{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Edited by Symmetry:
2/27/2013 6:03:27 PM
30
-
it is sad, and i dont agree with it but the [url=http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iUaMrNjdCeSmf_4__CYrSIe26SBg]US breaks International law[/url] all the time with those damn drone strikes.
-
The more often we use drones instead of people, the more often we cut down on accidents and civilian casualties. What would they prefer us to do? Send in tanks and footsoldiers?
-
i do not believe drone strikes 'cut down on accidents and civilian casualties'. [quote]The more often we use drones instead of people,...[/quote] drones are operated by a crew of people.
-
No shit? I thought they had a mind of their own. My point is that drone strikes are more calculated and precise than a person on the ground trying to accomplish the same task.
-
human error is the same no matter where it occurs.
-
Drones = fewer civilian casualties.
-
source from 2011. acknowledged that drones are supposed to help reduce civilian casualties. [url]http://livingunderdrones.org/numbers/[/url] just going to leave this here.
-
livingunderdrones.org? C'mon, man.
-
you are going to nit-pic a cite by it's name alone? not even read or check to see if it is accurate. you just like arguing for the sake of arguing. good night.
-
If you want to have a debate, you should use credible sources. I'm surprised you didn't cite Infowars...
-
How else do you propose we deal with people associated with terrorist organizations who refuse extradition? Just let them keep doing their thing? Also collateral damage is a thing. Secondly, Obama didn't murder anyone. He didn't pull the trigger, he just gave the order. If he's responsible for that death, he's responsible for every death in any military action since he took office.
-
Edited by Symmetry: 2/27/2013 5:49:51 PM[quote]How else do you propose we deal with people associated with terrorist organizations who refuse extradition? Just let them keep doing their thing? Also collateral damage is a thing.[/quote] How does that justify his murder? The only association he had with any terrorist organizations was his father. That's reason alone to murder an American citizen? He's obviously responsible for that death even though he didn't pull the trigger, he did give the order. Not only that, his administration justified his murder by saying he was 20 years old and part of whatever organization his father was in. It turns out he was 16 and was only the son of someone else who the U.S. deems an enemy. Leave the kid out of it.
-
Edited by halo: 2/27/2013 5:43:35 PMIt's funny how liberals think. If a conservative president did something like this, you guys would be all over it. Giving an order to kill a minor is wrong and you know it. You guys are all against death penalty but when something like this happens you don't suppose Obama should have just had this kid put in a high security prison. Don't let your liberal bias blind your judgement Max. You're obviously delusional.
-
I'm not a liberal, but I totally agree with Max here. When he said: [quote]How else do you propose we deal with people associated with terrorist organizations who refuse extradition? Just let them keep doing their thing? Also collateral damage is a thing.[/quote]This is a great question. There is no other way to deal with these terrorists, other than putting boots on the ground in either a full invasion or a special operation. Collateral damage happens, it's happened forever. It's an unfortunate thing in war. I'm not justifying the death of innocents, I'm just saying it happens. Now, for case of Abdulrahman (sp?), my question is: Why was he that close to the vicinity of the intended target (a senior member of AQAP, by the way)? But let's put this away, for now. I, and many other people, do not believe that this kid was the intended target. I believe he really was "in the wrong place, at the wrong time", but this leads back to the aforementioned question. Now, this is directed to the person who said: [quote]The only association he had with any terrorist organizations was his father.[/quote]His father was a senior leader of al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and was one of the key reasons why they are the number one threat to us. This isn't a justification of his sons' death, but rather, just some information on Anwar. His son, on the other hand, might have been completely and utterly innocent. Or he could have not been; being he was that close to another senior leader of the same group his father was a leader of. But let's assume he was innocent. This leads back to collateral damage. It happens. It's unfortunate, but there's really nothing we can do about it. When Max said: [quote]collateral damage and civilian deaths are minimized significantly.[/quote]He's not speaking out of his ass. I've already linked these once today, but it won't hurt to do it again. [url=http://www.longwarjournal.org/pakistan-strikes.php]Charts of drone strikes in Pakistan[/url] [url=http://www.longwarjournal.org/multimedia/Yemen/code/Yemen-strike.php]Charts of drone strikes in Yemen[/url] If you look closely, civilian causalities are significantly lower than that of terrorists killed. To the person who said this: [quote]The son of a terrorist group leader doesn't just happen to be the target of a drone strike meant to kill somebody else.[/quote]Okay. If we want to look at it this way, then please refer to my question of: Why was he that close to a senior commander of AQAP? To the person who said this: [quote]If they can go in there and kill them, what's so hard about going in and simply arresting this 16 year old?[/quote]They could have. Well, to avoid international debacles, the CIA could have. But they didn't. Why? This goes back to shit happens. The kid probably wasn't the intended target.
-
Thanks for not answering my question.
-
Edited by halo: 2/27/2013 5:44:32 PMThere, I answered it.
-
How do you propose we put him in a high security prison, when extradition is refused?
-
You're right man. I'm glad they killed that little 16 year old terrorist. Oh wait, he wasn't a terrorist nor was he a member of al Qaeda. He was an innocent American citizen targeted without due process, and he's underage, he was just a kid. I do not see any justification for this kid's death.
-
He was collateral damage. It happens. No military mission is perfect. With the advent of drones and other current military technology, collateral damage and civilian deaths are minimized significantly.
-
Edited by halo: 2/27/2013 6:00:11 PMWill you get off Obama's dick? I bet you liberal kids would be ALL over a republican president for this. Funny thing is, both sides are all over Obama for this. Obviously it wasn't just collateral damage. The son of a terrorist group leader doesn't just happen to be the target of a drone strike meant to kill somebody else. So your justification is, shit happens? lol
-
Because shit does happen.
-
Well shit did not just happen here.
-
Innocent person is murdered, stop trying to justify it.
-
But not intentionally. It's not like Obama's sitting in his chair saying "let's take out this teenager for no reason"
-
Manslaughter then. Still a fkin crime
