3 ms·

If you're looking for a simple way to reduce support for the Taliban and start bringing stability to Pakistan and Afghanistan, look no further than grounding th

by beloch 13y ago

If you're looking for a simple way to reduce support for the Taliban and start bringing stability to Pakistan and Afghanistan, look no further than grounding the drones. Vietnam taught U.S. strategists that wars of attrition simply don't work. You'll never kill all of the enemy because every attack creates more enemies than it destroys. In this sense, drone attacks do exactly the opposite of what they're supposed to do. U.S. drones do more for General Atomics than they do for U.S. citizens! Every shot fired generates future business for weapons manufacturers. The use of drones also sets an ugly precedent. If the U.S. can kill anyone they want, anywhere they want, so too can China or Russia or any other country. Sooner or later that's going to be U.S. citizens on U.S. soil. There will be moral outrage, but no moral high-ground to stand on and no recourse. Just terror.

shardling 13y ago
>Vietnam taught U.S. strategists that wars of attrition simply don't work. You'll never kill all of the enemy because every attack creates more enemies than it destroys. There is an absolutely amazing Rumsfield moment where he acknowledges this, but draws the conclusion that the solution is to kill them more quickly!
rdtsc 13y ago
> U.S. drones do more for General Atomics than they do for U.S. citizens! Understandably nobody wants to think their own country, that they have been taught to love and idolize, would deliberately target and kill goat herders without too much evidence. "Well of course these are all accidents" everyone replies with a unified voice. But are they? How do we know? There is no transcript, court record or transparency in the process. I believe there is not a single shred of _written down_ evidence that shows targeting of innocent civilians to be taking place. But large bureaucratic systems always evolve hidden channels and vocabulary (using double meaning words) to exactly indicate what is do be done while also allowing for plausible deniability. (For example think about at-will employment states and racial or sexual discrimination. If anyone can be fired for any reason any time, but oh, one cannot discriminate, companies evolve language such as "personality fit", "restructuring", "not a team player" to indicate internally what they mean when they want to fire someone whose race they don't like). I believe there is such a language / channel (hell, there maybe even open discussions, wouldn't be surprised) between contractors like drone builders, NSA, CIA and other government agencies that signal and encourage targeting of civilians. Why? Because it is simply too profitable. Every new terrorist cell, every IED, every phone call captured that mentions "revenge", "jihad" or Arabic version of "the motherfuckers killed my 13 year son when he was out with the goats in the mountain" is linked to money in the bank for everyone involved -- drone manufacturers, drone maintainers, logistics, all the hire-ups, government departments, pilots. Everyone in the chain gets paid the more severe and persistent the threat gets.

by beloch 13y ago

shardling 13y ago

>Vietnam taught U.S. strategists that wars of attrition simply don't work. You'll never kill all of the enemy because every attack creates more enemies than it destroys. There is an absolutely amazing Rumsfield moment where he acknowledges this, but draws the conclusion that the solution is to kill them more quickly!

rdtsc 13y ago

> U.S. drones do more for General Atomics than they do for U.S. citizens! Understandably nobody wants to think their own country, that they have been taught to love and idolize, would deliberately target and kill goat herders without too much evidence. "Well of course these are all accidents" everyone replies with a unified voice. But are they? How do we know? There is no transcript, court record or transparency in the process. I believe there is not a single shred of _written down_ evidence that shows targeting of innocent civilians to be taking place. But large bureaucratic systems always evolve hidden channels and vocabulary (using double meaning words) to exactly indicate what is do be done while also allowing for plausible deniability. (For example think about at-will employment states and racial or sexual discrimination. If anyone can be fired for any reason any time, but oh, one cannot discriminate, companies evolve language such as "personality fit", "restructuring", "not a team player" to indicate internally what they mean when they want to fire someone whose race they don't like). I believe there is such a language / channel (hell, there maybe even open discussions, wouldn't be surprised) between contractors like drone builders, NSA, CIA and other government agencies that signal and encourage targeting of civilians. Why? Because it is simply too profitable. Every new terrorist cell, every IED, every phone call captured that mentions "revenge", "jihad" or Arabic version of "the motherfuckers killed my 13 year son when he was out with the goats in the mountain" is linked to money in the bank for everyone involved -- drone manufacturers, drone maintainers, logistics, all the hire-ups, government departments, pilots. Everyone in the chain gets paid the more severe and persistent the threat gets.