5 ms·

The statement that only 2% are high profile targets is kind of misleading. The vetting that goes into assessing whether military age males are actually doing ba

The statement that only 2% are high profile targets is kind of misleading. The vetting that goes into assessing whether military age males are actually doing bad things is surprisingly high. I am not saying mistakes were not made. Civilians and kids have died for sure, but the majority of those killed were combatants. Implying otherwise makes me doubt the veracity of the other claims here. Nifty visualization though.

berdario 10y ago
Is the vetting truly that high? http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/i-am-on-the-us-kill-list-this-is-what-it-feels-like-to-be-hunted-by-drones-a6980141.html http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/i-am-on-the-us-kill-list... From what you write, I understand that you mean mistakes in targeting/dropping bombs, but not mistakes in assessing/choosing the target themselves. Or do you mean otherwise?
- dforrestwilson1 10y ago
  http://www.npr.org/2012/06/06/154443665/how-the-president-decides-to-make-drone-strikes http://www.npr.org/2012/06/06/154443665/how-the-president-de...
3131s 10y ago
How do you know? Internal documents concerning a five month period of airstrikes in Afghanistan showed that around 90% of individuals killed were not the intended targets.
- dforrestwilson1 10y ago
  Look at my profile.
  - 3131s 10y ago
    What about it? The SSL certificate on your personal site is broken.
imron 10y ago
> but the majority of those killed were combatants I hope so because otherwise that makes the US a monster. > Civilians and kids have died for sure It makes you wonder though, about cause and effect. I mean, imagine if a foreign power had the capability to deploy drone strikes on US soil against people it saw as 'military combatants', and managed to kill them while they were attending weddings and the like, with some civilians and children regretfully caught in the crossfire. I don't imagine it would take long for large numbers of military age males to be willing to become combatants against such an enemy.
alva 10y ago
> military age males > Civilians Not mutually exclusive. > but the majority of those killed were combatants You mean all men aged between 16-49 regardless of who they are or what they do? Remember that the definition for a militant/combatant was changed due to the terribly high number of civilians killed by the US. What a disgusting thing to do. Ranks as one of the lowest points of the Nobel peace prize winning President https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/05/under-obama-men-killed-by-drones-are-presumed-to-be-terrorists/257749/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/05/under-o... https://www.salon.com/2012/05/29/militants_media_propaganda/ https://www.salon.com/2012/05/29/militants_media_propaganda/ http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/world/obamas-leadership-in-war-on-al-qaeda.html http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/world/obamas-leadership-in...
drinkjuice 10y ago
> The vetting that goes into assessing whether military age males are actually doing bad things is surprisingly high. No. Not just since the Vietnam War, but certainly since then, the US is beyond her eyes in blood. It's so thick you can even call it water and not blush. Amazing. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/18/life-as-a-drone-pilot-creech-air-force-base-nevada https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/18/life-as-a-dron...
belorn 10y ago
The leaked documents and statements from the military explicitly contradicts any claims of assessing whether military age males are actually a combatant. The leaked documents wrote that any male casualties between 18-49 were automatically classified as militants. And I personally suspect that the age verification is beyond anything scientific.

berdario 10y ago

Is the vetting truly that high? http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/i-am-on-the-us-kill-list-this-is-what-it-feels-like-to-be-hunted-by-drones-a6980141.html http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/i-am-on-the-us-kill-list... From what you write, I understand that you mean mistakes in targeting/dropping bombs, but not mistakes in assessing/choosing the target themselves. Or do you mean otherwise?

dforrestwilson1 10y ago
http://www.npr.org/2012/06/06/154443665/how-the-president-decides-to-make-drone-strikes http://www.npr.org/2012/06/06/154443665/how-the-president-de...

3131s 10y ago

How do you know? Internal documents concerning a five month period of airstrikes in Afghanistan showed that around 90% of individuals killed were not the intended targets.

dforrestwilson1 10y ago
Look at my profile.
- 3131s 10y ago
  What about it? The SSL certificate on your personal site is broken.

imron 10y ago

> but the majority of those killed were combatants I hope so because otherwise that makes the US a monster. > Civilians and kids have died for sure It makes you wonder though, about cause and effect. I mean, imagine if a foreign power had the capability to deploy drone strikes on US soil against people it saw as 'military combatants', and managed to kill them while they were attending weddings and the like, with some civilians and children regretfully caught in the crossfire. I don't imagine it would take long for large numbers of military age males to be willing to become combatants against such an enemy.

alva 10y ago

> military age males > Civilians Not mutually exclusive. > but the majority of those killed were combatants You mean all men aged between 16-49 regardless of who they are or what they do? Remember that the definition for a militant/combatant was changed due to the terribly high number of civilians killed by the US. What a disgusting thing to do. Ranks as one of the lowest points of the Nobel peace prize winning President https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/05/under-obama-men-killed-by-drones-are-presumed-to-be-terrorists/257749/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/05/under-o... https://www.salon.com/2012/05/29/militants_media_propaganda/ https://www.salon.com/2012/05/29/militants_media_propaganda/ http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/world/obamas-leadership-in-war-on-al-qaeda.html http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/world/obamas-leadership-in...

drinkjuice 10y ago

> The vetting that goes into assessing whether military age males are actually doing bad things is surprisingly high. No. Not just since the Vietnam War, but certainly since then, the US is beyond her eyes in blood. It's so thick you can even call it water and not blush. Amazing. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/18/life-as-a-drone-pilot-creech-air-force-base-nevada https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/18/life-as-a-dron...

belorn 10y ago

The leaked documents and statements from the military explicitly contradicts any claims of assessing whether military age males are actually a combatant. The leaked documents wrote that any male casualties between 18-49 were automatically classified as militants. And I personally suspect that the age verification is beyond anything scientific.