The War in Afghanistan

[Arch Dornan]

Yeah, I hope South Korea refuses. Material wealth is not worth the mountain of trouble a bunch of immigrants from Afghanistan will cause. The east-asian people are absolutely justified in their racism and hostility towards foreigners.

I think this is to not put all their eggs in one basket getting other countries other than the CCP to get their hands on the metal.

 

[Terthna]

The use of drone strikes ought to be deemed a war crime, and banned.

 

[Marduk]

The use of drone strikes ought to be deemed a war crime, and banned.

Drones are a meme and you are falling for it.
There is no practical difference to a JDAM, Hellfire or Brimstone being delivered by a helicopter, tactical jet or drone when it comes to risk or scale of collateral damage.
The only difference is in cost, performance of the craft, and pilot risk.
They would use exactly the same weapon and targeting information.

 

[Zachowon]

The use of drone strikes ought to be deemed a war crime, and banned.

Then you risk more lives sending in troops deep into hostile land to kill one guy, and potentially lose a team of some of your best troops....

 

[Terthna]

Drones are a meme and you are falling for it.
There is no practical difference to a JDAM, Hellfire or Brimstone being delivered by a helicopter, tactical jet or drone when it comes to risk or scale of collateral damage.
The only difference is in cost, performance of the craft, and pilot risk.
They would use exactly the same weapon and targeting information.

A fair point; but regardless, the seemingly inevitable collateral damage involved in these kinds of operations are unacceptable.

Then you risk more lives sending in troops deep into hostile land to kill one guy, and potentially lose a team of some of your best troops....

Maybe we need that risk; so that those making the decisions don't do so on a whim, and as a consequence needlessly murder innocent civilians.

 

[Zachowon]

A fair point; but regardless, the seemingly inevitable collateral damage involved in these kinds of operations are unacceptable.




Maybe we need that risk; so that those making the decisions don't do so on a whim, and as a consequence needlessly murder innocent civilians.

So, you have to get them in. Most ways invovle a air vehicle of some sort to get people in the area.
That is more lives and equipment on the line.
Equipment that if shot down and captured would endanger more lives.

 

[Terthna]

So, you have to get them in. Most ways invovle a air vehicle of some sort to get people in the area.
That is more lives and equipment on the line.
Equipment that if shot down and captured would endanger more lives.

Sounds rather costly and difficult, in order to ensure that seven children are dead. Maybe they should, you know, not do that? Just a thought.

 

[Marduk]

A fair point; but regardless, the seemingly inevitable collateral damage involved in these kinds of operations are unacceptable.

So what alternative do you propose? Let people get away with aggression against western countries, as long as they are clever enough to take shelter in a third world shithole with police unwilling or unable to catch and punish or extradite them, if there is a police at all?

Or alternatively solve the conflict by the collectivist standard of the tribal societies involved; if a member of a tribe or its guest attacks you, and the tribe refuses to cooperate in punishing them, consider the whole tribe to have offended you and then feel free to bomb the whole village, its not collateral damage if it is in fact part of the target.

 

[Zachowon]

Sounds rather costly and difficult, in order to ensure that seven children are dead. Maybe they should, you know, not do that? Just a thought.

Then how do you suppose we kill the bad guys? If drones are out and sending in a team is out...

 

[Arch Dornan]

Drones are there to stay. It's just too useful.

 

[Blasterbot]

Sounds rather costly and difficult, in order to ensure that seven children are dead. Maybe they should, you know, not do that? Just a thought.

If the issue is the target for you then it isn't the method you should blame. blame the guys who okayed the targeting of an aid worker after tailing him for 2 hours and choosing to do so when there were civilian children around.

 

[Zachowon]

If the issue is the target for you then it isn't the method you should blame. blame the guys who okayed the targeting of an aid worker after tailing him for 2 hours and choosing to do so when there were civilian children around.

Sometimes it would be the only shot you can take, and any other chance may be too late

 

[Blasterbot]

Sometimes it would be the only shot you can take, and any other chance may be too late

they had 2 hours of better chances. and they killed an aid worker.

 

[Arch Dornan]

It's really simple. When any idea is used and disseminated across the Earth every Tom, Dick and Harry nation will attempt to get their own if they can especially the latest in weapons technology. That's how the game is played.

 

[Zachowon]

they had 2 hours of better chances. and they killed an aid worker.

Did they? Are we sure?

 

[Blasterbot]

Did they? Are we sure?

explicitly admitted that they followed for 2 hours.

 

[Zachowon]

explicitly admitted that they followed for 2 hours.

Doesn't mean they had an opportunity.
For all we know there were other larger casualty areas they avoided

 

[Terthna]

So what alternative do you propose? Let people get away with aggression against western countries, as long as they are clever enough to take shelter in a third world shithole with police unwilling or unable to catch and punish or extradite them, if there is a police at all?

Or alternatively solve the conflict by the collectivist standard of the tribal societies involved; if a member of a tribe or its guest attacks you, and the tribe refuses to cooperate in punishing them, consider the whole tribe to have offended you and then feel free to bomb the whole village, its not collateral damage if it is in fact part of the target.

We're already letting people get away with aggression against western countries; or are you going to argue that those seven children were guilty of that? What we're doing now isn't working; our enemies often escape unharmed, or turn out to have never been there in the first place, and we just end up killing a bunch of civilians for no reason.

Then how do you suppose we kill the bad guys? If drones are out and sending in a team is out...

You ever consider that the tactics we're employing makes us the bad guys? You want to take someone out? You send that team, and stop foisting the risks and costs in lives off onto innocent civilians.

If the issue is the target for you then it isn't the method you should blame. blame the guys who okayed the targeting of an aid worker after tailing him for 2 hours and choosing to do so when there were civilian children around.

I would, but the problem is the military won't; they refuse to let those guys be held accountable for their actions, in the name of keeping our country strong, and basically able to do whatever the hell it wants without consequence. @Zachowon is a prime example of this mentality; in his mind, it's never anyone's fault when innocent civilians die as a result of our actions. The perceived tactical advantage against our enemies is more important than the lives of children.

 

[Zachowon]

We're already letting people get away with aggression against western countries; or are you going to argue that those seven children were guilty of that? What we're doing now isn't working; our enemies often escape unharmed, or turn out to have never been there in the first place, and we just end up killing a bunch of civilians for no reason.




You ever consider that the tactics we're employing makes us the bad guys? You want to take someone out? You send that team, and stop foisting the risks and costs in lives off onto innocent civilians.




I would, but the problem is the military won't; they refuse to let those guys be held accountable for their actions, in the name of keeping our country strong, and basically able to do whatever the hell it wants without consequence. @Zachowon is a prime example of this mentality; in his mind, it's never anyone's fault when innocent civilians die as a result of our actions. The perceived tactical advantage against our enemies is more important than the lives of children.

So again, spend millions more then needed, and put more lives on the line then what would be normally...and the ability for ability for more citizens to get killed....
Q firefight is horrible for the a small team when outnumbered. Especially in A-stan.
Ever see the movie Outpost?

A drone allows us to get in, quickly kill them, and get out without any retaliation.

Oh. An example of us trying to send a team in to deal with a bad guy. Any number of based on true events war movies in the past 20 years....

 

[Marduk]

We're already letting people get away with aggression against western countries; or are you going to argue that those seven children were guilty of that? What we're doing now isn't working; our enemies often escape unharmed, or turn out to have never been there in the first place, and we just end up killing a bunch of civilians for no reason.

So again, what is the strategy you propose?

Make it official that they will get away with it, not possibly but certainly, because there's always a risk of kids dying (and they will take fucking note and make sure to have some kids around)?

Or go back to the glory days of WW2 style warfighting and send a fleet of B-52's to firebomb the city the enemies happen to be in. There's going to be plenty of collateral damage but chances are some enemies will die too, and plenty of stuff they need will burn down.

Its war, collateral damage happens. Meanwhile when the other side attacks, they consider it a feature, not a bug. Where are the supposed terrible consequences of such attitude they should be suffering?
How many civilians did the Taliban kill as collateral damage?

You ever consider that the tactics we're employing makes us the bad guys? You want to take someone out? You send that team, and stop foisting the risks and costs in lives off onto innocent civilians.

Counterpoint - stray gunfire, human shields, ganking suspected defensive emplacements.
Especially in the specific case of islamist paramilitaries who are very fucking aware of western sensibility about accidentaly'ing civilians, and as such making sure that there are civilians aplenty around the place they are in.
As the international laws of war specifically ban. But hey, that's another case of rules for thee, not for me as far as the problem factions are concerned.