[DuePew]

Fascinating and thought provoking article on the CIA's predator campaign in Pakistan.
Eye-opening statistic? More predator attacks have been conducted by Obama in his 11 months than the entire presidency of George Bush.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/04/wo...l?pagewanted=1

[SeLvesTr]

Fascinating and thought provoking article on the CIA's predator campaign in Pakistan.
Eye-opening statistic? More predator attacks have been conducted by Obama in his 11 months than the entire presidency of George Bush.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/04/wo...l?pagewanted=1

I've read that a good number of the population in the areas controlled by the Taliban were tired of being under their thumb and were not only giving info about their locations but also helping in the fight. Nothing is ever 100%. The prior administration gave Pakistan billions and did little to halt the spread of areas under Taliban control. With the real possibility of the Taliban gaining control of the nuclear weapons Obama and Clinton laid down the law and the Pakistan army started to push back. I'm sure there are some negatives to the use of drones but on balance as the article said they have the Taliban in disarray. With our troops across the border they are between that famous rock and a hard place. The civilians in the areas where the fighting has been heavy fled and those who remained took their chances, it's war.

We are also trying ease tensions between Pakistan and India which distracts Pakistan from the job at hand.

I still wonder out loud what the hell Bush had in mind to just let Al Qaeda and the Taliban fester without any real attempt to kill them for seven plus years.
Wasn't the idea from day one to get the people who attacked us on 9/11 ?

The question as to whether or not Obama would be tough has been answered.

[DuePew]

I still wonder out loud what the hell Bush had in mind to just let Al Qaeda and the Taliban fester without any real attempt to kill them for seven plus years.
Wasn't the idea from day one to get the people who attacked us on 9/11 ?

Agreed. It boggles my mind that it took this country 8 years to figure out that a comprehensive multi-dimensional strategy was necessary to combat Al Qaeda-and that Iraq had nothing to do with it.

Too many people in this country are so ignorant they thought that as long as we are bombing somebody (hint: Iraq) that we were being effective against Al Qaeda.

The question as to whether or not Obama would be tough has been answered. Agreed. The first US president ever to be completely focused on Al Qaeda and Bin Laden.

[SeLvesTr]

Just now on CNN. A source says that Osama fled Pakistan and moved back to Afghanistan because of the drone attacks. Very interesting if true. It was said that Osama is in Ghazni province.

Bin Laden not in Pakistan, PM says - CNN.com

It also has been speculated that Pakistan may be behind this to cover their ass for not capturing Osama.

[Forex Autopilot]

There is one aspect regarding the drones that doesn't get repeated often and that is that the combatant flying the drone is in the USA which makes the site where the combatant is located a legitimate target.

The drones seem successful and I think they should be used. But I have a moral problem with a combatant that can wage war without risk to his/her own life.

[usacomm]

That's a good point. I see potential problems with it as well. But, in all, I think the Bush Administration did a good job in fully developing the MQ-1 concept. There were 125 of them as of September 2007, with an order for 36 more. It's a well-designed, economical aircraft.

[gundorana]

There is one aspect regarding the drones that doesn't get repeated often and that is that the combatant flying the drone is in the USA which makes the site where the combatant is located a legitimate target.

The drones seem successful and I think they should be used. But I have a moral problem with a combatant that can wage war without risk to his/her own life.

Anytime I think of the drone, I think of Eagle Eye:





The Artificial Intelligence that the government made to predict and create war plans to protect the US....Which then sees the government leaders as a enemy after they override its control of a Drone in Afghanistan and decides to kill them all at a holiday event...

[flopay]

I never heared Obama say he inherited such a hi-tec wepon from President Bush,
I wonder why????

[GAGNAPPEAPH]

I never heared Obama say he inherited such a hi-tec wepon from President Bush,
I wonder why????

I didn't know sitting presidents were supposed to ass-kiss previous ones.


Did GBW kneel in front of Clinton's crotch and thank him personally for the Welfare Reform Act?

[gundorana]

And the Drone was in development BEFORE Bush


MQ-1 Predator - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


In 2000 a joint CIA-Pentagon effort was agreed to locate Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan. Dubbed "Afghan Eyes", it involved a projected 60-day trial run of Predators over the country. The first experimental flight was held on 7 September 2000. White House security chief Richard A. Clarke was impressed by the resulting video footage; he hoped that the drones might eventually be used to target Bin Laden with cruise missiles or armed aircraft. Clarke's enthusiasm was matched by that of Cofer Black, head of the CIA's Counterterrorist Center (CTC), and Charles Allen, in charge of the CIA's intelligence-collection operations. The three men backed an immediate trial run of reconnaissance flights. Ten out of the ensuing 15 Predator missions over Afghanistan were rated successful. On at least two flights, a Predator spotted a tall man in white robes at bin Laden's Tarnak Farm compound outside Kandahar; the figure was subsequently deemed to be "probably bin Laden".[25] By October 2000, deteriorating weather conditions made it difficult for the Predator to fly from its base in Uzbekistan, and the flights were suspended

[usacomm]

So was the Community Reinvestment Act. If we're going to blame/credit Bush, at least do it right.

