Jaekus
I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose
+957|5149|Sydney

13urnzz wrote:

Jaekus wrote:

Pretty sure posting on BF2s is hardly going to be something that screws you over if you become a public figure.
online tax cheating online tax evasion

what's my post count? what's my mod note say?
I want to know my AWM count.
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6382|'Murka

Interesting thoughts. Too bad nobody here seems to have any understanding of how CAS (via drone or manned aircraft) works.

It's not like there isn't someone on the ground, verifying the target area meets ROE. The drone pilots don't just spot something on their HD display and say, "'Murka! Fuck Yeah! Die, towelhead!" They spend the vast majority of their time boring holes in the sky, taking video so that SOF teams can develop a pattern of life on a specific target to roll up later.

As to the "disconnectedness" claimed, they are no more disconnected than any other platform's crew. In the end, it comes down to putting a reticle on a target on a screen and then hitting the button when the ground commander (or asset) says to, after its been through all the legal wickets. The biggest difference is that the drone pilot then has to zoom in with his HD camera and verify the strike results, usually looking at people he's just blown apart in 1080p. All he's missing is the smell at that point. Even Apache and Hog pilots don't get to do that.

So he gets to go home after his sortie and debrief. Big deal. So did the NATO pilots during Kosovo and Libya. And so do the French pilots in Mali. Studies after Kosovo showed that the schism caused by going home to a "normal" life after every combat sortie caused a lot of problems for the crews involved.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
BVC
Member
+325|6666
The term 'drone' is a bit dehumanising/demonising, and probably does more to give them a bad rep than a lot of people realise.  "Oooh the name sounds scary!"

Also, something on wiki you all might find interesting:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unmanned_c … al_vehicle
In the 1980s, Iran deployed a drone armed with six RPG-7 rounds in the Iran-Iraq War. This was the first time a combat drone was used in war.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6077|eXtreme to the maX

FEOS wrote:

It's not like there isn't someone on the ground, verifying the target area meets ROE.
So what are the ROE for the military killing citizens of a country you're not formally at war with?
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,285|6687

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

It's not like there isn't someone on the ground, verifying the target area meets ROE.
So what are the ROE for the military killing citizens of a country you're not formally at war with?
CIA has their own drones
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6077|eXtreme to the maX
The CIA meets the definition of 'military'.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,285|6687

Dilbert_X wrote:

The CIA meets the definition of 'military'.
nope.avi

CIA is considered a civilian agency, and not under the DoD. Would you consider the MI6 or ASIS to be military?
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6077|eXtreme to the maX
Erm, you know what the MI bit stands for right? AFAIK MI6 and ASIS don't kill people, although they would fit under 'military intelligence' so they'd still be connected with the military.

I'll go with the wiki definition of 'military' "A military is an organization authorized by its greater society to use lethal force, usually including use of weapons, in defending its country by combating actual or perceived threats."

Use of lethal force being covered by various domestic and international statutes.

So the CIA killing foreign nationals would make them 'military'.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2013-02-28 02:38:43)

Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,285|6687
dude theyre a spy agency, i don't think they care much about breaking laws. hell their whole purpose is to break laws.
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6077|eXtreme to the maX
Govt agencies don't get dispensation to break the law, they have to operate within the law.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,285|6687

Dilbert_X wrote:

Govt agencies don't get dispensation to break the law, they have to operate within the law.
You mean like local espionage laws? lol.

yeah CIA never broke any laws at all. I mean, why would any intelligence agency do that.
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6077|eXtreme to the maX
Spying on other countries doesn't usually break domestic laws, are there any international laws on spying?
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,285|6687

Dilbert_X wrote:

Spying on other countries doesn't usually break domestic laws, are there any international laws on spying?
they're breaking local laws.

and lol @ international laws.
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
M.O.A.B
'Light 'em up!'
+1,220|6194|Escea

Dilbert_X wrote:

Erm, you know what the MI bit stands for right? AFAIK MI6 and ASIS don't kill people, although they would fit under 'military intelligence' so they'd still be connected with the military.

I'll go with the wiki definition of 'military' "A military is an organization authorized by its greater society to use lethal force, usually including use of weapons, in defending its country by combating actual or perceived threats."

Use of lethal force being covered by various domestic and international statutes.

So the CIA killing foreign nationals would make them 'military'.
CIA uses Special Activities Division, specifically the Special Operations Group, which is a part of the National Clandestine Service (acronyms galore), as a paramilitary unit for combat operations in places like Afghanistan. These would be the ones who go in to do the hard-hitting work. They're generally considered the absolute best SF there is, since they take their recruits out of units like DEVGRU and Delta.

As for MI6, Mossad preferred them to any other agency for carrying out hits.
13urnzz
Banned
+5,830|6468

Cybargs wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Spying on other countries doesn't usually break domestic laws, are there any international laws on spying?
they're breaking local laws.

and lol @ international laws.
Think Global, Act Local
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6382|'Murka

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

It's not like there isn't someone on the ground, verifying the target area meets ROE.
So what are the ROE for the military killing citizens of a country you're not formally at war with?
For those who are affiliated with terrorist groups, they're quite clear. And those countries are complicit in the targeting of those individuals.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6077|eXtreme to the maX
Complicity in a crime is not a good thing.

On the plus side does this mean we can send the SAS out to shoot suspected members of the IRA in the neck while they sleep?
While they're living in America?
If so then I'm in favour.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6382|'Murka

It's not a crime if the country involved approves.

If the US government is a part of it and not actively supporting the IRA against the UK...why not?

Of course, both the US and UK have that pesky due process thing as part of their domestic law, so it's an apples and horseshoes comparison.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|6661|Tampa Bay Florida
Come on feos.  So you'd argue that if we did not have an armed UAV's in countries like Yemen/Pakistan, we'd be bombing them with conventional aircraft instead?
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6382|'Murka

Probably not Pakistan, but likely Yemen.

The drones give the other countries deniability.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|4225

FEOS wrote:

It's not a crime if the country involved approves.

If the US government is a part of it and not actively supporting the IRA against the UK...why not?

Of course, both the US and UK have that pesky due process thing as part of their domestic law, so it's an apples and horseshoes comparison.
what, so because both parties agree to wrong, that absolves all ethical responsibility? that erases the transgression of the crime? lol what fucking bullshit. what a nursery-like understanding of international law and its putative purposes/aims.
M.O.A.B
'Light 'em up!'
+1,220|6194|Escea

Dilbert_X wrote:

Complicity in a crime is not a good thing.

On the plus side does this mean we can send the SAS out to shoot suspected members of the IRA in the neck while they sleep?
While they're living in America?
If so then I'm in favour.
As fas as I'm aware, for something like that, MI6 would 'borrow' a member of the SAS so they weren't acting on behalf of the military, putting them on leave so to speak.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6077|eXtreme to the maX

FEOS wrote:

It's not a crime if the country involved approves.
Yes it is.

Does Pakistani law allow the govt to summarily execute citizens?

Does US law allow the military to kill foreign citizens of countries its not formally at war with, or US citizens for that matter?
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,285|6687

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

It's not a crime if the country involved approves.
Yes it is.

Does Pakistani law allow the govt to summarily execute citizens?

Does US law allow the military to kill foreign citizens of countries its not formally at war with, or US citizens for that matter?
havent you heard about the war on terror lel
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
1stSFOD-Delta
Mike "The Spooge Gobbler" Morales
+376|5949|Blue Mountain State

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

It's not a crime if the country involved approves.
Yes it is.

Does Pakistani law allow the govt to summarily execute citizens?

Does US law allow the military to kill foreign citizens of countries its not formally at war with, or US citizens for that matter?
You're right.

We should stop.
https://www.itwirx.com/other/hksignature.jpg

Baba Booey

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard