Skip to main content

View Diary: Some Recent Daily Kos Comics Go Against Site's Mission (280 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Drones kill non combatants indiscriminately (7+ / 0-)

    Other weapons and tactics that do so have been outlawed by international treaty. I find it insulting that you would compare the left's issues with drones to patently false issues of the right. We are informed and intelligent allies, you do not serve your cause by insulting us and dismissing our concerns.

    •  Pardon me. (12+ / 0-)

      War kills noncombatants indiscriminately.

      It always has. It always will.

      It. Sucks.

      --

      Republicans chap my ass

      Me

      by Marc in KS on Thu May 24, 2012 at 02:17:35 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Which is why we should not be (7+ / 0-)

        excusing more awful, unfair, unseeing, and unfeeling ways to do it.

        Here is the truth: The Earth is round; Saddam Hussein did not attack us on 9/11; Elvis is dead; Obama was born in the United States; and the climate crisis is real. It is time to act. - Al Gore

        by Burned on Thu May 24, 2012 at 02:55:47 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  We should never excuse it, (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          poligirl, m16eib

          no matter how it's waged.

          There is never an excuse for war.

          --

          Republicans chap my ass

          Me

          by Marc in KS on Thu May 24, 2012 at 03:04:13 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  all modern weapon systems are headed (0+ / 0-)

          in that direction - unfair, unseeing and unfeeling. All you have to do is look at the current R&D projects underway at DARPA; cyberattacks which can kill a lot of people, directed energy weapons, space based lasers, joystick controlled robots, on and on and on. THey all have one thing in common - depersonalization of war.

        •  In what way (0+ / 0-)

          are drones more awful, unfair, unseeing, or unfeeling than a typical bomber?

          •  In the same way (8+ / 0-)

            that a typical bomber is worse than hand to hand combat, only more so by magnitudes.
            Now we can be halfway around the world, seated in a comfortable chair at a console in an air conditioned room with no chance of being shot at or attacked similarly.
            There is even less disinclination to engage in making people dead than a typical bomber flying miles above the killing field.
            Among other things.

            Here is the truth: The Earth is round; Saddam Hussein did not attack us on 9/11; Elvis is dead; Obama was born in the United States; and the climate crisis is real. It is time to act. - Al Gore

            by Burned on Thu May 24, 2012 at 05:33:15 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I understand what you're saying (4+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Burned, KayCeSF, volleyboy1, sarahnity

              I just don't understand the point? Should we go back to 19th Century warfare where columns of troops get mowed down in an instance? I suppose you could say that we'd be less inclined to war, but that's never been the case in human history.

              •  The point of living imo (9+ / 0-)

                is to become better at living not killing.
                And yes, I think if there is going to be people warring, that they ought to do it face to face. Advances in killing are not advances at all.

                Here is the truth: The Earth is round; Saddam Hussein did not attack us on 9/11; Elvis is dead; Obama was born in the United States; and the climate crisis is real. It is time to act. - Al Gore

                by Burned on Thu May 24, 2012 at 06:11:03 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Face to face war results in (5+ / 0-)

                  huge casualties for all, doesn't diminish the will to war.

                  Vietnam - somewhere between 2 and 4 million total deaths.

                  WW II - 50-70 Million deaths

                  WW I -35 million deaths

                  Rather than regress weaponry to the Stone Age which will result in no less casualties, the focus should be on eliminating the cause of war.

                  •   I agree on eliminating the causes of war. (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    chipmo, fcvaguy, joe shikspack

                    We could start with putting a complete stop to the ability to make any financial profit from it, whether from the weaponry used in the war itself or from the aftermath of "winning".

                    Here is the truth: The Earth is round; Saddam Hussein did not attack us on 9/11; Elvis is dead; Obama was born in the United States; and the climate crisis is real. It is time to act. - Al Gore

                    by Burned on Fri May 25, 2012 at 03:21:14 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  there would be a lot less war if war was... (6+ / 0-)

                  conducted face to face...  sigh... i'm with you...

                  Hope has two beautiful daughters; their names are Anger and Courage. Anger at the way things are and Courage to see that they do not remain as they are. --St Augustine

                  by poligirl on Thu May 24, 2012 at 07:34:23 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Really? I guess Earth was a very peaceful place (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Mets102, sarahnity

                    before the invention of the Gun then? Imagine that. I guess all of history is wrong.

                    "'Touch it dude' - President Barack Obama"

                    by volleyboy1 on Fri May 25, 2012 at 10:02:59 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  yeah, cuz i said there'd be no war. not. of... (4+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      triv33, PhilJD, Shawn Russell, priceman

                      course there will always be war as long as there are humans; i'm saying that if it had to be done face to face - the ugly kind of war - it would be a more difficult decision for the PTB to engage in it.

                      i'll go even further and say that if we went back to the days of conscription, there be even less war, cuz the decision makers and their kids would be more at risk to have to participate in the fighting.

                      you have to pay attention to the exact words used - nuance does count.

                      Hope has two beautiful daughters; their names are Anger and Courage. Anger at the way things are and Courage to see that they do not remain as they are. --St Augustine

                      by poligirl on Fri May 25, 2012 at 10:23:37 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  But there were not less wars (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Mets102, sarahnity

                        Human history is bloody and tragic.

                        Whether face to face or not, war would still exist and it's specter would haunt us. Is it easier with Guns and Drones.. sure.

                        Now if there were a draft.. There would be less ground troop presence and probably even more drone strikes. If there were no drones then rather than us slaughtering people in a far land, they would be slaughtering each other. NOTE: THAT IS NOT SAYING THAT OUR ACTIONS ARE RIGHT OR MAKE NO DIFFERENCE

                        There is nothing in history as a species that indicates that if people went face to face there would be less fighting. Absolutely nothing.

                        "'Touch it dude' - President Barack Obama"

                        by volleyboy1 on Fri May 25, 2012 at 10:34:48 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  how many countries are we bombing with... (4+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          triv33, PhilJD, Shawn Russell, priceman

                          drones in right now? and how many of those countries would we still be warring with if we had to do so face to face?

                          sometimes, it really is that simple.

                          Hope has two beautiful daughters; their names are Anger and Courage. Anger at the way things are and Courage to see that they do not remain as they are. --St Augustine

                          by poligirl on Fri May 25, 2012 at 11:31:19 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  WOW... that is about the most simplistic thing (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Mets102

                            that I have seen in a long time.

                            You think if we didn't have drones there wouldn't be military actions in those countries? Seriously?

                            Again poligirl, where in the mankinds past has he/she been worried about fighting wars? We fight for all kinds of stupid reasons.

                            It is NOT that simple and it never is that simple.

                            But Drones as a tool of war are not going away whether you want them to or not. It if our enemies had them, they would use them as well. As military technology gets more advanced, people don't shy away from it, witness Nuclear weapons. We used one. People saw what they can do, what happened... Everyone wants to build them despite that fact. You think al-Qaeda would hesitate for three seconds if someone offered them a nuke? If so, then please... I have some land in Florida to sell...

                            This is not some weird challenge of 1v1 combat. That is not how wars are fought. They will never be fought that way and despite romantic notions they never were fought that way. People use advantages in war. That is how it works.

                            "'Touch it dude' - President Barack Obama"

                            by volleyboy1 on Fri May 25, 2012 at 12:18:39 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  i don't think you understand what i am saying... (4+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            PhilJD, triv33, Shawn Russell, priceman

                            we are not talking about the reasons to go to war, we are talking the sheer magnitude and increasing frequency with which we militarily attack in other countries.

                            if you seriously think we would be doing the same level of warring (meaning the same level of killing and destruction) in all of the countries we are using drones in right now, if it had to be face to face, then i'm the one with the bridge to sell, not you.

                            Hope has two beautiful daughters; their names are Anger and Courage. Anger at the way things are and Courage to see that they do not remain as they are. --St Augustine

                            by poligirl on Fri May 25, 2012 at 12:24:01 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  LOL... No, I get you perfectly (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Mets102

                            and I think you are some misguided impression that if there were no drones there would be less war when all of human history argues against you.

                            If you are just talking about the Post WWII U.S.... No, I don't even think that would apply. We didn't have drones for a lot of that and look how much killing there was.

                            But it's a silly discussion because drones exist and are not going away. What commander is going to send troops into harms way if he doesn't have to?

                            Let me ask you, do you actually think that if our enemies had drones as well, they wouldn't use them?

                            "'Touch it dude' - President Barack Obama"

                            by volleyboy1 on Fri May 25, 2012 at 12:46:20 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  no, it's pretty clear you don't get what i'm... (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            triv33, priceman

                            saying, cuz you keep adding to and/or changing the parameters, to fit your argument.

                            so rather than sit here and argue with someone who's calling me - a university-educated, college level Am Gov textbook writer, with a minor in ME studies including in depth Am For Policy over there - "misguided" and calling the discussion "silly" i think i'll go elsewhere. have a good day.

                            Hope has two beautiful daughters; their names are Anger and Courage. Anger at the way things are and Courage to see that they do not remain as they are. --St Augustine

                            by poligirl on Fri May 25, 2012 at 01:26:37 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  No... I am not. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Mets102

                            I don't know what inane point you are trying to make since you don't seem to have a reasonable answer for any of my questions... I realize they don't fit your simplistic world view but..... I haven't changed a darn thing about our discussion but you seem not to want to deal with hard questions.

                            Now as far as your qualifications.... WOW!!! Get your money back from the University that you got your degree from - you got ripped off.

