HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Thought Experiment, inste...

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 09:56 PM

Thought Experiment, instead of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars we had only used drone strikes


What if, instead of a military response, the U.S. had responded with an attitude more similar to police actions? Targeting specific individuals and using deadly force to eliminate them.


Would we still be outraged by the drone strikes?


8 replies, 451 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 8 replies Author Time Post
Reply Thought Experiment, instead of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars we had only used drone strikes (Original post)
Motown_Johnny Feb 2013 OP
jberryhill Feb 2013 #1
DireStrike Feb 2013 #2
JaneyVee Feb 2013 #3
randome Feb 2013 #4
loose wheel Feb 2013 #5
Canuckistanian Feb 2013 #6
nadinbrzezinski Feb 2013 #7
Agnosticsherbet Feb 2013 #8

Response to Motown_Johnny (Original post)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 10:04 PM

1. Remind me what the Iraq war was about...

Prior to Bush, we had been engaged in low intensity warfare to keep the no fly zones in Iraq, and nobody was too excited about it.

We had cruise missiles for a long time, and it was the use of those for specific targets which Bush believed was not dramatic enough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Motown_Johnny (Original post)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 10:05 PM

2. I think there would be less outrage, and it would be harder to get the word out about how bad drones

actually are.

It would be tough to argue against "but they kept our troops out of danger!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Motown_Johnny (Original post)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 10:06 PM

3. Less blood lost, less treasure lost, less collateral damage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Motown_Johnny (Original post)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 10:10 PM

4. Well, if we hadn't invaded Iraq, the economy would be stronger.

People wouldn't be as angry and looking to vent as they are today. So no.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Motown_Johnny (Original post)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 10:13 PM

5. Get back to me when...

 

Get back to me when I can send in drones to arrest every left-handed red head in a ten city block square area. Oh, and I happen to not want to just smash the whole thing or kill the objective, which is my only real choice with drones, which won't exactly do wonders for keeping collateral damage low.

Drones have advantages and disadvantages just like any other tool in the national security box. They can't tell for example, that the house you've been watching that is now swarming with activity is a wedding in progress and not a terrorist meeting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Motown_Johnny (Original post)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 10:18 PM

6. What, relying on locals to provide all of your intelligence?

And then using that intelligence to make "targeted" strikes?

I can't think of anything LESS effective. You can't achieve ANY kind of progress unless you've got boots AND brains on the ground. Interacting and gaining trust of locals is essential.

Using "death from the sky" techniques on a terrified population would increase Al Qaeda and Taliban membership EXPONENTIALLY.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Motown_Johnny (Original post)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 10:19 PM

7. Thought experiment

What if SecDef did not issue the stand down order at Tora Bora and US Special Forces instead finished the job instead of watching the ISI fly out OBL and his henchmen?

Nah, there would not have been a war in Iraq and the short intervention in Afghanistan would have come to an end.

Wait, you mean KBR, Chenney's last employer, would not have made a killing?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Motown_Johnny (Original post)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 11:36 PM

8. Saddam or at least the Bath party would still be in power.

Targeted attacks would not destroy the iraqi military, nor would it have changed much in Afghanistan. We could not have brought down national governments with drones. Our policy of targeted killings is like Israel's, and it has not affected much there except to exacerbate the problem.

Are we outraged by Israel's targeted killings? Yes. Using them in a decade long series of assassinations that killed a lot of number 3's, some number 2's, and an occasional number 1's would not enamor drone strikes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread