General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Obama less popular on DU than war-making [View all]DissedByBush
(3,342 posts)You talk about collateral damage, but that happens regardless of whether the aircraft is manned.
I believe we should use the most effective tool for the job that places our servicemembers at the least risk. I'm not for unnecessarily risking the lives of our servicemembers out of some sense of fair play.
"Yet people die from taser attacks and now this has become acceptable collateral damage. "
That's why we call it "less lethal" not "non-lethal." I figure if an officer has a choice between his pistol and a taser, I'd rather him use a taser if he can. If you get rid of tasers, you limit his choice to the pistol, and then how many people do you think will die? Overuse of tasers is, of course, a valid and important issue, just as is needless shooting with the pistol. Producing tasers with pistol handles was flat-out shocking to me, and it lead to that death in Oakland.
"However, targeting individuals who may or may not be terrorists in a country we are not at war with while allowing women and children to be acceptable collateral damage is barbaric at best. "
If you're talking about al-Awlaki, we're just going to have to agree to disagree. I believe we have the right to take out Al Qaeda operatives wherever they may be. Our only concern is pissing off the country where that operative was killed, but that's a diplomacy issue. I'm glad Obama is stepping up the use of such targeted attacks rather than blindly invading countries, carpet bombing with B-52s and sending over salvos of Tomahawks.
As far as collateral damage goes, it would help if the enemy didn't purposely surround himself with human shields. When he does, I put the responsibility for the deaths on him.
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):