                            Just FYI, I too am a University Graduate with a degree in Poli Sci. Int'l Relations (emphasis on the Middle East) AND I lived over there (the Middle East) for a year which honestly doesn't mean a whole lot regarding anything. Now, I certainly don't know it all but I do that I made valid points to which you simply had no reasonable answer.

                            Anyway, you have a lovely day yourself.

                            "'Touch it dude' - President Barack Obama"

                            by volleyboy1 on Fri May 25, 2012 at 02:00:30 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, but some weapons are worse than others (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        poligirl, PhilJD, jabney, chipmo

        And that is why we no longer use, say, poison gas. Most civilized countries (159 and counting, with one major exception, us) have outlawed land mines because they kill civilians.

        Drones should be outlawed like land mines are, but I have little hope of seeing that happen, and even less hope that the US would sign such a treaty.

    •  I don't understand this (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mets102, exlrrp, KayCeSF, Unit Zero, sarahnity

      how is a missile fired from a drone any different than one fired from an F-16, or a bomb dropped from a B-52, or a cruise missile launched from a ship? It isn't. They all explode and kill people, no one more or less discriminately than another.

      What other similar weapons and tactics have been outlawed by international treaty?

      •  Land Mines (0+ / 0-)

        159 countries have outlawed the creation, stockpiling, and use of land mines. The US is not on the list, of course.

        Poison gas is also outlawed. As are cluster bombs. And biological weapons. Massacring entire villages of non combatants is outlawed, but strangely, no one is prosecuting any US citizen for war crimes.

        •  Under what or whose jurisdiction? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Mets102

          Who can prosecute and actually enforce compliance? I didn't know there was a "law" that every country lived under. If we have this then why isn't everyone prosecuted?

          "'Touch it dude' - President Barack Obama"

          by volleyboy1 on Fri May 25, 2012 at 12:22:37 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Your Word of the Day: Treaty (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Shawn Russell

            Please, just stop. If you don't understand basic international politics, you can educate yourself. It's not my job.

            •  Oh no you don't..... UNDER WHOSE JURISDICTION (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Mets102

              does this fall? IF the U.S. is not a party to the treaty then how do you prosecute and enforce compliance? And even if they were, what do suggest people do about it if we just say... "Screw it"?

              I have a degree in International Relations plus work times. I understand them well. Now, again, WHO is the authority that creates BINDING International law? The U.N.? Really? Then if it's so binding why does almost every nation ignore it? Oh wait, it's not really binding and is subject to the whims of member states.

              Seth... it's not my job to answer ignorant posts from wannabee international lawyers but, I figured why not answer this one.

              So please answer the questions rather than just give some stupid ass answer that means absolutely nothing.

              "'Touch it dude' - President Barack Obama"

              by volleyboy1 on Fri May 25, 2012 at 01:47:16 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Herp derp, AND we're done. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Shawn Russell

                Was Nazi Germany under our jurisdiction at Nuremberg?

                Look, the whole problem is that the US is NOT a party to these treaties, which is the god damn point I was making. All you are doing here is muddying the water, and I think you know it.

                Let me reiterate the ACTUAL issues at hand. We are not discussing basic international politics and how a treaty becomes law. You fucking well KNOW that is not what we are discussing. The actual ISSUE AT HAND is our use of drones, and whether we the people can and should outlaw their use, as the citizens of many countries have done with other immoral weapons systems.

                Let me rephrase what you are saying so other can see how damn dumb it is: "We are doing the right thing because we broke no laws. We broke no laws because we never signed the treaties. It doesn't matter that other countries think land minds should be banned, because we don't think that, and nobody has the power to hold us accountable."

                You are sick and I am done talking with you. Good day, Mr. volley ball playing sales manager with a degree in international relations. I'm ignoring your ignorant, immoral ass from now on.

                •  Wow... that is a strange answer.. (0+ / 0-)

                  Sethy... Don't engage in political analysis... you are not good at it. Your rephrasing... let's just say - needs work.

                  As to your main point. I don't agree with you and unless your name is G-d (which it is not) I don't really see where you have the authority to tell me whether I am "immoral" or not.

                  You should ignore  my "ignorant" ass, first off because apparently you know even less than I do about the subject at hand, AND honestly my brain hurts with the does of TEH STOOPIDS that you are dishing out.

                  "'Touch it dude' - President Barack Obama"

                  by volleyboy1 on Fri May 25, 2012 at 03:15:21 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (132)
  • Community (62)
  • Elections (39)
  • 2016 (37)
  • Environment (36)
  • Bernie Sanders (35)
  • Hillary Clinton (30)
  • Culture (30)
  • Republicans (29)
  • Media (29)
  • Climate Change (27)
  • Spam (24)
  • Congress (23)
  • Education (23)
  • Civil Rights (22)
  • Barack Obama (21)
  • Labor (21)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (21)
  • Texas (20)
  • Law (20)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site