• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

American, Italian Hostages Killed in CIA Drone Strike in January

sangha said:
Add let terrorists go about their "business" unhindered?
Click to expand...
joG said:
And then what? Do nothing and wait?
Click to expand...

If that what it means to you, then I guess. But when the negatives costs have shown to outweigh the benefits, and the legality is constantly questioned either 1.)it needs to be put on halt and completely reformed, or 2.)Needs to end for good.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
If that what it means to you, then I guess.
Click to expand...

I didn't say that's what it means to me. I asked if that's what you're proposing.

But when the negatives costs have shown to outweigh the benefits, and the legality is constantly questioned either 1.)it needs to be put on halt and completely reformed, or 2.)Needs to end for good.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I get that you want the drone program to end. But I asked if you think we should pursue terrorists via some alternative means and you still haven't responded to that question.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
If that what it means to you, then I guess. But when the negatives costs have shown to outweigh the benefits, and the legality is constantly questioned either 1.)it needs to be put on halt and completely reformed, or 2.)Needs to end for good.
Click to expand...

What legality issue? Like international law?
 
sangha said:
ANd conventional means result in even more "collateral damage"
Click to expand...

Takes just 1 preplanned Ops to go bad, and it can quite easily. Target may be in a populated town- well guarded, many enemy on the ground. Then from landing to the target has to be considered. Not all are like OBL landing in a large walled area, I would hazard a wild guess most are not.
So from landing, to move to the target. 1 person can sound an alarm. Then the target- killing, or extracting hostages.
Then they have to extract themselves.

I am sure many remember this one.
Battle of Mogadishu (1993) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Read more @: American, Italian Hostages Killed in CIA Drone Strike in January

Incredibly unfortunate. One of the major problems with our drone war program, incredibly difficult to verify who you are targeting, and confirming if the target was killed or who else was killed by the strike. RIP, and thoughts go out to the families.

[/FONT][/COLOR]
Click to expand...

The same. It's like fighting the Viet Cong all over again. The enemy rules the area by fear so our intelligence wavers.
 
CanadaJohn said:
Funny how the OP and the accompanying article place the blame at the feet of the CIA as opposed to the President who authorizes all of these drone strikes. If an American, just out doing their job or minding their own business, happens to kill a fellow American mistakenly or completely by accident, they're likely to be charged with negligent homicide or involuntary manslaughter. I guess being an irresponsible President gives you a get our of jail free card.
Click to expand...

Like the responsibility that Ronald Reagan took in '82 when 250 American servicemen were killed in one wack in Lebanon. Gee, I don't remember impeachment, involuntary manslaughter, negligent homicide, or any of that coming down on him. In fact, he was re elected. So, yeah, I guess being president DOES give you a get out of jail free card: isn't that so.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
If that what it means to you, then I guess. But when the negatives costs have shown to outweigh the benefits, and the legality is constantly questioned either 1.)it needs to be put on halt and completely reformed, or 2.)Needs to end for good.
Click to expand...

Forbid take a person prisoner, just kill them instead is the Obama formula. No one goes to Club Getmo, kill them instead and if innocent people including an American captive is killed so be it.
 
jet57 said:
Like the responsibility that Ronald Reagan took in '82 when 250 American servicemen were killed in one wack in Lebanon. Gee, I don't remember impeachment, involuntary manslaughter, negligent homicide, or any of that coming down on him. In fact, he was re elected. So, yeah, I guess being president DOES give you a get out of jail free card: isn't that so.
Click to expand...

President Obama is directly responsible for the deaths of the American and Italian hostages noted in the OP and the attached article - he gave the order. Perhaps you can enlighten my on what order President Reagan gave that directly resulted in 250 American servicemen being killed in Lebanon.
 
sangha said:
I didn't say that's what it means to me. I asked if that's what you're proposing.
Click to expand...
No.


Yeah, I get that you want the drone program to end. But I asked if you think we should pursue terrorists via some alternative means and you still haven't responded to that question.
Click to expand...
I think we need to end it completely. We should instead focus more efforts on aid, training, and diplomatic efforts with local leaders. As Malala said, "send books not drones, drones fuel terrorism".

"Retired military officials warn that drones and commando raids are no substitute for the difficult process of helping local leaders marginalize militants. Missile strikes that kill members of al Qaeda and its affiliates in Pakistan and Yemen do not strengthen economies, curb corruption or improve government services. David Barno, a retired lieutenant general who commanded U.S. forces in Afghanistan from 2003 to 2005, believes hunting down senior terrorists over and over again is not a long-term solution." How Obama’s drone war is backfiring
 
TheDemSocialist said:
No.



I think we need to end it completely. We should instead focus more efforts on aid, training, and diplomatic efforts with local leaders. As Malala said, "send books not drones, drones fuel terrorism".

"Retired military officials warn that drones and commando raids are no substitute for the difficult process of helping local leaders marginalize militants. Missile strikes that kill members of al Qaeda and its affiliates in Pakistan and Yemen do not strengthen economies, curb corruption or improve government services. David Barno, a retired lieutenant general who commanded U.S. forces in Afghanistan from 2003 to 2005, believes hunting down senior terrorists over and over again is not a long-term solution." How Obama’s drone war is backfiring
Click to expand...

Now *that's* an answer. Thank you

However, I think it's a bit naive.

The fact is that these terrorists are taking advantage of the conditions in areas that are hard to govern. We can win the sympathy of many of the residents, but they will still have to deal with groups of people who are armed and will not hesitate to use them if they even suspect the locals are undermining them.

Those areas need to be governed but Yemen, Pakistan, etc aren't about to do that because they can't. They don't have the resources or the will.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
No.



I think we need to end it completely. We should instead focus more efforts on aid, training, and diplomatic efforts with local leaders. As Malala said, "send books not drones, drones fuel terrorism".

"Retired military officials warn that drones and commando raids are no substitute for the difficult process of helping local leaders marginalize militants. Missile strikes that kill members of al Qaeda and its affiliates in Pakistan and Yemen do not strengthen economies, curb corruption or improve government services. David Barno, a retired lieutenant general who commanded U.S. forces in Afghanistan from 2003 to 2005, believes hunting down senior terrorists over and over again is not a long-term solution." How Obama’s drone war is backfiring
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting after 9-11 we should have sent books to the Taliban and AQ in Afghanistan to turn their ideology to not want to kill us.
 
sangha said:
Now *that's* an answer. Thank you

However, I think it's a bit naive.

The fact is that these terrorists are taking advantage of the conditions in areas that are hard to govern.
Click to expand...
They are. And they are taking advantage of our drone war as well.. How many "high value targets" has the US killed with drones? How many do we kill per year? The number is tiny. Hell in 2011 alone we only killed 2... "The number of “high-level” targets killed as a percentage of total casualties is extremely low—estimated at just 2%" Living Under Drones
"Together, these first two numbers present the reality of U.S. drone strikes as it is hardly every covered: for every high-level suspect in Pakistan, the U.S. military kills 49 other people who we know little to nothing about and at least three of those 49 are children." Four numbers that everyone needs to know about drone strikes | syracuse.com

We can win the sympathy of many of the residents,
Click to expand...
The thing is we are nowhere near winning sympathy with hardly anyone..
" In a 2011 Pew Research Center poll, 97 percent of Pakistani respondents who knew about the attacks said American drone strikes were a “bad thing.” Seventy-three percent of Pakistanis had an unfavorable view of the United States, a 10-percentage-point rise from 2008." How Obama’s drone war is backfiring


Those areas need to be governed but Yemen, Pakistan, etc aren't about to do that because they can't. They don't have the resources or the will.
Click to expand...
And people that can give them more resources instead are loosing support among the population
 
Montecresto said:
I'm sure Jesus would be an advocate of the predator drone program.
Click to expand...

In other words: "This discussion exceeds both my mental abilities and the strict boundaries of my ideology, so instead of actually being a part of a discussion, I'm just going spitball the smart people."
 
Luftwaffe said:
Pretty much. My first impression of the drone is reonassaince/surgical-striking.

And surgical strikes =\= assassination as far as I'm concerned.
Click to expand...

Hellfire missiles are a very interesting choice of weaponry for "surgical strikes."
 
Handled pretty appropriately, actually. No apologies by the administration needed. Appropriate condolences, but still have to drop the hammer on terrorists. And that they got the 2 American Al Qaida members...even if they claim that was a lucky accident? Bonus.
 
Phys251 said:
Hellfire missiles are a very interesting choice of weaponry for "surgical strikes."
Click to expand...

Then you don't know what a surgical strike is. The hellfire is one missile and it's only a hundred pounds. It's not some sort of nuke or MOAB-type device.
 
face said:
The responsibility lies solely with the terrorist scum who took them hostage.
Click to expand...

So its okay to kill hostages to get after the terrorists now? :roll:
 
CanadaJohn said:
Drones were initially designed as a war zone recognizance tool and, when armed, as a war zone weapon. This President has turned drones into vehicles of assassination outside of war zones. That's where the problem lies.
Click to expand...

Yeah it will quite possibly become a real massive problem if groups like ISIS ever develop weapons like that and deploy them in this country in response. Although futuristic, i don't think it's far fetched. I mean, the so-called intelligence agencies can't even protect the capital from a bigass jet, a gyrocopter, or a fat guy running right into the white house.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Read more @: American, Italian Hostages Killed in CIA Drone Strike in January

Incredibly unfortunate. One of the major problems with our drone war program, incredibly difficult to verify who you are targeting, and confirming if the target was killed or who else was killed by the strike. RIP, and thoughts go out to the families.

[/FONT][/COLOR]
Click to expand...

With our drone war? This wouldn't have been any different if it was a bomb dropped from a warplane--except that more people would likely have been killed. We had intelligence that Adam Gadahn & Ahmed Farouq, among others, were there and the President made the decision to strike. Whether from a Predator or an F-16 the outcome would have been the same. Don't try and turn this into more drone hysteria.

Incidentally Gadahn and Farouq were there and were killed along with an undisclosed number of senior militants.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom