• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

What do you think about drone strikes?

Your opinion on drone strikes?

  • I (rather) approve of them

  • I (rather) object to them


Results are only viewable after voting.

boxleitnerb

Platinum Member
Nov 1, 2011
2,597
1
81
I was reading up on the topic and that it most likely won't make a difference if Obama or Romney wins - both would continue (and intensify?) the drone strikes against suspected terrorists in other countries. I don't mean drone strikes in general, like in a "real" war.

What do you think about them? Do you approve of them or are you against them?

Now I fear that I won't make friends with this statement, but I want to be honest. Personally I think of them as acts of terrorism.
 
Last edited:

Nintendesert

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2010
7,761
5
0
Good for you. Just wait until we put some missiles on satellites and they linger over countries 24/7 ready to smite down the enemies of our beloved United States.
 

bfdd

Lifer
Feb 3, 2007
13,312
1
0
I'm not against drones really, I'm against our current implementation and usage of drones though. With this stance is there any option in this poll I can choose?
 

lotus503

Diamond Member
Feb 12, 2005
6,502
1
76
I'm not against drones really, I'm against our current implementation and usage of drones though. With this stance is there any option in this poll I can choose?
I agree, I think they are awesome, just think who, how and why they are being used sucks ass.
 

pauldun170

Diamond Member
Sep 26, 2011
7,573
2,957
136
I think unions are past their prime and while I support the ability to collectively bargain I generally do not support strikes.
So no, I do not support Drone strikes.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
28,624
8,748
136
I'll give an honest response. On the face of it I'm for them and anything that minimizes US casualties, however the questions I have are; are they affective? Is the civilian casualty rate higher than it would have been otherwise?
 

ichy

Diamond Member
Oct 5, 2006
6,940
6
81
I'm all for them. What exactly would you suggest as an alternative? Letting terrorists operate freely in Pakistan? Invading yet another backward-ass shithole of a country instead? The real solution to terrorism is to get out of Afghanistan and close our borders to people from Muslim countries, but as long as we're stuck in A-stan we should do everything possible to win.
 

boxleitnerb

Platinum Member
Nov 1, 2011
2,597
1
81
I'm not against drones really, I'm against our current implementation and usage of drones though. With this stance is there any option in this poll I can choose?
The poll is about the current state, how they are used right now. I've edited the OP to clarify.

I'm all for them. What exactly would you suggest as an alternative? Letting terrorists operate freely in Pakistan? Invading yet another backward-ass shithole of a country instead? The real solution to terrorism is to get out of Afghanistan and close our borders to people from Muslim countries, but as long as we're stuck in A-stan we should do everything possible to win.
Problem is, the civilian casualties only drive more people to become extremists. You kill one, you create one (or several ones) basically. Then there is the question about who defines what a "terrorist" is? It's a matter of perspective I guess and the lack of what we would call "state structures" or "state control" in countries like Jemen or Pakistan with tribal traditions makes matters only more complicated. If I were to live in a country that was being invaded or attacked and I would resist the attackers, I wouldn't call myself a terrorist but a resistance or freedom fighter. Now if I were to run around with an explosive belt, trying to kill people who believe in different things than I, that would be something else altogether. You see, "terrorist" != "terrorist". It's easy to put people you don't like all in the same basket and just try to kill them all, but I believe that is a big big part of the problem.
 
Last edited:

Juddog

Diamond Member
Dec 11, 2006
7,851
1
76
It's a complicated subject, but in short, I believe that if it can save a lot of american lives that it's worth it. War has always been an ugly business, and if there are people out there willing to kill 10 people while wearing a suicide bomb, then we just have to fight fire with fire and have a drone kill them from a distance.

It definitely opens a can of worms though, because once other nations start getting their hands on this type of technology, what's to stop them from doing the same to us, or our leaders? It reminds me of a way of the nuclear bomb; once the technology has presented itself then there is no way to go back on it. Targeted killing, mass killing, both are scary but targeted killing reduces the number of civilian casualties.
 

davmat787

Diamond Member
Nov 30, 2010
5,514
24
76
Depends on the target and level of collateral damage. If a drone strike can take out a meeting of terrist masterminds without hurting anyone else while not placing any US personnel in harms way, then great. But when you hear about a wedding party getting taken out, not so great.

