8 ms·
Yeah, the headline seems to imply it’s some new ‘big bad’ where the article just slowly exposes that it’s a non-explosive missile. Killing fewer people by not c
by t413 6y ago
Yeah, the headline seems to imply it’s some new ‘big bad’ where the article just slowly exposes that it’s a non-explosive missile. Killing fewer people by not combusting the surrounding area sounds like an improvement.
- danaos 6y agoAnd spending your valuable resources on developing such weapons shows that you're the good guy.
- sneak 6y agoMass murdering fewer people still makes you a mass murderer.
- Koshkin 6y agoKilling one's enemies does not necessarily make one a "murderer."
- approxim8ion 6y agoBy very definition it does.
- wongarsu 6y agoExtrajudicial targeted assassinations are pretty far on the bad side, no matter how few other people get killed in the process. Sure, if you are doing it, killing fewer bystanders is preferable on the surface. But if individual assassinations are less likely to cause an international outcry since fewer people died that likely leads to more assassinations.
- nine_k 6y agoIsn't the US is, like, at war in Syria? Wars being a terrible thing and all, one won't expect a speedy and fair trial on a battlefield.
- ben_w 6y agoI only leaned this a few days ago in another HN thread, but no, the USA has not declared war since 1942: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24567355 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24567355
- bdamm 6y agoThe US is not at war in Syria. ISIS is deemed to be a threat to stable governments in the area including Israel, Iraq, and even Turkey, and US is assisting those governments in fighting ISIS back. The seemingly endless civil war in Syria is still a civil war although US had at one point been supporting certain groups.
- nine_k 6y agoMy idea was that the US is fulfilling the ally obligations towards these governments. ISIS itself is not a recognized sovereign, so it cannot be declared a war to, thus no congressional approval.
- gwright 6y agoThe rise of non-state actors has definitely complicated public policy regarding the use of force. IANAL, but it seems like much of the legal frameworks around use of force, just war, etc. is predicated on Westphalian sovereignty, which doesn't really have a place for groups like ISIS, Al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, Iraqi militias, etc.
- Joker_vD 6y agoWith whom exactly? With Syria? Then why have the Congress never declared war on it? With some terrorists who happen to be in Syria? Then why is the US fighting them there, not the Syrian government? What's that? The Syrian government is actually fighting them too but demands the US forces to leave the Syrian territory, which demand the US ignores because why wouldn't it? It can't be declared to be engaging in a non-provoked aggression against a sovereign state since it has veto in the UNSC, after all.
- GekkePrutser 6y ago
- Pfhreak 6y agoDoesn't that line of reasoning presuppose you need to be firing missiles into crowded areas? Rather than develop those missiles, what could be achieved by investing those millions into developing economies and relationships abroad?
- plazmatic 6y agoYou're asking this while trump is president? Lol. Americans expecting a change in the middle-east then voting for republicans. Lol.
- throwaway0a5e 6y agoI think it's more along the lines of you can hit a car or a meeting without decimating everything nearby. It's the difference between sending an assassin and a suicide bomber.
- wongarsu 6y agoBut usually we despise both suicide bombers and assassins, not congratulate the assassin on killing so few bystanders. The question by GP is more along the line of "what if instead of spending lots of money to kill fewer bystanders we spent that money to reduce the number of people that are so dangerous to us that we kill them". Of course we know that won't happen because building weapons helps US companies and building hospitals and helping local people in foreign countries doesn't.
- SubiculumCode 6y agoUsually because it costs more to do so. Many times the local governments are corrupt, and U.S. money gets funneled to terrorist organizations or just pocketed, never actually helping the populace have better lives..
- pas 6y agoGo ahead, build a hospital in Assad's backyard, no biggie. Or just build a hospital somewhere and watch as it gets captured/used by the regional dictator. Yes, wars are bad. Yes, if it were that easy to export peace and prosperity we wouldn't be talking about it, but the reality is that there are power structures that consider their selfish short term goals more important than the lives of many-many of their fellow humans. (Eg. Putin, Xi, Assad, etc.)
- aww_dang 6y agoFlying swords which cut through the roof of a SUV probably give the targeted individuals something to ponder. https://www.quotes.net/mquote/992742 https://www.quotes.net/mquote/992742 "Paul Kersey: Nothing's too good for our friends!"