That said, the MQ-1 didn't really didn't "come of age" until Afghanistan. It demonstrated itself to be an effective vehicle.

[GAGNAPPEAPH]

The terrorists can still get into this country just like they could under the Bush Admin.

All they have to do is arrive at customs looking like NASCAR fans.

[usacomm]

Or be any race, since we can't profile anymore.

[Forex Autopilot]

Or be any race, since we can't profile anymore.

No profiling, but anyone can be randomly searched, with or without reason.

[SeelaypeKet]

There is one aspect regarding the drones that doesn't get repeated often and that is that the combatant flying the drone is in the USA which makes the site where the combatant is located a legitimate target.

The drones seem successful and I think they should be used. But I have a moral problem with a combatant that can wage war without risk to his/her own life.

I don't exactly expect accuracy from you when it comes to these issues, but people should know that those drones fly out of Baluchistan and from places within Afghanistan ... and that it takes a whole contingent of brave US soldiers to operate them. All of those guys are in harms way, every day.

Your argument = EPIC FAIL.

[Forex Autopilot]

I don't exactly expect accuracy from you when it comes to these issues, but people should know that those drones fly out of Baluchistan and from places within Afghanistan ... and that it takes a whole contingent of brave US soldiers to operate them. All of those guys are in harms way, every day.

Your argument = EPIC FAIL.

Apparently you should be better informed as to WHO actually flies the drones. While support staff and the drones are in Afghanistan the pilot/combatant is usually in this country which is the United States of America. I added that because someone might be confused.

[SeelaypeKet]

Apparently you should be better informed as to WHO actually flies the drones. While support staff and the drones are in Afghanistan the pilot/combatant is usually in this country which is the United States of America. I added that because someone might be confused.

1) They are not always piloted from the United States.
2) American servicemen place themselves in the thick of things to keep the drones operational in the skies above Afghanistan and Pakistan.

You suggested that using drones was somehow "unfair" because no American lives are at stake while these things are in the air. That's not true at all and you're silly for suggesting it.

You're also silly for suggesting that war should be fair or somehow sporting.

[Forex Autopilot]

1) They are not always piloted from the United States.
2) American servicemen place themselves in the thick of things to keep the drones operational in the skies above Afghanistan and Pakistan.

You suggested that using drones was somehow "unfair" because no American lives are at stake while these things are in the air. That's not true at all and you're silly for suggesting it.

You're also silly for suggesting that war should be fair or somehow sporting.

Every news report I have read, seen, and heard said the drones were piloted from the US. If you have different information please present it. Of course then can be flown from anywhere, and the pilot is at risk from an attack in a general sense.

I have never suggested that war be "fair", I raised a moral issue of a battle where one combatant is able to kill without risk. As to the support staff they put themselves at risk and there was never a question about that. However, the actually killing is done by the pilot of the drone. When the pilot encages the enemy he/himself is not at risk from his direct actions as a soldier on the ground would be.

However, if fairness is an issue for you then I suppose you would say that an attack the location of the pilot in the US is fair?

[Flefebleaft]

Every news report I have read, seen, and heard said the drones were piloted from the US. If you have different information please present it. Of course then can be flown from anywhere, and the pilot is at risk from an attack in a general sense.

I have never suggested that war be "fair", I raised a moral issue of a battle where one combatant is able to kill without risk. As to the support staff they put themselves at risk and there was never a question about that. However, the actually killing is done by the pilot of the drone. When the pilot encages the enemy he/himself is not at risk from his direct actions as a soldier on the ground would be.

However, if fairness is an issue for you then I suppose you would say that an attack the location of the pilot in the US is fair?

What morality are you speaking of where military leaders are obligated to expose their personnel to the same risk as their enemies? Sun Tzu you ain't, Colin. Heck, Manuel de Landa you ain't either. It seems you're naively alluding to some sort of schoolyard "fair fight" principle, which is a principle that doesn't even apply in the actual schoolyard, just highly regulated professional sports.

Generals are no longer morally obligated to personally lead charges sword drawn into the enemy breach (if they ever did in the first place). Your argument really is applicable to every single advance in military technology. Machine guns, poison gas, aerial bombardment, heck even armor and bows and arrows were designed to minimize the risk of one side and maximize the disadvantage of its enemy.* If that's the ground you're trying to claim, you should just simplify your case and claim war itself is immoral. We can appreciate your principle and move on with the fact that wars nevertheless take place and can be subject to more nuanced debates besides the kneejerk "this is immoral!".

*Drones are also cheaper and more logistically flexible than manned attack aircraft. The costs of war are a joint metric, that's why we refer to blood and treasure. Yes, some calculation is made about the impact on the other side, but war leaders are foremost responsible to its own side, usually at great expense to the other.

I agree that, as articulated, your point is silly.

[SeLvesTr]

I read some time ago that when the machine gun was introduced that it made killing impersonal. I think as least some of our drones are guided from Nevada. As long as they are not being used on us, I like them.