What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Leaked Drone Assassination program (1 Viewer)

Are international war crimes charges possible here? It's pretty rich that this is the guy who won the Nobel 'Peace Prize'!!!!

Way to ruin another priceless treasure, Odumbo!!!!

 
Although I think it is pretty common knowledge that our president has been facilitating this, I love the fact that this now 'out in the open'. More ammunition for opponents of this tool, who is a total phony and has zero qualms about killing innocent civilians in order to achieve his 'objectives', which in my opinion, are pretty much meaningless because things are worse than ever in that part of the world.

 
Meatwad Reloaded said:
Although I think it is pretty common knowledge that our president has been facilitating this, I love the fact that this now 'out in the open'. More ammunition for opponents of this tool, who is a total phony and has zero qualms about killing innocent civilians in order to achieve his 'objectives', which in my opinion, are pretty much meaningless because things are worse than ever in that part of the world.
Click to expand...
:lmao:

 
cstu said:
Meatwad Reloaded said:
Although I think it is pretty common knowledge that our president has been facilitating this, I love the fact that this now 'out in the open'. More ammunition for opponents of this tool, who is a total phony and has zero qualms about killing innocent civilians in order to achieve his 'objectives', which in my opinion, are pretty much meaningless because things are worse than ever in that part of the world.
Click to expand...
:lmao:
Click to expand...
:thumbup:

Glad to see you think innocent people being killed by our government is funny!

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/world/asia/drone-strikes-reveal-uncomfortable-truth-us-is-often-unsure-about-who-will-die.html?_r=0

 
Meatwad Reloaded said:
cstu said:
Meatwad Reloaded said:
Although I think it is pretty common knowledge that our president has been facilitating this, I love the fact that this now 'out in the open'. More ammunition for opponents of this tool, who is a total phony and has zero qualms about killing innocent civilians in order to achieve his 'objectives', which in my opinion, are pretty much meaningless because things are worse than ever in that part of the world.
Click to expand...
:lmao:
Click to expand...
:thumbup:

Glad to see you think innocent people being killed by our government is funny!

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/world/asia/drone-strikes-reveal-uncomfortable-truth-us-is-often-unsure-about-who-will-die.html?_r=0
Click to expand...
Unpossible. That never happens in wars.
 
Ignoramus said:
Meatwad Reloaded said:
cstu said:
Meatwad Reloaded said:
Although I think it is pretty common knowledge that our president has been facilitating this, I love the fact that this now 'out in the open'. More ammunition for opponents of this tool, who is a total phony and has zero qualms about killing innocent civilians in order to achieve his 'objectives', which in my opinion, are pretty much meaningless because things are worse than ever in that part of the world.
Click to expand...
:lmao:
Click to expand...
:thumbup:

Glad to see you think innocent people being killed by our government is funny!

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/world/asia/drone-strikes-reveal-uncomfortable-truth-us-is-often-unsure-about-who-will-die.html?_r=0
Click to expand...
Unpossible. That never happens in wars.
Click to expand...
The wrinkle here is that it's borderless war, so were killing people in places like Somalia and Yemen etc where we are not at war with the prevailing regime....

 
See this is definitely a misuse of drones. They should be used primarily to spy on chicks sunbathing nude on apartment roofs. Or chicks sunbathing nude anywhere.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
1. I'm not seeing this reported anywhere else yet. Doesn't mean it's false but I'm a tad hesitant to give it significant credibility based upon that link to a shoddy site with no mention of where it came from.

2. If true, is this news? We've been slaughtering folk with drones for some time. We think they're not operating with some sort of hit list? Americans appear to be okay with it.

 
James Daulton said:
See this is definitely a misuse of drones. They should be used primarily to spy on chicks sunbathing nude on apartment roofs. Or chicks sunbathing nude anywhere.
Click to expand...
You, my friend, should run for President.

I bet Odumbo doesn't even like chicks who sunbathe in the nude.

 
AnonymousBob said:
1. I'm not seeing this reported anywhere else yet. Doesn't mean it's false but I'm a tad hesitant to give it significant credibility based upon that link to a shoddy site with no mention of where it came from.

2. If true, is this news? We've been slaughtering folk with drones for some time. We think they're not operating with some sort of hit list? Americans appear to be okay with it.
Click to expand...
The Intercept is run independently by the journos that released the early Snowden stories. Very credible website.

 
James Daulton said:
See this is definitely a misuse of drones. They should be used primarily to spy on chicks sunbathing nude on apartment roofs. Or chicks sunbathing nude anywhere.
Click to expand...
If only Rob Ford could become the POTUS. Drones would be used for the right things, like spying on hot chicks in bikinis and delivering weed to your doorstep.

 
AnonymousBob said:
1. I'm not seeing this reported anywhere else yet. Doesn't mean it's false but I'm a tad hesitant to give it significant credibility based upon that link to a shoddy site with no mention of where it came from.

2. If true, is this news? We've been slaughtering folk with drones for some time. We think they're not operating with some sort of hit list? Americans appear to be okay with it.
Click to expand...
This is not the first I have heard of us literally not knowing who we are shooting so it's not news really.

If you think about the limitations of technology it's common sense:

  • We are tracking using satellite imaging, so it's a cross-reference of what little info we really have, and a look alike game
  • As good as our cameras are, all we really know is that there is someone who looks like a terrorist in the vicinity of the last known location of the terrorist in or around people/things believed to be linked to a terrorist network
  • Now think about what that really is: looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, must be a duck
IOW drone warfare is only acceptable if you accept the fact that about 2-3 times out of ten you'll be killing innocent people. And that's balanced against the inherent risk of ground troops.

From a long-term strategic perspective, we are picking off a few terrorists and breeding somewhere in the neighborhood of 20-30 per attack. Nothing could be more detrimental to our longterm objectives (if in fact the long term objective is peace) than using drones to take out terrorists.

 
Clifford said:
AnonymousBob said:
1. I'm not seeing this reported anywhere else yet. Doesn't mean it's false but I'm a tad hesitant to give it significant credibility based upon that link to a shoddy site with no mention of where it came from.

2. If true, is this news? We've been slaughtering folk with drones for some time. We think they're not operating with some sort of hit list? Americans appear to be okay with it.
Click to expand...
This is not the first I have heard of us literally not knowing who we are shooting so it's not news really.

If you think about the limitations of technology it's common sense:

  • We are tracking using satellite imaging, so it's a cross-reference of what little info we really have, and a look alike game
  • As good as our cameras are, all we really know is that there is someone who looks like a terrorist in the vicinity of the last known location of the terrorist in or around people/things believed to be linked to a terrorist network
  • Now think about what that really is: looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, must be a duck
IOW drone warfare is only acceptable if you accept the fact that about 2-3 times out of ten you'll be killing innocent people. And that's balanced against the inherent risk of ground troops.

From a long-term strategic perspective, we are picking off a few terrorists and breeding somewhere in the neighborhood of 20-30 per attack. Nothing could be more detrimental to our longterm objectives (if in fact the long term objective is peace) than using drones to take out terrorists.
Click to expand...
A ground invasion is far more detrimental in term of breeding new terrorists. Drone attacks that kill innocents do encourage people to become terrorists, but seeing an armed invading force walking through your neighborhood and knocking down door does it even more.

 
cstu said:
Clifford said:
AnonymousBob said:
1. I'm not seeing this reported anywhere else yet. Doesn't mean it's false but I'm a tad hesitant to give it significant credibility based upon that link to a shoddy site with no mention of where it came from.

2. If true, is this news? We've been slaughtering folk with drones for some time. We think they're not operating with some sort of hit list? Americans appear to be okay with it.
Click to expand...
This is not the first I have heard of us literally not knowing who we are shooting so it's not news really.

If you think about the limitations of technology it's common sense:

  • We are tracking using satellite imaging, so it's a cross-reference of what little info we really have, and a look alike game
  • As good as our cameras are, all we really know is that there is someone who looks like a terrorist in the vicinity of the last known location of the terrorist in or around people/things believed to be linked to a terrorist network
  • Now think about what that really is: looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, must be a duck
IOW drone warfare is only acceptable if you accept the fact that about 2-3 times out of ten you'll be killing innocent people. And that's balanced against the inherent risk of ground troops.

From a long-term strategic perspective, we are picking off a few terrorists and breeding somewhere in the neighborhood of 20-30 per attack. Nothing could be more detrimental to our longterm objectives (if in fact the long term objective is peace) than using drones to take out terrorists.
Click to expand...
A ground invasion is far more detrimental in term of breeding new terrorists. Drone attacks that kill innocents do encourage people to become terrorists, but seeing an armed invading force walking through your neighborhood and knocking down door does it even more.
Click to expand...
You have no idea because neither of these has ever happened to your community.

 
Ilov80s said:
cstu said:
Clifford said:
AnonymousBob said:
1. I'm not seeing this reported anywhere else yet. Doesn't mean it's false but I'm a tad hesitant to give it significant credibility based upon that link to a shoddy site with no mention of where it came from.

2. If true, is this news? We've been slaughtering folk with drones for some time. We think they're not operating with some sort of hit list? Americans appear to be okay with it.
Click to expand...
This is not the first I have heard of us literally not knowing who we are shooting so it's not news really.

