It is not the weapon, it's the use of them. Dropping explosives on sovereign countries we are not at war with just blurs all the boundaries. Some (The New York Times, amazingly) says it's a brand new world. I don't care for it and I think that drones are creating it rather than adapting to this so-called new world.
yeah. There have been a number of articles out there detailing the number of civilian casualties, refuting the claims of US officials that these things are "surgical" in any way, and the claims that there have been few to none civilian casualties.
furthermore, some journalists who have studied this have had surmised that these strikes actually serve to spark anti-american sentiment (unsurprisingly) and one guy who went to the scene and documented american-made missile parts in a strike that they had denied occurred is now being held prisoner without trial by us.
No, but they are captured and sent to to Russian and Chinese research labs. I sure hope there's no chance of us ever being in conflict with a nation that can out-manufacture us and has reverse-engineered our drones.
...
indeed. I think this is all a case of reckless profiteering driving policy. there seems to be no thought behind it, other than escalating the sales of drones and spare parts, and encouraging their use everywhere.
as I mentioned above the issue that these drone strikes that miss and kill innocent people (or
are on target and still kill innocent people because the kids sitting in Arizona piloting them don't think or care) end up spurring anti-american sentiment ... could be seen as a bonus to some. it creates a vicious circle of drone-attacks-> more anti-American sentiment -> more drone attacks... which pumps out profits for the defense industry, and medals of "valor" for the drone pilots.
this is all no worse or better than it was under Bush. maybe to a degree less destructive and not as costly, but this hardly gives Obama any moral credibility versus his predecessor.
it's just awful and despicable any way you look at it.
