TaimiKhan
SENIOR MODERATOR
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2009
- Messages
- 8,956
- Reaction score
- 10
- Country
- Location
We do not know the details yet. There could be many reason of not chosing drones.
1 catching people live.
2 collateral damage due to location.
They did not used drones for Osama as well.
Do you seriously believe they would have given up ?? Don't you have any knowledge of how they fight ?? Till death.
Does US seriously believes in collateral damage ?? Wedding parties being bombed in Afghanistan, hundreds of civilians dieing with no regret or control on future incidents, similarly so many women, children, men with nothing to do with militants dieing in drone strikes in tribal areas, has all this taught the US anything about collateral damage ?? I believe not.
So both options are not worth to be considered had they really wanted to help and make a difference.
And as for Osama, the conditions were different. They were not themselves sure that he was there, they had a 50-60% surety, plus a drone strike would have made the body mutilated beyond imagination. Plus there were other considerations, kindly read about them and then mention Osama.