165
Legal case for drone strikes on Americans : Swingers Discussion 2164301071
Busy Swingers Forum - everything you always wanted to know about swingers.
SwingLifeStyle Swingers Personal Ads. | SwingLifeStyle Swingers Clubs

Busy Swingers Forum

Everything you always wanted to know about swingers.

Create A Free Account

HELP
FORUMSGeneral DiscussionsPoliticsLegal case for drone strikes on Americans
TOPIC: Legal case for drone strikes on Americans
GoTo Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Start   71 to 80 of 86   End
User Details are only visible to members.
Why would they be? Soldiers following orders answer to no one but their CO.

Your argument is the EXACT same one the gun control advocates are using FJ. ie...How many innocent people have to die before the device used to hurt them is taken away because of it's potential for doing bad things in the wrong hands? Never mind who's pushing the button or pulling the trigger or WHY, just take them all away and make everyone safer.

I'm sure you're not on board with that idea, so why attach yourself to this one?

Long Beach CA
Username hidden
(1757 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
So far hundreds of innocent women and children have been killed by drones. Has even one person been held accountable?

Sanford NC
Username hidden
(19441 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
They are not in the drone. In many cases they are nowhere near where the drone is being used. This is being argued by not only the US but other countries.

Sanford NC
Username hidden
(19441 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
With all due respect FJ, you're completely wrong.

The "drone" IS, in fact, piloted by a soldier. A well trained, ethically bound pilot just like the ones in an attack helicopter. They swore the same oath when they joined the program that every other pilot does. They take their firing orders from the same chain of command that a pilot in any aircraft, tank, boat, or wheeled artillery vehicle does when in an engagement. Other than size (and that's slowly shifting as well) they are an identical weapon to each other.

The benefit for using drones are staggering. Not only is the pilot safe from harm, his actions can be monitored by an infinite number of military strategists and personnel and the overall challenge of whether he or she should fire (eliminating the ethics question completely), is virtually nonexistant. When a Predator drone goes down in the desert, another is simply prepped for launch and the game begins again. No one is left crying at home or becomes an orphan. And the real kicker? Everything is recorded for anyone in the loop to see.

People who are so vehemently against the use of drones are generally the ones who also believe they are some "self aware" robots that can watch and monitor you and using only an electronic algorythm that can decide whether you live or die. Nothing could be further from the truth. There are more than 2 sets of eyes on target at any time using a drone vs. the pilot/RIO standard we currently deploy. It's safer, more economical, and far more ethical in any argument you could bring up.

Do they have purpose here in he US? You betcha! Ask any border patrol agent what he can't do to keep our borders closed to illegal jumpers and a drone suddenly become a godsend. 24/7 monitoring from an object that can be watching miles and miles at a time and then intercept in a moments notice over ANY terrain at any time in any conditions? What's not to like?

Can they be abused? Sure. But why BAN and be afraid of something that also does good, like, I dunno...a fucking gun.

Long Beach CA
Username hidden
(1757 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
There are no actual troops in the drone, which by some laws is different and gives some governments more latitude. It makes killing easier, and no one person is on or in the kill zone to be held responsible for illegal or irresponsible behavior.

In the past it was/is usually the soldier that was held accountable for wrongs, even when command was responsible. Which is acceptable by UCMJ, soldiers are to refuse illegal orders, and held accountable when they don't. There is no soldier in the drone.

Sanford NC
Username hidden
(19441 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
PP if an armed rebellion happened here it would be to hard to use them with out killing innocent people. The drones are estimated to have killed over 3000 civilians over seas. That is the estimate that was released by DOD.Just something to think about.

Berryville VA
Username hidden
(1750 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
I too would oppose using them on our own soil. When "in the jurisdiction of the United States" you are protected under the equal protection and due process clauses. Having said that, were there a case of clear and present insurrection on American soil against a duly elected government, I would rather use drones than place the life of a SINGLE national guardsman at risk

Rosemont IL
Username hidden
(3843 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
NK, guess you missed my post. Am fine with it but not using them on our own soil. Don't lump everybody together.

Berryville VA
Username hidden
(1750 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
If Americans are plotting against or helping our enemies they are traitors. Who cares what happens to them.

It's funny that the right wants to spare american traitors. Must be friends of theirs...

Pittsburgh PA
Username hidden
(2789 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
I'd just like to point out that using Infowars as a news link is like handing in a Master's Thesis to your professor and citing "The guy in the alley who talks to his hand" as your primary source.

The drone thing is a major issue, and a serious grievance against the administration for conservatives and liberals alike - but let's not drop it into tin-foil-hattery like Alex Jones and Glenn Beck.

Easton PA
Username hidden
(79 posts)
GoTo Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Start   71 to 80 of 86   End
TOPIC: Legal case for drone strikes on Americans