If you think about the limitations of technology it's common sense:

  • We are tracking using satellite imaging, so it's a cross-reference of what little info we really have, and a look alike game
  • As good as our cameras are, all we really know is that there is someone who looks like a terrorist in the vicinity of the last known location of the terrorist in or around people/things believed to be linked to a terrorist network
  • Now think about what that really is: looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, must be a duck
IOW drone warfare is only acceptable if you accept the fact that about 2-3 times out of ten you'll be killing innocent people. And that's balanced against the inherent risk of ground troops.

From a long-term strategic perspective, we are picking off a few terrorists and breeding somewhere in the neighborhood of 20-30 per attack. Nothing could be more detrimental to our longterm objectives (if in fact the long term objective is peace) than using drones to take out terrorists.
Click to expand...
A ground invasion is far more detrimental in term of breeding new terrorists. Drone attacks that kill innocents do encourage people to become terrorists, but seeing an armed invading force walking through your neighborhood and knocking down door does it even more.
Click to expand...
You have no idea because neither of these has ever happened to your community.
Click to expand...
I've seen Red Dawn.

 
cstu said:
Clifford said:
AnonymousBob said:
1. I'm not seeing this reported anywhere else yet. Doesn't mean it's false but I'm a tad hesitant to give it significant credibility based upon that link to a shoddy site with no mention of where it came from.

2. If true, is this news? We've been slaughtering folk with drones for some time. We think they're not operating with some sort of hit list? Americans appear to be okay with it.
Click to expand...
This is not the first I have heard of us literally not knowing who we are shooting so it's not news really.If you think about the limitations of technology it's common sense:

  • We are tracking using satellite imaging, so it's a cross-reference of what little info we really have, and a look alike game
  • As good as our cameras are, all we really know is that there is someone who looks like a terrorist in the vicinity of the last known location of the terrorist in or around people/things believed to be linked to a terrorist network
  • Now think about what that really is: looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, must be a duck
IOW drone warfare is only acceptable if you accept the fact that about 2-3 times out of ten you'll be killing innocent people. And that's balanced against the inherent risk of ground troops.From a long-term strategic perspective, we are picking off a few terrorists and breeding somewhere in the neighborhood of 20-30 per attack. Nothing could be more detrimental to our longterm objectives (if in fact the long term objective is peace) than using drones to take out terrorists.
Click to expand...
A ground invasion is far more detrimental in term of breeding new terrorists. Drone attacks that kill innocents do encourage people to become terrorists, but seeing an armed invading force walking through your neighborhood and knocking down door does it even more.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what's wrong with choosing none of the above.

 
A drone is just another weapon in our military arsenal. One that happens to help keep our soldiers safe. I think drones are a great idea, but like any weapon of course there is the potential for misuse. I don't get the paranoia and outrage over them. I'm sure i'll get crucified for those comments but whatever.

 
Been telling you guys for years. The drone program is completely out of control. We have used it to assassinate US citizens and their children. We have used them to attack funerals and weddings. We have used them to attack rescuers who show up after the initial attack trying to help. By the way those last 3 are war crimes and the first 2 are nothing short of murder IMO.

This program was wrong under Bush and its expansion is wrong under Obama. I believe it has gotten even more reckless and out of control under Obama and that he has spilled a lot of innocent blood needlessly, recklessly and wantonly. It's stain is on us all.

Mock as you see fit.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Stupid to introduce to begin with. Anyone with any vision knows that within ten years the enemy has it, and then it's a war of escalation and exponential killing machines.

 
Rand has been trying to bring attention to the misuse of drones for a long time. If only he wasn't such a weak candidate maybe people would of given a crap. If Trump was saying the same thing people would listen.

Maybe a leak like this will finally change things.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mr. Ham said:
Stupid to introduce to begin with. Anyone with any vision knows that within ten years the enemy has it, and then it's a war of escalation and exponential killing machines.
Click to expand...
All the gun owners may finally have something good to shoot instead of having to drop a rack at the range shooting paper.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Intercept is Glenn Greenwald's site. You may remember that Greenwald was the primarily journalist on the Snowden leaks when he was with the Guardian, for which he won a Pulitzer. He may be biased, but this is legit. Does need to fire his web designer though.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Fat Nick
New Jersey Drone Invasion
6 7 8
Replies
392
Views
14K
fatness
fatness
Chadstroma
Brain Storm Help with a Youth Football Program
Replies
28
Views
481
Chadstroma
Chadstroma
C
40 Year High School Reunion
2
Replies
60
Views
2K
Gatorade
Gatorade

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top