Drone strikes are just the next iteration of war technology, as always it comes down to how it is applied.
 

lotus503

Diamond Member
Feb 12, 2005
6,502
1
76
Depends on the target and level of collateral damage. If a drone strike can take out a meeting of terrist masterminds without hurting anyone else while not placing any US personnel in harms way, then great. But when you hear about a wedding party getting taken out, not so great.

Drone strikes are just the next iteration of war technology, as always it comes down to how it is applied.
Totally agree

Oh BTW, Vote yes on 502!
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,652
199
101
Drones are a great way to minimize risk to our troops when killing the bad guys. We should be judicious in our use of drone attacks given the potential problems their use could cause, but they are an excellent tool to keep our folks out of harms way while killing bad guys.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
Drone strikes are already targeted against those that are attempting to kill/attack us.

Safer for us than sending people to target the target.

Those that become colateral damage are not that innocent; Pissing off the hornet nest has already happened; now it is a matter of nailing each of those pests when they are discovered.
 

ichy

Diamond Member
Oct 5, 2006
6,940
6
81
Problem is, the civilian casualties only drive more people to become extremists. You kill one, you create one (or several ones) basically.
Oh please. Those barbarians hated the US long before we had troops in Afghanistan and they're going to continue to hate us long after we're gone. They're a bunch of neanderthals who are stuck in the dark ages and the only good way to deal with them is to cut all contact and interaction. Get our people out of that hell hole of a region, ban all Pakistanis and Afghans from entering the US and let them go back to their time honored tradition of slaughtering each other.
 

lotus503

Diamond Member
Feb 12, 2005
6,502
1
76
Drone strikes are already targeted against those that are attempting to kill/attack us.

Safer for us than sending people to target the target.

Those that become colateral damage are not that innocent; Pissing off the hornet nest has already happened; now it is a matter of nailing each of those pests when they are discovered.
"Those that become colateral damage are not that innocent"?

Yeah because fucking children yeah guilty by association right?

pfffft
 

ichy

Diamond Member
Oct 5, 2006
6,940
6
81
"Those that become colateral damage are not that innocent"?

Yeah because fucking children yeah guilty by association right?

pfffft
Hundreds of Pakistanis are killed by other Pakistanis for every one killed in drone strikes. The damage we do is a rounding error compared to the Pakistani Taliban's trail of destruction. If you know a way to fight a war without collateral damage then by all means, pipe up.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
28,624
8,748
136
Oh please. Those barbarians hated the US long before we had troops in Afghanistan and they're going to continue to hate us long after we're gone. They're a bunch of neanderthals who are stuck in the dark ages and the only good way to deal with them is to cut all contact and interaction. Get our people out of that hell hole of a region, ban all Pakistanis and Afghans from entering the US and let them go back to their time honored tradition of slaughtering each other.
Thats some extremely small and ignorant thinking. In countries like those were outside information is scarce they form their opinions based on experience. If their experience says the US killed innocent people they grew up with then they are more susceptible to agreeing with viewpoints of terrorist.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
"Those that become colateral damage are not that innocent"?

Yeah because fucking children yeah guilty by association right?

pfffft
your targets are hiding among the children. they care not for the welfare of the child.

your attitudes encourages such and lead them to believe that we are weak.

you fight the enemy on their terms; you are sure to loose.

They have no value of a childs life unless it is their own.
Look at the number of children that they choose to kill to make a political statement.
 

Agent11

Diamond Member
Jan 22, 2006
3,535
1
0
Pakistan is a pretty fucked up place irregardless.

Unless some one cracks down on their tribal hinterland and civilizes it, which would involve hundreds hundreds of thousands to millions of troops on the ground to do correctly, the drones seem like a good a good balance of cost to performance.
 

boxleitnerb

Platinum Member
Nov 1, 2011
2,597
1
81
Oh please. Those barbarians hated the US long before we had troops in Afghanistan and they're going to continue to hate us long after we're gone. They're a bunch of neanderthals who are stuck in the dark ages and the only good way to deal with them is to cut all contact and interaction. Get our people out of that hell hole of a region, ban all Pakistanis and Afghans from entering the US and let them go back to their time honored tradition of slaughtering each other.
I believe that terrorist don't just exist for "fun", they are created. The roots for most anti-US sentiments are actual problems and perceived injustice/interference in other peoples affairs.

So while I agree that resentment and hate toward the US has existed before Afghanistan/Iraq, the drone strikes are not helping but make things worse. Maybe one should look at the underlying problems and questions instead of fighting the symptoms.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY