drones vs. hand to hand-combat

[zakdavis]

Well, we've had the ability to bomb from afar for a long time, with little to no damage to us. A drone actually has a fairly small range compared to our bombers and cruise missiles, nor does it fly as high.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Without diving in to the more practial consideration, have any of you who support the use of drones stopped to consider the risks to safety posed by them? Doesn't the ability to strike without taking significant damage make strikes more likely to occur, and as the technology progresses, the more likely for our own citizens to be harmed by it.

yeah, far better we drop bombs and kill hundreds of thousands.

Better yet, let's send our people in - thousands of deaths and maimed.

If given the choice, OF COURSE I support drones over traditional and archaic, barbaric warfare.

The real question is, why doesn't every one?

The only reason some don't support drones is that its President Obama behind them. As with other issues, its divided right down party lines with the rw's in favor of hundreds of thousands of deaths and trillions of dollars debts.

 

[zakdavis]

Someone still needs to go in and check. You know, I bet this debate happened with airplanes...

 

[zakdavis]

Someone still needs to go in and check. You know, I bet this debate happened with airplanes...

You know, the whole 'We can attack from afar, the enemy will never know we were there until they are dead, traditional warfare is dead!'

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Someone still needs to go in and check. You know, I bet this debate happened with airplanes...

You know, the whole 'We can attack from afar, the enemy will never know we were there until they are dead, traditional warfare is dead!'

GAWD, I hope so.

Dozens of American soldiers dead but we got Pork Chop Hill as opposed to

A U.S. drone strike has killed a senior al-Qaida leader in Pakistan's tribal region near the Afghan border, Pakistani intelligence officials said, in the latest blow to the Islamic militant network.

What is there to discuss?

Sheik Khalid Bin Abdel Rehman Al-Hussainan Dead: Al Qaeda Leader Killed By U.S. Drone In Pakistan's Tribal Regions

Or, years of "war" on Iran and trillions in debt vs the surgical strike that kille bin Laden.

The GObP/pubs make money from making war and they don't give a flip about our military. rw's need to decide if they agree with that? Or, do they agree with fewer deaths and a lot less money spent.

 

[9thIDdoc]

Without diving in to the more practial consideration, have any of you who support the use of drones stopped to consider the risks to safety posed by them? Doesn't the ability to strike without taking significant damage make strikes more likely to occur, and as the technology progresses, the more likely for our own citizens to be harmed by it.

No.

 

[Duped]

When your at war you are suppose to try to win - the most efficient means to do so (limiting colladeral damage) is the best; I vote drones. A wounded service member is a very, very sad sight. God bless our troops!

 

[zakdavis]

I'm telling you this has happened with every new method of warfare. It happened with airplanes and tanks, and it will happen with drones-infantry still needs to go in and get some.

 

[Montrovant]

I'm telling you this has happened with every new method of warfare. It happened with airplanes and tanks, and it will happen with drones-infantry still needs to go in and get some.

Just send in Roddy Piper with the alien-vision sunglasses to kick ass and chew bubble gum!

Sorry, love the avi.

 

[zakdavis]

I'm telling you this has happened with every new method of warfare. It happened with airplanes and tanks, and it will happen with drones-infantry still needs to go in and get some.

Just send in Roddy Piper with the alien-vision sunglasses to kick ass and chew bubble gum!

Sorry, love the avi.

He and Bruce Willis could take out the terrorists, I'm sure. Thanks

 

[AmyNation]

Without diving in to the more practial consideration, have any of you who support the use of drones stopped to consider the risks to safety posed by them? Doesn't the ability to strike without taking significant damage make strikes more likely to occur, and as the technology progresses, the more likely for our own citizens to be harmed by it.

yeah, far better we drop bombs and kill hundreds of thousands.

Better yet, let's send our people in - thousands of deaths and maimed.

If given the choice, OF COURSE I support drones over traditional and archaic, barbaric warfare.

The real question is, why doesn't every one?

The only reason some don't support drones is that its President Obama behind them. As with other issues, its divided right down party lines with the rw's in favor of hundreds of thousands of deaths and trillions of dollars debts.

Or perhaps we don't support drones because of the massive upsurge in drone attacks, the killing of civilians, spying in foreign nations, the lying about the killing of civilians, etc etc.

When it comes to "boots on the ground" or drones, most people will choose drones. However, just because we can, doesnt mean we should. Obama has been using drones as if it's just another tool in his tool belt, instead of something that should only be deployed when absolutely necessary.

 

[Polk]

Someone still needs to go in and check. You know, I bet this debate happened with airplanes...

Note, I'm not saying we shouldn't be using drones. I'm just saying it's an important question to think about that has a lot of implications for how we conduct ourselves in the world. And yes, the debate happened with airplanes. And if you really want to trace it back, you can go all the way back to the first guns.

 

[zakdavis]

Someone still needs to go in and check. You know, I bet this debate happened with airplanes...

Note, I'm not saying we shouldn't be using drones. I'm just saying it's an important question to think about that has a lot of implications for how we conduct ourselves in the world. And yes, the debate happened with airplanes. And if you really want to trace it back, you can go all the way back to the first guns.

Yes, the debate probably did happen with guns, but airplanes and drones give the warfighter the ability to be far away (20,000 with airplanes, another continent with drones) and kill the enemy. I do agree that there should be a bit of a debate, but I don't see arguments for or against as anything really new.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Gotta count me in the column of "The drone strikes are no worse - and in many cases much better - than other methods."

War is ugly business. Consider that carefully before starting one.