Page 7 of 24 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 239

Thread: US drone strikes may break international law: UN

  1. #61
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: US drone strikes may break international law: UN

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    No. You're already confused.

    You think people dead by RPV are more important than if they were killed by an F-18.

    Explain how the technology makes any difference to the bleeding dying terrorists on the ground.
    I'm not holding your hand. If you can't read what I write, and only take one sentence out to respond to; that's your intellectual sloppiness and lack of integrity at work; not mine. Your faults are not my problem.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  2. #62
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: US drone strikes may break international law: UN

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    I though civilian casualty was of little concern?
    THEIR civillian casualties aren't my concern.

    Welcome to the real world. They started a war, we should make sure they never ever have a chance to start another.

    By killing them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    The Declaration of War has many benefits to supersede treaty and some amount of international law. Functional and legal definitions are different.
    Functionally, both situations wind up with dead civillians, aka terrorists.

    Since Afghanistan started the war, what's the problem?

    Ain't none.

    Now, back to the real matter.

    Assume a strike succeeds in killing a dozen on the ground.

    What difference does it make if we use an F-18, a Predator, or a B-52 to make the strike?

    Correct Answer: No difference whatsoever.

    Do you have the integrity to admit this, or not?

  3. #63
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: US drone strikes may break international law: UN

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    I'm not holding your hand.
    Eww, you can bet your ass you ain't.

    When I'm leading someone around by the nose, I don't expect that nose to grip back.

  4. #64
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,274

    Re: US drone strikes may break international law: UN

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    It's not all we do, but we certainly do it.

    Do you believe it possible to kill legitimate terror targets AQ, or Taliban without collateral civilian death in war? And if so, could you point to a time in history, or any other conflict where this is been born out?


    The contention is that the use of unmanned drones has caused significant civilian casualty, not that the base use of them is wrong or illegal.

    Who's contention? The UN's? Pakistans? The enemy themselves?


    I mean, you can ignore reality if you want.

    I don't try to, but if you think that fighting these terrorists that hide among innocents can be taken out without civilians that they hide amongst being harmed, then it is not I ignoring reality sir.


    Think we're getting all the nasty terrorists and nothing more. But that sort of head in the sand attitude isn't going to fix the problem.

    I don't believe I am displaying that....What an odd disconnect here.


    Especially when significant civilian death leads to exacerbating the anti-American attitudes of entire groups of people.

    I see, so if we all just play nice and beg we will get further? is that right?


    Attitudes which are used as propaganda for terrorists. But whatever. There are no negative consequences for our actions....ever. Got it.


    Tell me how would those negotiations go? How would they look? And I never said that actions come consequence free. That is hyperbole disseminated by you, and you alone.


    j-mac
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  5. #65
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: US drone strikes may break international law: UN

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    We have to adhere to more international law and treaty without the formal declaration.
    Ah, so what you're saying is that if we get punched in the nose, we have to tell the nation that punched us..."well, get ready, we're going to punch you back", and then we can abrogate any treaty we want and it'll be "legal" under international law, but if we just beat the living **** out of them without those magic words we're the criminal agressor?

  6. #66
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: US drone strikes may break international law: UN

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    THEIR civillian casualties aren't my concern.
    Then you lied when you said you got your morality from having served in the US military.

    Welcome to the real world. They started a war, we should make sure they never ever have a chance to start another.
    All this did was prove the lack of depth of your knowledge of this issue. There really isn't much more help for you until you go back and learn your history.

  7. #67
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: US drone strikes may break international law: UN

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Or a suicide vest.

    It's not that we can fully avoid civilian causality, it's how caviler we're going to be about it. Do we just say "**** it" and glass the entire region?
    Works for me.

    That's worth a single American life.

  8. #68
    Sage
    Renae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    San Antonio Texas
    Last Seen
    10-23-17 @ 10:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    38,972
    Blog Entries
    15

    Re: US drone strikes may break international law: UN

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    Your tune would changed if it was your family killed and labeled collateral damage.
    Oh, EMOTIONAL APPEAL MOMENT!

    No, if it was a war it would be... war. I wouldn't whine to the UN and demand laws change. God you people are so... goofy I swear you live in an alternate reality.
    Climate, changes. It takes a particularly uneducated population to buy into the idea that it's their fault climate is changing and further political solutions can fix it.



  9. #69
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    In your dreams...
    Last Seen
    05-29-12 @ 02:53 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,621

    Re: US drone strikes may break international law: UN

    Kill enough little brown people and the UN comes along.

    What a bunch of party poopers. Cant they tell were involved in a war against a portion of the indigenous population here?

  10. #70
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: US drone strikes may break international law: UN

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Functionally, both situations wind up with dead civillians, aka terrorists.

    Since Afghanistan started the war, what's the problem?

    Ain't none.

    Now, back to the real matter.

    Assume a strike succeeds in killing a dozen on the ground.

    What difference does it make if we use an F-18, a Predator, or a B-52 to make the strike?

    Correct Answer: No difference whatsoever.

    Do you have the integrity to admit this, or not?
    You're trying to redefine the argument. I already stated. The difference isn't that you take out 15 people with a drone, a F-18, a Predator, or any other weapon of war. The argument seems to be based in that you're getting more than that 15 and hardly any of them are actual terrorists.

    You may want to say a terrorist is a civilian, fine. But not all civilians are terrorists and in your nonchalant treatment of this you are condemning many innocent people to death.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

Page 7 of 24 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •