3 ms·
> Blowing up semi-random farmers on the other side of the world This crude propaganda cliche doesn't offer anything for the discussion. If you take an emotiona
by golergka 8y ago
> Blowing up semi-random farmers on the other side of the world
This crude propaganda cliche doesn't offer anything for the discussion. If you take an emotional snapshot of a complex situation and assume that's the whole truth of a situation you almost always are pretty far from the truth - even if in some subset of reality this snapshot is true.
- mrguyorama 8y agoHow many of the 3000[0] "terrorists" that Obama ordered blown up (accruing about 400 civilian casualties in the process) had actual plans and setups in place to make the trip to America and kill someone? My right wing uncle with his gun collection is a bigger threat to the American people. Why did those 400 innocent people die? [0] https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2016/01/12/reflecting-on-obamas-presidency/obamas-embrace-of-drone-strikes-will-be-a-lasting-legacy https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2016/01/12/reflecting-...
- golergka 8y ago> How many of the 3000[0] "terrorists" that Obama ordered blown up (accruing about 400 civilian casualties in the process) had actual plans and setups in place to make the trip to America and kill someone? This is a relevant question, but not precise enough. What I would be interested instead, is, what's the total mean and variance of american lifes saved in all those operations? And more importantly, what other hypothetical possible combinations of these variables (civilians killed, combatants killed, unuidentified casualties, mean and variance of americans saved) we could have if different decisions have been made - i.e. what's the whole problem space? Of course, this data is impossible to get and hard to estimate, but this is much closer to the real dilemma at hand.