3 ms·

1. In the State of Nevada, around Area 51, there are signs reading: "Use of deadly force authorized". I'm not aware of anyone who has ever been killed by trespa

1. In the State of Nevada, around Area 51, there are signs reading: "Use of deadly force authorized". I'm not aware of anyone who has ever been killed by trespassing into Area 51, but the government has given itself that option and made it public. I don't see why a similar policy couldn't be enacted regarding unauthorized drone flybys of military ships. 2. If the theory that these drones are the work of an adversarial nation state is correct, then shooting down the drones would not provoke an ostensible reaction from said government. China (or whoever is behind them) telling the world that the US "illegally" destroyed their drones would blow the cover on these mysterious drone incidents and legitimize the destruction of every other drone observed displaying the same behavior in the future. 3. Other countries, and you know which countries I'm talking about (China, Russia, Iran, North Korea) have no qualms about provoking international incidents. Shooting down suspicious drones near US waters would be returning the favor. Iran destroyed a US Navy drone in the Persian Gulf a few years ago. "People sleep soundly at night because rough men stand ready to visit violence on those who would do us harm."

julius_deane 4y ago
these ships were not in nevada
renewiltord 4y ago
US government will tax you in Nevada. Haven't yet seen them tax you on the high seas. Actually, why doesn't the US Government just put up "No Entry" signs in Xinjiang? Could probably prevent oppression.
- astrange 4y ago
  US income tax applies to your income worldwide as long as you're a citizen. There's tax equalization treaties with some other countries, but not on the sea.
  - renewiltord 4y ago
    They should just pass a law to tax everyone on the sea. Imagine how much money they could make. Just like foreigners in Nevada have to pay tax.
jltsiren 4y ago
What happens in Nevada is a domestic matter. Other countries don't care about it, and the US government can plausibly claim it has a legal basis for its actions. There are no such things as "unauthorized" flybys in international waters. There are no laws or international customs against approaching foreign warships, as long as that does not endanger the ship. How the warship chooses to respond is a matter of foreign policy and best left to civilians. Escalation often leads to further escalation. There is a similar situation in the South China Sea, where China claims sovereignty over some areas. The US disagrees and frequently patrols the area. If the US shoots down a Chinese drone in international waters, China may consider that shooting at an American plane or a warship there would be a proportional response. That could turn very bad very quickly. Unless the US deliberately wants to escalate, it may be a better policy to ignore Chinese provocations with drones.
- gorgoiler 4y ago
  Killing someone, in exchange for shooting down a robot, would be an escalation not a proportionate response.
  - jltsiren 4y ago
    You are looking at this from the American perspective, when you should look at it from the Chinese perspective. Killing someone who is trying to invade territory you claim sovereignty over is a justified response. China does not do that at the moment, and not because they don't think it would be justified but because they don't think it would be a smart move. If the US starts shooting at your assets in situations they consider justified, a proportional response would be shooting at their assets in situations you consider justified. Due to different perspectives, a proportional response may turn into escalation. A similar situation is developing in Ukraine. Russia is seriously considering annexing the territory it has managed to conquer. If Ukraine later gains the upper hand and tries to take lost territory back, it would be invading Russia from the Russian perspective. That, according to their doctrine, would allow a nuclear response, which might be enough to deter Ukraine.
- ncmncm 4y ago

julius_deane 4y ago

these ships were not in nevada

renewiltord 4y ago

US government will tax you in Nevada. Haven't yet seen them tax you on the high seas. Actually, why doesn't the US Government just put up "No Entry" signs in Xinjiang? Could probably prevent oppression.

astrange 4y ago
US income tax applies to your income worldwide as long as you're a citizen. There's tax equalization treaties with some other countries, but not on the sea.
- renewiltord 4y ago
  They should just pass a law to tax everyone on the sea. Imagine how much money they could make. Just like foreigners in Nevada have to pay tax.

jltsiren 4y ago

What happens in Nevada is a domestic matter. Other countries don't care about it, and the US government can plausibly claim it has a legal basis for its actions. There are no such things as "unauthorized" flybys in international waters. There are no laws or international customs against approaching foreign warships, as long as that does not endanger the ship. How the warship chooses to respond is a matter of foreign policy and best left to civilians. Escalation often leads to further escalation. There is a similar situation in the South China Sea, where China claims sovereignty over some areas. The US disagrees and frequently patrols the area. If the US shoots down a Chinese drone in international waters, China may consider that shooting at an American plane or a warship there would be a proportional response. That could turn very bad very quickly. Unless the US deliberately wants to escalate, it may be a better policy to ignore Chinese provocations with drones.

gorgoiler 4y ago
Killing someone, in exchange for shooting down a robot, would be an escalation not a proportionate response.
- jltsiren 4y ago
  You are looking at this from the American perspective, when you should look at it from the Chinese perspective. Killing someone who is trying to invade territory you claim sovereignty over is a justified response. China does not do that at the moment, and not because they don't think it would be justified but because they don't think it would be a smart move. If the US starts shooting at your assets in situations they consider justified, a proportional response would be shooting at their assets in situations you consider justified. Due to different perspectives, a proportional response may turn into escalation. A similar situation is developing in Ukraine. Russia is seriously considering annexing the territory it has managed to conquer. If Ukraine later gains the upper hand and tries to take lost territory back, it would be invading Russia from the Russian perspective. That, according to their doctrine, would allow a nuclear response, which might be enough to deter Ukraine.
ncmncm 4y ago