The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The drone 'war' > Comments

The drone 'war' : Comments

By Michael Giannopoulos, published 21/12/2009

The drones used by the US military in Pakistan kill more civilians than militants.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. All
Drones and who profits from war is timely.

Also is debating the relationship between General Atomics and Labor
governments, e.g. Premier Rann and Deputy Foley and uranium mining and the drone war.

See my blog http://chriswhiteonline.org ...go to Rann.

It is a question of public policy and sustainable social and ecological
development.

Chris White Canberra
Posted by Chris White, Monday, 21 December 2009 12:17:09 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
When soldiers don't wear a uniform then that is when civilians get killed.
By merging with civilians as viewed from a drone or directly
the civilians are at risk.
Posted by Bazz, Monday, 21 December 2009 1:27:23 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Drones, mines - what is the difference? Drones aren't popular because of some conspiracy. They are popular because they are relatively cheap compared to the fighters/bombers they replace and it is impossible to get yourself killed while flying a drone.

Mines are the same. They be very inefficient but they are cheap and near riskless to deploy. Because of this they are used despite the fact that they kill far more civilians than enemy combatants. They are banned for the same reasons of course. But there is fat chance of such a ban working in all but the most politely conducted war. Ditto for drones - another similarity.

The one hope is drones will get better at killing the people they are supposed to kill. Well it is a possibility anyway. But secondly thoughts, perhaps a highly efficient, dirt cheap, completely automated killing machine is such a wonderful idea.

Maybe it isn't possible to have nice thoughts about drones after all. So back the original conspiracy theories in the article. They are just junk. Or at least they had better be, because next year the US will spend 25% or its air force equipment budget on buying them. That is one hell of a lot of drones.
Posted by rstuart, Monday, 21 December 2009 2:06:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The author seems to suggest that the US is randomly killing people in the hope of eliminating a few Taliban leaders. The so-called strike rate of 2% is complete conjecture in his part based on information coming from areas of strong Taliban support. As in the middle east, reports of civilian casualties are often grossly exaggerated by the enemy in an effort to win the media propaganda war by causing unease amongst the general public in the West. The author seems naive enough to believe this information without question yet distrustful of that coming from the US military. His bias is clear and he has therefore lost his ability to look at the situation dispassionately.
Posted by Atman, Monday, 21 December 2009 8:02:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What no one seems to pick up on is that if you kill a Taliban you kill
a civilian.
To turn the killing of a group of Taliban into a photo opportunity
of the killing of civilians all you have to do is remove the weapons.

If real civilians get killed they should not have stayed near Taliban.
This is what happens when the Taliban do not wear uniforms.

Why on earth do you think uniforms are worn ?
Posted by Bazz, Tuesday, 22 December 2009 7:17:22 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This article presents quite a contrast with Hollywood's propagandist version of the 'drone war', which is surgically precise and with no collateral damage. For 60 years the Americans have been highly skilled at bombing foreigners "into the Stone Age", it's sometimes ineffective,counterproductive and criminal,however,they don't seem to care.
Posted by mac, Wednesday, 23 December 2009 7:50:30 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Good article Michael Giannopoulos, but it is undermined by it's implicit acceptance of the given justification for the attacks, that is, to destroy a group known as Al Qaeda, which is held to be responsible for 9/11, 7/7, Bali et al.

That is a lie.

Whatever the targets may or may not be guilty of in Afghanistan or Pakistan, they clearly had nothing to do with the abovelisted false flag terroist attacks.

Fro more information, please visit 9/11 Truth Forum at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/compose-message-general.asp?discussion=2166&page=0 http://911truth.org http://ae911truth.org and many other sites.
Posted by daggett, Wednesday, 23 December 2009 2:30:26 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy