Are you pro-drones or anti-drones?

[onehandle]

As an offensive weapon striking 'targets' outside the U.S.

Not as a spying device, here or abroad. Consider that a different subject.

My wife and I were having a discussion about this last weekend.

34 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	Pro
	9 (26%)
	Anti
	17 (50%)
	It's complicated
	8 (24%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[Silent3]

1. I'm against a lack of accountability and due process

Make the process of deploying drones more accountable, and it's certainly not inherently worse than deploying any other weapons of war -- which should be done minimally and as a last resort. I'm not an absolute pacifist.

[onehandle]

3. Overthinking it. Be Colbert. Vote with your gut. nt

[randome]

16. You may be UNDERthinking it.

'Pro drone' versus 'anti drone'? It's sort of like trying to pigeon hole someone on the question of abortion.

[graham4anything]

2. Richard Clarke "Drones are the most humane form of warfare"

I agree with Richard Clarke.

[GRENADE]

4. if warfare

by drones is accepted, there will be no "consequence" to start a war. I am anti-war...therefore I am Anti-drone! Especially against american citizens.

[graham4anything]

6. Gorby tore down the walls and borders. Terrorists exist.

War has always been and always will be
regardless if the US is involved or not

Hitler killed 20 million and would have killed 20 million without us in

Who wouldn't have wanted a drone to drop on him 2 weeks prior to giving the orders to go and arrest or kill 20 million people, and 6 million Jews like my relatives.

and any collateral damage most likely would have died anyhow by the bad people who stop at nothing.

Who wouldn't have wanted a drone to drop on Timid McCoward in Oklahoma City before he killed all the kids and others.

[GRENADE]

8. well by that logic

hitler would have also had drones and it would of been a lot easier for him to kill many more Jews (like your relatives)

[graham4anything]

9. Have a nice day.

[white_wolf]

12. Ahh our resident authoritarian. I was wondering when you'd weigh in.

[Fumesucker]

17. Eh, I agree with Sun Tzu

For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill.

[frazzled]

5. Love 'em

as long as they're not angry. But the honey is sweet!



I think you meant to say "Do you approve of the way drones are being used in war situations?" (You could also ask about some of their civilian uses, such as scientific research or rescue missions. Drones in themselves are nothing to like or dislike: it's the uses to which they are put.)

[pampango]

7. I am anti-killing of civilians whether it is done by drone, rifle, hand grenade, jet or helicopter.

I suspect we have killed a thousand times (at least) as many civilians with bombs and missiles fired from planes, "collateral damage" and fire from soldiers on the ground of one form or another.

If I opposed drones because they kill civilians I would have to oppose practically all military weapons. Since that is not your poll question, I voted in favor of drones.

[joshcryer]

23. Good for you.

I agree with your assessment, Bush killed a million innocent civilians, Obama killed a few thousand innocent civilians. Bush was slash and burn, Obama was drone king.

I voted in opposition to drones because I do not believe they are effective at rooting out terrorist cells. At most they're keeping the terrorists in a state of chaos, but one of these days they're going to get out of the hills and organize in the cities, clandestinely, and we won't be able to get them. At that point they'll have a nuke or a dirty bomb or something and it won't be pretty. And I think drones will be directly responsible, simply delaying the inevitable.

[GreenStormCloud]

28. The military is waaay ahead of you.

Micro Air Vehicles (MAV)

[Tom Ripley]

10. I love musical instruments that produce drones, but am ambivalent about drones as weapons

[GreenStormCloud]

11. It is only a matter of time until terrorists get drones.

Like Moore's Law with computers, the same thing is happening with drones. They are getting smaller and cheaper and more versatile. Soon terrorists will be able to buy them on the open market and modify them into attack drones.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

14. Undoubtedly true.

[WillyT]

18. Funny You Should Say That...

The United Arab Emirates is close to purchasing Predator drones from a San Diego County defense contractor, sparking concern among arms control advocates.

Under the proposed sale, revealed this week at a defense conference in Abu Dhabi and confirmed Friday, General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Inc. of Poway will sell an undisclosed number of the robotic aircraft to the UAE armed forces for $197 million.

The agreement would mark the first time a non-NATO country has obtained the American-made technology, which has reshaped modern warfare. The deal has drawn scrutiny from critics who worry about the technology falling into terrorists' hands or being used by governments against their own citizens.

The UAE, notably the city-state of Dubai, has been a crossroads for banking, finance and technology as the nation emerged as an economic hub for the Arab world. It has only recently begun to tighten regulations to limit money laundering and other shady financial endeavors that attracted Islamic militants, drug smugglers and other traffickers.

Over the last year, UAE security officials — which have drawn criticism for their surveillance tactics — have also cracked down on internal dissent after the political upheavals of the "Arab Spring."

The sale would still need the approval of Congress...

Link: http://articles.latimes.com/2013/feb/22/business/la-fi-predator-drone-sale-20130223

[joshcryer]

22. They'd never be able to build 30k drones a year.

And drones aren't exactly invisible. Anywhere they're flying states know they're there.

[GreenStormCloud]

25. You are thinking of drones the size of an airplane.

Some drones are the size of an insect. Drones the size of a basketball can be bought on the civilian market, and they are quiet in flight.

[jeff47]

27. And they're too small to carry weapons. (nt)

[GreenStormCloud]

29. They CAN carry weapons.

Check out this video:

You don't need huge amount of high explosive. Just put a tiny needle coated with a super potent poison attached to the insect sized drone and sting the target.

[joshcryer]

37. Those don't exist yet.

Once they do "innocent civilians" won't be in the equation. It'd be like the killing of Bin Laden. Targeted, direct. No women or children involved.

[GreenStormCloud]

42. Drones the size of soccer balls exist. N/T

[Recursion]

32. And the US not using them will delay that?

If drones are outlawed, only outlaws will have them.

[GreenStormCloud]

36. No, U.S. abstinence won't delay that.

Nor did I imply that. I was pointing out what is coming.

[whatchamacallit]

13. They are only a means

it's the end I object to.

[warrprayer]

15. what would Ma and Pa think?

[GreenStormCloud]

26. Actually, that was father and daughter. N/T

[Player_One]

19. Just from my own little world...

That's one less chance for me and mine to get shot at. Love em...

Of course, 99.99% of the time I love em for their ability to see whats going on. That's day to day however....

[LWolf]

20. Neither.

I'm anti-bombing people and anti-spying on people, drones or other methods.

I'm pro-drones for things like weather research/data collection, which at least two drones were designed for.

The Altus:

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/news/FactSheets/FS-058-DFRC.html



Global Hawk:

http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/imagegallery/image_feature_2362.html

[moondust]

21. Complicated.

Not having skin in the game means not risking lives on the battlefield. Good.

Not having skin in the game means killin' is too easy and therefore subject to abuse. Bad.

Some people probably have enough restraint to handle it responsibly while some "cowboy diplomacy" types are more inclined to blow somebody away at the drop of a hat (McCain).

[Waltons_Mtn]

31. That is my thought on this exactly.

An additional point, remember during the war when the Iraqi troops surrendered to the television crew. The use of drones fails to give the enemy that chance to surrender. "What if" a (suspected) terrorist saw the drone coming and threw his hands into the air in surrender. Now if they still cut that missile loose, they are killing a prisoner of war. Of course, no-one but the guys in the air conditioned trailer will ever know. Total lack of accountability.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

24. I'm against killing people.

"What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty or democracy." - Gandhi

[Oldenuff]

30. Outside the US...

is what they want you to believe.Oh,we would never ever use it against our own citizens...oh no...well..maybe if there were citizens who became enemy combatants....you know.

To even be having this discussion is unbelievable.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

33. Let's say you're a military officer

You can either send an infantry company on a mission, for which you're almost certain to have 1-2 dead and 3-5 severely wounded. Or you can blow the place to smithereens with a drone.

Unless there's a compelling reason to have boots on the ground, I would be hard put to send my guys into combat if I can meet my objective in other ways.

The downside, of course, is the drones become a no muss-no fuss way of engaging in offensive operations. Since none of our guys get killed, it's way too easy to start lobbing drones indiscriminately.

[99Forever]

34. Too late.

That demon is out of the box and won't be put back in. Just like every other new and improved method of governments mass murdering people, drones will spread to all power grubbing, authoritarian, military types on the planet and they won't ever give them up.

The day will inevitably come when drone attacks will be launched against people and targets within the USA. That is guaranteed and there is nothing our fearless "leaders" can do to stop it.

Thanks again, MIC, you are real fucking geniuses.

[Myrina]

35. I don't understand ...

.... how - according to some of the spy-guys - we could spot bin Laden in a horse caravan in Pakistan in <?> 2003 <?> and even 'read the time on the watch' one of his dudes was wearing, and not do a pinpoint strike to 'eliminate' specific targets rather than bunker bust entire cities full of people.

If we could utilize drones in that manner, and ONLY that manner, I would be ok with them - think of the troops lives it would save (not to mention MONEY).

On the other hand, if we have that ability, we have that ability. What's to stop us from using it anywhere to eliminate 'specific targets' that the present Admin (whoever it may be) didn't like?

Color me confused.

[slackmaster]

38. Pro-choice on drones, pro-choice on shotguns

[FreeJoe]

39. I'm not inherently against drones

They serve a purpose for our national defense. In fact, I think the day when fighter pilots are replaced will happen in my lifetime. Am I happy with the way they are being used? Of course not.

[quaker bill]

40. I don't discriminate, against all of it

It does not matter to me where the pilot is seated. Just say no.

[valiberal26]

41. Opposed.

I don't believe that the United States should have drone technology, or should use it for any purpose whatsoever. Having the ability to wage war with no direct consequences only encourages armed conflict and military adventurism.