenever Assad loses. You don't want these extremists in charge of a country.

The advancements on drone tech will lessen the civilian casualties, unless the extremeists activity use them as enemy shields.

 

[andycapps]

First of all, I spent my life studying history and archeology and making a living out of it, so to answer your question, yes I know most of these things.

I also know it was useless to end the war. And, if you want to talk about military justifications, how come no high officer of the US army was for the bombing to begin with?
Dwight D. Eisenhower, Douglas MacArthur, Carl A. Spaatz (US Air Force Chief of Staff), Chester Nimitz (Fleet Admiral and Commander in chief in the Pacific), admirals William Leahy and Ernest King, Carter Clarke (brigadier general of military intelligence), etc (I could go on).

All these men with the highest authority on the subject believed that it wasn't the right thing to do. The US government had reasons to drop these bombs, but they weren't military ones. You're fooling yourself if you believe that.
If you are a US citizen, maybe that's what they teach you in middle school in the US, I don't know. If so, then I don't blame you.

I was discussing war crimes. The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki have their place in such a discussion. Along with these drone strikes.
Also, may I remind you that I merely mentioned it in one of my sentence as an example. My intent wasn't to start a discussion about Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Dresden specifically. I was just responding to another gaffer. So if you don't want a discussion about it, don't drag me into one.

If we're going to talk about war crimes in World War 2, we could also talk about the Nanking Massacre. That pales in comparison to the 7.5 million Chinese civilians killed by the Japanese during WW2.

Not disputing that the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a horrible thing, or that it was justified by what the Japanese did. I'm glad it wasn't my call back then. Choice between millions of lives dying in a conventional ground and air assault, or a horrible nuclear attack.

 

[Alpha-Bromega]

Dropping missiles on them with drones does serve the purpose of keeping them disorganized and on the run which is part of the reason there have been no major terror attacks on US soil since 911.

i'm assuming you're trolling but this is false causality