US Drone strikes in Pakistan are illegal under international law.

[S-2]

"There is a difference between people like Warraich, who would actually applaud the Taliban and their actions, and those like RR for example, who ... condemn what they perceive as indiscriminate bombing by the US resulting in collateral damage."

There is, sadly, no difference between young waraich and those like roadrunner who can't recognize the functional flaws in their rationales about PREDATOR.

The weapons are precisely aimed. It cannot be indiscriminate bombing. These are not gravity bombs tossed like Palestinian rockets into the great unknown. They are anti-tank rockets or laser/infrared guided munitions. They are directed against precisely identified targets. We know the face of the man whom we are targeting in almost all certainty.

Note the difference displayed by this example of indiscriminate? I hope it helps.

"Collateral damage" is not a war-crime. It is an unfortunate byproduct of war to include legitimate actions. Measures taken to protect ourselves, our allies, and the afghan populace against known and identified enemies will occur until our satisfaction that no such threat exists.

To date, that's not the case.

 

[metalfalcon]

You have no proof of this statement. None. Nada. It's just your opinion and irhabi sympathy shining through.

what will you do if i give you pictures and proofs.

What will be your reaction, will you be convinced....i don't think so

 

[S-2]

We don't need the pictures. How about, for starters, you simply match the "innocent" casualties attributed to each known strike and tally them up. Maybe there are strikes which you can find that are unknown because they went so heinously bad.

See, you've even room to make some up. Please be able to source these missions, if so.

You guys can do that, correct? I asked Asim yesterday if this would be possible.

I haven't read a reply yet. Can you help me, metalfalcon?

 

[roadrunner]

Actually, neither roadrunner nor you are in position to know what these men have done in their past nor their future intended plans. Neither anybody else here. Thus, you've little credibility to evaluate "effect".

Aren't these men innocent until proven guilty? Or shall we just bomb people at random? That's the point. We don't know what they did in the past. But presumably you do. Release the information about the crimes committed before (or after) you've blown them up, and those crimes can be investigated further.

Blowing them up, then labelling everyone "bad guys blown up here" is just not washing. Why should a local believe it? They're the ones that know each other, who is a foreigner and who is not. On the one hand you say they're very patriotic, on the other, they must be lying because they're going against the word of the Pakistani government. Which is it? (actually you refer to it as Pashtunistan, so perhaps you don't believe in patriotism).

roadrunner's simplistic "cause and effect" rationales remain woefully and pathetically full of holes. Worse, the central underlying premise behind these attacks- the absence of a Pakistani gov't writ inside the Islamic Republic of Pashtunistan makes impossible for NATO (specifically America) to ignore it's responsibilities to protect itself and Afghanistan.

The argument I made was that your claim these drone strikes are effective is nonsense. If they were effective you would not see previously Taliban free territories becoming Taliban territories. Locals do believe they're being targeted unfairly. That is what is leading to instability.

 

[roadrunner]

There is, sadly, no difference between young waraich and those like roadrunner who can't recognize the functional flaws in their rationales about PREDATOR.

Yes yes, I'm horrid, but this isn't about my personality. I could argue you're personality is one of a psycopathic cyber-murdering little wimp. And argue it strongly, I could

The weapons are precisely aimed. It cannot be indiscriminate bombing. These are not gravity bombs tossed like Palestinian rockets into the great unknown. They are anti-tank rockets or laser/infrared guided munitions. They are directed against precisely identified targets. We know the face of the man whom we are targeting in almost all certainty.

You're having difficulty again. Read.

The weapons have a precise aim, no doubt. The people controlling them do not. They make snap judgements about who to bomb. You even acknowledge Predator to be surveillance, and the good thing is that it can shoot straight away. If you saw how poor American judgement was in the Apache, Iraqi farmer incident, you will know that it is not possible to positively ID anyone that gets shot up. They are infra red images without any positive ID. You cannot positively ID anyone from a Predator, there's even less chance when you're drugged out snorting coke all night in front of the screen.

 

[S-2]

" I could argue you're personality is one of a psycopathic [sic] cyber-murdering little wimp. And argue it strongly."

No. You couldn't. You can't spell the term yet. Start there. I can argue that point even more strongly. You see the clear evidence of your mistake? Evidence is something rarely otherwise seen from you.

I, OTOH, could strongly argue that I'm debating with an inarticulate mental midget. I like my chances a lot.

"They make snap judgements about who to bomb."

And you know this how, please?

"...the good thing is that it can shoot straight away."

You know so little about target processing it's beyond discussion. Your plaintive ignorance is displayed in the above statement.

" If you saw how poor American judgement was in the Apache, Iraqi farmer incident..."

Yes! I saw that. ratus ratus made rather short work of it's dubious content. You're a pushover, though, as you are hardly an unbiased and professional observer of American combat operations.

Some advice offered sincerely-

"So little pains do the vulgar take in the investigation of truth, accepting readily the first story that comes to hand." Thucydides 1.20.3

An apt description of you. Please take it to heart.

Your arguments are poorly grounded and lack specificity. You know little about multiple existing means of identification and show little understanding of PREDATOR mission configuration. Without either, it's impossible for you to appreciate the nature of these missions. It's not your fauilt. You're simply reaching beyond a very narrow and limited perspective.

When will your nation prevent the slaughter of innocent afghanis by the men whom you harbor on your lands? Will you ever condemn the misery which you've launched daily from your former lands for seven years? Have you no shame at the butchery which you've unleashed upon Afghanistan for over seven years, roadrunner?

This must stop, please. Until it does, I pray PREDATOR hovers the skies above these men every damned day. It's the only protection afghanis have from the plans of these evil men and their willing minions.

Thanks, roadrunner.

 

[roadrunner]

Alright, I spelt psychopathic wrong. Sue mee. Oh no, there's an extra e........

Your arguments are poorly grounded and lack specificity. You know little about multiple existing means of identification and show little understanding of PREDATOR mission configuration. Without either, it's impossible for you to appreciate the nature of these missions. It's not your fauilt. You're simply reaching beyond a very narrow and limited perspective.

I doubt Predator has better target selection than Apache, and we all know how good its target selection is.

 

[S-2]

Seen it. Thanks.

Image magnification? Signal intercepts and/or triangulation? HUMINT? All of the aforementioned? That you haven't considered these strikes happening at any hour, to include daylight, nor the possible means of viable target I.D. confirms your amateurish perspectives, an emotional clinging to your position or both.

How's that count of innocents wantonly murdered by PREDATOR coming?

Thanks...

 

[Kasrkin]

When will your nation prevent the slaughter of innocent afghanis by the men whom you harbor on your lands? Will you ever condemn the misery which you've launched daily from your former lands for seven years? Have you no shame at the butchery which you've unleashed upon Afghanistan for over seven years, roadrunner?

Let’s stick to the topic, shall we? I know you excel at flaming, dissembling, misdirecting arguments but let’s try to refrain from that. We want all the discussion to be constructive, properly orientated and spirited but that won’t happen if we allow it to degenerate to this every time someone ticks you off.

You say that Roadrunner is the one here trying to reach out beyond a ‘very narrow and limited prospective’. But I’ll say this; seeing the amount of objectivity, balance and factual merit your posts have to offer, at least he has the capacity to try and reach out beyond any pre-established naïve stereotyping unlike some people.

You’ve deflected his criticism/concerns through a smokescreen of vague technicalities without actually addressing any of it. Your post(s) constituted nothing more than preemptive attempts at undermining an opponent’s personal credibility and perception. This has to stop.

P.S. You spelt ‘fault’ wrong too, I guess that makes you an amateur debater as well.

 

[S-2]

Let's start here-

"P.S. You spelt ‘fault’ wrong too, I guess that makes you an amateur debater as well."

Deserved!

"You’ve deflected his criticism/concerns through a smokescreen of vague technicalities without actually addressing any of it."

Horsecrap. roadrunner painted a picture of an on-call, target-of-opportunity attack that is unvetted. Very, very unlikely. What's so vague about signal triangulation? What's so vague about unamplified image intensification? What's so vague about HUMINT?

Paint a picture?

roadrunner attempted to link and diminish PREDATOR's sensor systems against APACHE and used a video portraying an attack to simulate what PREDATOR may see.

roadrunner has consistently attacked the professionalism and sense of responsibility of these operators without any real sense of their mission duties.

Smokescreen? B.S. Kasrkin, anybody with half an ounce of brain would know that there's a high probability that these targets are vetted through independant means but, naw...not roadrunner.

Instead, we've got desk-jockeys playing real-world video games and lighting off hellfires for kicks and grins-at least to believe him-and I don't and actually KNOW better.

Nice catch on the misspell.

So how's that count coming, fellas?

Thanks.

 

[Kasrkin]

roadrunner attempted to link and diminish PREDATOR's sensor systems against APACHE and used a video portraying an attack to simulate what PREDATOR may see.

I was actually referring to your posts above. But fair enough. However this does not say much about the credibility or accuracy of those 'independent means' (which can be horrendously inaccurate as proved on numerous occasions). Concerns over civilian casualties still stand and while he can’t prove that all attacks are unvetted, you certainly can’t prove otherwise either.

But these knee-jerk trollish anti-Pakistani outbursts have to go, otherwise there is no end to it.

 

[S-2]

"But these knee-jerk trollish anti-Pakistani outbursts have to go, otherwise there is no end to it."

There is no end to what an American faces here. My position is simple and firm-

You aborgated your sovereignty years ago. Clear enough? A foreign army invaded/invited itself to your tribal areas and are still there. From your tribal areas they make war on Afghanistan. There's strong reason to suspect that elements within your government continue to support such actions.

We will defend our interests in the face of such. We've lost interest, in the meantime, with your concerns as they appear decidedly one-sided. Too many Afghani civilians die by attacks directed at them from these very men you shelter.

Those are the general premises by which PREDATOR operates. The specifics of such are ABSOLUTELY UNKNOWN HERE at this board. Anything beyond what's read is sheer speculation. Do you wish to claim they're ineffective? O.K.

So?

Do you wish to claim that they divide your people against the U.N. mission? O.K.

Do you wish to claim that they make your citizens hate America? O.K.

So? In truth, you hated America long ago. In truth, you've long hated the U.N. mission to stabilize Afghanistan.

In truth, many of you here have yearned to have PREDATOR yourselves.

Thanks.

 

[Kasrkin]

Very well, if you insist…

”There's strong reason to suspect that elements within your government continue to support such actions.”

Yup, by ‘strong reason’ you mean paranoia, distrust, insecurity, downright contempt and tendency to attribute your own failures to another party. Other than that, your ‘strong reasons’ are in terms of credibility not more than what would be a source of faint amusement to us.

But your own hypocrisy is painfully clear for all to see. You just in your last post moaned to me about:

“has consistently attacked the professionalism and sense of responsibility of these operators without any real sense of their mission duties.”

But what are you doing on the other hand; accusing Pakistani servicemen of being responsible for the brutal deaths and slaughtering not only of their fellow citizens but of their comrades as well, with even less to go on than what we have in regards to Predator. Allegations of incompetence and unprofessionalism are nothing compared to what you rant out on our faces on an instinctive and regular basis. If you want to vent your paranoia so badly, then at least do to in a thread dedicated to thus instead of trolling around.

”You aborgated your sovereignty years ago. Clear enough? A foreign army invaded/invited itself to your tribal areas and are still there.”

Same is the case with Afghanistan; a country whose sovereignty has been mandated to the US (and allies) through UNSC resolutions. So therefore by that logic a foreign army invites itself/invades your domains on a daily basis and IN FACT used your domain to invade and establish bases in our country in the first place because of your woeful incompetence in not only properly dealing with the threat but failing to notify us (an ally) in an appropriate and timely manner (despite fully knowing the relevant ground realities and military dispositions). In fact, this ‘foreign army’ never really left your domain in the first place, and thanks to your blunderings not only survived but made a spectacular comeback with sufficient Afghan local support to do so. But your arrogance and self-contentment is astounding...

The stuff you give us is very very weak, no matter which way you look at it. You desperately delude yourself about your own moral superiority that simply does not exist.

Now if you try to whine about my ‘nation’s slaughtering of innocent Afghans for years’ or crap like that; then remember you’re not only ruining the context of the thread but you’re setting a pretty low common denominator. We all know how you’d react if some kid here started randomly moaning about ‘US slaughtering Iraqis for years’, but actually you’re no better. If you start with ‘Pakistan’s Taliban’ killing innocents, then someone will talk about the HR abusing warlords you’ve supported in Afghanistan, then one of your friends is going to rant about Baluchistan and before you know it we’re talking about US bombings in Vietnam and Hiroshima and what not.

As a senior member, show some responsibility as to the direction of the discourse and don’t troll. Also find impersonal ways to address the gaps or ambiguities in your opponent’s line of argument. That would be best for the thread and best for you.

 

[S-2]

"Yup, by ‘strong reason’ you mean paranoia, distrust, insecurity, downright contempt and tendency to attribute your own failures to another party."

Thanks for your interesting views. They don't merit addressing seriously-so I won't other than to say that after five month of serious discussion with you I can agree that we don't see eye to eye on PREDATOR and, in general, sovereign responsibilities.

Nor does your government and mine.

At least we can agree that PREDATOR will remain in the skies above FATA and continue it's attacks-likely for most of the reasons which I've articulated.

From that firm common bond, we can build anew, Kasrkin.

Thanks.

 

[Tang0]

So this thread has gotten fairly philosophical, and I'll keep the tone.
To all Trolls:

The problem with war is not necessarily that people die, and certainly not that warriors die. All of this is to be expected. What makes it so painful is that so much is broken that should be whole. Children are separated from their parents, years of blood, sweat and toil disappear in a puff in a fire stoked by intransigent political differences that in retrospect will probably seem absurd. People make decisions based on limited data, and lives are destroyed because of it. It all seems so stupid.

When people join their nation's military, they sign up knowing that they will be asked to kill. The rest of the story though, they rarely think about. Its not the dead people who matter, it is their families, their nation, their culture. The warriors made their choices, but in the end, they aren't the ones who pay, are they?

No one wants to believe that what they did probably just made things worse, no one wants to be involved in the death of a way of life. But that is the choice you make when you decide to participate in a modern war. Technology broadens the scope of who is, and is not, a target.

Armies do not meet at an appointed time and place, throw the best they have at each other until all there forces are destroyed, and call it a day.

So, we create a narrative. "Good Guys" in this corner, "Bad Guys" in that corner. The "Good Guys" act like this, the "Bad Guys" act like that. Of course, it is all just a convenient little lie that helps us sleep at night, but hey, ya gotta believe in something right?

Ask yourself, do I believe what I do so that I can sleep at night, or because that is what any rational person would think? Objectivity is impossible, but it is worth a try.

Of course, this is terribly off topic, and will probably be moved or deleted, but I hope the relevant parties see it.