Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ConservativeDemocrat

(2,720 posts)
86. Point by point deconstruction...
Mon Feb 11, 2013, 05:35 AM
Feb 2013
The drones SEEM OK to a lot of people because we're bombing faceless brown people who hate the U.S. and live in a faraway country.

No, the drones seem okay because we're bombing people who we absolutely know are foreign enemy terrorists. The use of guided munitions is nearly the exact opposite of "faceless".

Facts: 1
This article: 0

But look at it this way. Suppose the government sent drone strikes against American neighborhoods where Mafia figures or seditious right-wing militia leaders lived. Would we accept the same excuses?

We did during the civil war, except it was naval bombardment of southern cities.

Facts: 2
This article: 0

That they were too dangerous to get at by legal means? That the deaths of their children were just "collateral damage"? That if the targeting wasn't accurate and a neighbor's house was blown up instead, that was just too bad, but perhaps the neighbors shouldn't have agreed to let the Mafia boss or militia leader live in their neighborhood?

Of all acts of war, drone strikes have the absolutely lowest percentage of injury and death to bystanders... ever.

Facts: 3
This article: 0

Come to think of it, our government has actually used the first two excuses in its attack on David Koresh's followers in Waco, Texas, a few years back. The members of the cult, including Koresh, frequently went into town to buy supplies, and the authorities could have arrested them then and there with a minimum of fuss. Noooo, they had to play cowboy and mount a siege and then an attack, and we were told that the children who were killed were just "collateral damage" and that their parents shouldn't have joined the cult.

First, they didn't "mount a siege". That happened after the initial failed attempt to simply arrest him. Second, while there are Republican conspiracy theorists who spew all kinds of B.S. on this, there is indisputable evidence that at least five of the children who died in the compound were shot execution style by a weapon wielded by Steve Schneider (Koresh's right hand man). And third, besides seriously using the same arguments that Timothy McVeigh used to justify bomb the Federal Building in Oklahoma City, this has nothing to do with drones.

Facts: 4, 5 (could be 6 and 7 too - but I'll be nice)
This article: 0

We see this again and again on the world stage. There's a certain percentage of the population that has never grown out of childish video game revenge fantasies and loves the idea of watching perceived enemies get blown up at a distance, even if they would not be willing to go in themselves and kill a perceived enemy and his wife and children and neighbors with an axe or even a handgun.

This policy is being pursued under the direct direction of the President of the United States, who has shown no propensity to engage in "video game revenge fantasies".

Facts: 6
This article: 0

And let's get practical here. Killing (not "taking out"--let's be realistic about what we're saying) ONE or even a DOZEN alleged insurgents will make only a negative difference in the bogus War on Terror, because individuals aren't the problem.

First of all, the people killed have friends and extended families, and their cultural norms will require them to seek revenge. Each drone strike creates more terrorists. (If you want to facilitate further corporate dominance and eroded civil liberties by putting the nation on an endless war footing, make sure that you fight an unwinnable war against a vaguely defined enemy whose numbers will only multiply. Such a deal for the military-industrial complex and so easy to have the mass media persuade the uninformed that anything and everything the MIC dreams up is essential for "national security.&quot

Discounting the fact that the number of terrorist attacks against civilians has declined dramatically since the start of this program, arguably as a result of bringing consequence to the leaders of these theocratic drug-financed gangsters (i.e. 'order the murder of a 14 year old schoolgirl who dares to say women should be able to get an education? get a missile through your window'), this article's thesis doesn't account for 9/11. We were not using drones, yet were still attacked anyway.

It must be very comforting to believe that all the worlds security problems are entirely the fault of the U.S., because then by golly, all we need to do to make everyone sing in peace and harmony is to just stop doing bad things! The only problem with this worldview is that it is entirely false. The number of worldwide deaths through war has absolutely plunged under America's leadership, which lead most people to think that we're the solution, not the problem.

Facts: 7
This article: 0

Second, I'm sorry to break the news to all you "America's the greatest country in the world and we're always on the side of truth and justice" grade school patriots, but the REAL problem is and has always been the behavior of successive Republican and Democratic governments in the Middle East. Oil companies call the shots in our system, and in the interests of ensuring a continued, low-priced flow of "our" (our?) oil from the Middle East, U.S. governments have supported anyone who will play nice with the oil companies, no matter how badly they treat their own people. (Our government loved Saddam Hussein for decades before it hated him.)

The U.S. gets nearly NO oil from the Middle East. We are largely supplied by ourselves, Venezuela, and Canada.

Facts: 8
This article: 0

I'm afraid that in the realm of international relations, America's morality has deteriorated in the past seventy years.

In 1945, the Allies put the surviving members of the German government on trial at Nuremberg. The conclusion was foregone, but the world heard a full account of their crimes before they were executed or imprisoned. We didn't just send soldiers out to kill the top Nazis and their families. (That's what the Nazis did in the countries they conquered.)

So in 1945, we could formally arrest, imprison, and hold trials for the top Nazis, the men who planned to conquer Europe and wipe out all "non-Aryans," and in 2013, we have to send drones to get ONE GUY who may be aiding Al Qaeda (or may not be--we never see the evidence. What if someone being held for the CIA in a foreign prison gave his name under torture just to make the torture stop?) and risk killing his whole family and several of his neighbors?

Oh wait, you're serious! Let me laugh even harder!

In WW2, we bombed the fuck out of Germany and Japan. Here, whoever agrees with with this hackneyed POS article, have a look at this. One hundred times more civilians died in a single air raid on Toyko than everybody who has ever been killed in this entire drone campaign, terrorist and bystander, combined.

The fact is that we had those NAZI leaders in custody. That's entirely different from a combatant out in the field.

Facts: 9
This article: 0 (a bonus, though, for making me laugh at it's sheer stupidity)

The system is rotten, infiltrated with blood lust and money lust, and I do blame Obama for going along with it. He has a history of appeasing his opponents, so if the Experts and Very Serious People and Legal Equivocators say that we need to go after individuals with drones, his natural tendency will be to do what they say.

But he IS Commander-in-Chief. He could say NO. He could say, "You know, about Iran, I bet if we didn't have them surrounded on all sides by U.S. military installations, they wouldn't be so belligerent. You know, there are a lot of people in the Middle East who hate us for very good reasons, and why are we always intervening when we only screw up every time we go in there?"

For the record, while we are spying on Iran with drones, there has not been a single drone strike against Iran. We've even rescued their sailors from Somali pirates. Twice. And the truth is that this article gets the cause and effect precisely wrong. The reason why Iraq is surrounded by military installations is because they have a history of bad behavior, including promoting terrorism, not the reverse.

Facts: 10
This article: 0

So once again, I am ashamed to be an American, and I've lost track of how many times in my life I've had to say this.

Of course you are, dear. Of course you are.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community
Just curious... KansDem Feb 2013 #1
you cant, but the ramifications are, really, quite different pasto76 Feb 2013 #38
curious kardonb Feb 2013 #56
You forgot the most important part. President Obama will be President forever and ever Egalitarian Thug Feb 2013 #2
if obama behaves like "those awful republicans" there's not that much difference on those issues nt msongs Feb 2013 #3
Yep. It's not that there's no difference between the parties, it's that the differences Egalitarian Thug Feb 2013 #10
Yes. truebluegreen Feb 2013 #29
That is absolutely perfectly stated. FredStembottom Feb 2013 #34
Why TYVM. Egalitarian Thug Feb 2013 #43
The number of DUers who refuse to admit how execrable the policy is has me contemplating on coalition_unwilling Feb 2013 #60
No more contemplating. JTFrog Feb 2013 #64
There are many on this board who are not here because they support iemitsu Feb 2013 #67
Coalition_unwilling, if you ever read this Catherina Feb 2013 #79
Indeed. nt woo me with science Feb 2013 #46
K&R idwiyo Feb 2013 #73
Next up Hillary. 12 more years of this neo-liberal bullshit leftstreet Feb 2013 #5
I'm at least somewhat hopeful that she won't run. DU is not nearly as influential as it likes Egalitarian Thug Feb 2013 #6
Hillary45. Michelle46. President Obama nominated/becomes SCOTUS in 2018. graham4anything Feb 2013 #51
It is not good for our Democracy to nurture political dynasties. iemitsu Feb 2013 #58
Heavens, yes! Suggesting a Clinton-Obama dynasty gives the impression that Lydia Leftcoast Feb 2013 #59
I hate everything about the Bush dynasty. iemitsu Feb 2013 #65
Yeah, new SCOTUS will indeed be provided by Jeb Bush to your liking graham4anything Feb 2013 #63
All of your points are good. I don't take issue with any of them, iemitsu Feb 2013 #66
Yes, as I said, failure of imagination Lydia Leftcoast Feb 2013 #68
Yep, I suspect that some of the support that Obama enjoyed in 2008 iemitsu Feb 2013 #70
But what is your opinion on torture as practiced by CIA? Do you think president was right when he idwiyo Feb 2013 #74
DURec leftstreet Feb 2013 #4
Not all the terrorists hate the U.S. randome Feb 2013 #7
We are also allies of countries who do those very things. Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2013 #9
And the US was friends with EXACTLY those people... TheMadMonk Feb 2013 #16
Yes, and if we had stood by and let the Soviets help the Marxist Afghan government suppress the Lydia Leftcoast Feb 2013 #21
That's the problem - government of Afganistan was a socialist government and just like Chiliean idwiyo Feb 2013 #75
What a load of bull that is. Our Saudi 'allies' chop off hands and behead women. Bluenorthwest Feb 2013 #76
How are those drone strikes working out in Saudi Arabia? DisgustipatedinCA Feb 2013 #99
K&R G_j Feb 2013 #8
K&R whatchamacallit Feb 2013 #11
"loves the idea of watching perceived enemies get blown up at a distance" SkyIsGrey Feb 2013 #12
K&R. zeemike Feb 2013 #13
There's several problems with your arguments jeff47 Feb 2013 #14
Bigger problems with yours. Drones already in use... TheMadMonk Feb 2013 #20
You might wanna fix your post so the quotes are in place. (nt) jeff47 Feb 2013 #22
Your words don't bear repeating. TheMadMonk Feb 2013 #25
So you'd like people to guess at what you are replying to? jeff47 Feb 2013 #26
More or less the same break up of points as yours. TheMadMonk Feb 2013 #35
"Go back to the colonial era...boundaries deliberately drawn to maximise internal ethnic conflict." HiPointDem Feb 2013 #61
Drones targeting kids is problematic but maybe that issue will soon be solved. iemitsu Feb 2013 #69
Obviously, you never heard of Godwin's Law. Benton D Struckcheon Feb 2013 #81
Problems with your arguments, Mr. Conventional Wisdom Lydia Leftcoast Feb 2013 #23
K&R wish I could do it for real though. idwiyo Feb 2013 #53
Hey, don't you know inconvenient facts get in the way of a good rant? nt. OldDem2012 Feb 2013 #37
The most disturbing part of all of this Thav Feb 2013 #15
You got that right... NeoConsSuck Feb 2013 #18
K&R woo me with science Feb 2013 #17
K&R Guy Whitey Corngood Feb 2013 #19
k/r marmar Feb 2013 #24
Well said. K&R Louisiana1976 Feb 2013 #27
+ a million truebluegreen Feb 2013 #28
thanks, Lydia noiretextatique Feb 2013 #30
kick woo me with science Feb 2013 #31
DURec! bvar22 Feb 2013 #32
An incredible post "LL".....can't recommend enough. KoKo Feb 2013 #33
Brilliant and spot on - as you always are, LL. scarletwoman Feb 2013 #36
+1000 blackspade Feb 2013 #39
I sure wished Bush had a Drone at TORA BORA DearAbby Feb 2013 #40
This is a debate we should be having DearAbby Feb 2013 #41
What's this I see here? Lydia Leftcoast Feb 2013 #45
Thank you n/t Catherina Feb 2013 #47
Yeah DearAbby Feb 2013 #49
I don't agree that these are all necessarily bad guys Lydia Leftcoast Feb 2013 #52
+1 HiPointDem Feb 2013 #62
Thanks Lydia. n/t Catherina Feb 2013 #80
Unfortunately, we all KNOW why Bush would never had used a drone (or any other weaponry) bullwinkle428 Feb 2013 #48
Drones are here to stay because people buy into the fear racket and condone them and support them Catherina Feb 2013 #82
The real problem Augiedog Feb 2013 #42
China or North Korea John2 Feb 2013 #50
So would you actually tell a Chinese dissident to go back to China and Lydia Leftcoast Feb 2013 #55
Actually, the Taliban OFFERED to turn over Bin Laden ... brett_jv Feb 2013 #85
Dones, Coming To The Skies Near You. blkmusclmachine Feb 2013 #44
HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You !!! WillyT Feb 2013 #54
But..but..seeing as we can't win an actual war we must seem to be doing something. Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2013 #57
I find your argument absurd and your last line rather disgraceful hfojvt Feb 2013 #71
Sending drones into another country IS an act of war Lydia Leftcoast Feb 2013 #72
Funny how WWII always gets a pass as Skidmore Feb 2013 #77
Thanks for a brilliant rant- copied to read whenever the BS overflows green for victory Feb 2013 #78
Well said. MannyGoldstein Feb 2013 #83
Thank You unapatriciated Feb 2013 #84
Point by point deconstruction... ConservativeDemocrat Feb 2013 #86
Stopped reading after you graded your own baseless statement as a fact. Bonobo Feb 2013 #87
Of course you did: facts are "baseless" when you don't want them to be true. ConservativeDemocrat Feb 2013 #89
You mean "proud member of the rationalization community," don't you? Lydia Leftcoast Feb 2013 #88
Characterizations are fair... ConservativeDemocrat Feb 2013 #92
Who says the world needs a policeman? Lydia Leftcoast Feb 2013 #93
Not to put too fine a point on it... ConservativeDemocrat Feb 2013 #94
The Europeans did most of the work in Kosovo Lydia Leftcoast Feb 2013 #95
Please, before you just say things like this, do some research ConservativeDemocrat Feb 2013 #96
"The U.S. has more military firepower than the next five nations world wide combined. " Lydia Leftcoast Feb 2013 #97
Lydia, again, your perceptions run contrary to the facts... ConservativeDemocrat Feb 2013 #98
Conflicts like Libya and Syria are treated like Evil vs. Good in the U.S. media, but Lydia Leftcoast Feb 2013 #100
I agree that things are nuanced... ConservativeDemocrat Feb 2013 #101
Agree 100%. This should be front and center on the 'Greatest' page Taverner Feb 2013 #90
Well said, Lydia. Thanks. nt Zorra Feb 2013 #91
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Repost as OP: All this ta...»Reply #86