I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on

[Procrustes Stretched]

wtf is Kosh, a former member?

So you show that you care by posting this?

Typical far left Obama drone.

I've never pretended to care about cd in far away places. I admit it is the cost of things and it sucks. It should be minimized but not at all costs

 

[g5000]

DUPE: The far left does not care about drone strike collateral damage.

G5000: Here are multiple links to far lefties who are angry about drone strike collateral damage.

DUPE: I see nothing!!!

DUPE: The Senate Democrats do not care about collateral damage.

G5000: Here is a Senate Democratic bill which would require reporting of collateral damage from drone strikes.

DUPE: I see nothing!!!

And this goes to show that you will post lies to cover your position and the fact that you have nothing!

like we are supposed to believe one that claims the government has a 5000 year plan to deal with nuclear waste.

No one made that claim.

 

[Kosh]

wtf is Kosh, a former member?

So you show that you care by posting this?

Typical far left Obama drone.

I've never pretended to care about cd in far away places. I admit it is the cost of things and it sucks. It should be minimized but not at all costs

I am sure that is true after Nov 2008

 

[Freewill]

The far left still cares about collateral damage. They are very angry at Obama.

Really? If they are angry they have a really funny way of showing it. On Obama's orders a 16 year old American was killed. Maybe it was an accident but they did it any way. What did Gibbs say? The boy should have had a better father. Cold blooded liberals.

See posts 11, 13, and 18.

OK, I did and here is the results for those who didn't bother:

Number 18 Not a mention of Obama, not one. And who did they march on General Atomics, not Obama. So if they are mad at Obama they certainly are not showing it. From the link:

from the White House to General Atomics in protest of the U.S. government's use of drones. The protest was the kick-off event for a weekend of anti-war activities focusing on drone warfare, including the 2013 Drone Summit

and the second link in number 18, blamed the drone pilot and their superiors and the US government, Washington, not a mention of Obama who signs on off on this selective killing.

At least in 11 the woman vents at Obama. Did she seem angery? Maybe a little. Was there a mass of left wingers standing behind her? I didn't see them.

13 you got to be kidding: "I thanked President Obama for the United States' work in supporting education in Pakistan and Afghanistan and for Syrian refugees," she said in the statement. "I also expressed my concerns that drone attacks are fueling terrorism. Innocent victims are killed in these acts, and they lead to resentment among the Pakistani people. If we refocus efforts on education it will make a big impact."

Where exactly is the anger?

So where are all these liberals that are mad at Obama? Non-existent. But I must admit I love it when someone posts an argument thinking they won't get called on it.

 

[Kosh]

DUPE: The far left does not care about drone strike collateral damage.

G5000: Here are multiple links to far lefties who are angry about drone strike collateral damage.

DUPE: I see nothing!!!

DUPE: The Senate Democrats do not care about collateral damage.

G5000: Here is a Senate Democratic bill which would require reporting of collateral damage from drone strikes.

DUPE: I see nothing!!!

And this goes to show that you will post lies to cover your position and the fact that you have nothing!

like we are supposed to believe one that claims the government has a 5000 year plan to deal with nuclear waste.

No one made that claim.

Check out your post here:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/energy/332194-the-solar-swindle-5.html

 

[g5000]

And this goes to show that you will post lies to cover your position and the fact that you have nothing!

like we are supposed to believe one that claims the government has a 5000 year plan to deal with nuclear waste.

No one made that claim.

Check out your post here:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/energy/332194-the-solar-swindle-5.html

Yes, please check them out. Actually read them instead of letting the voices in your head speak for me.

You made an assumption that in the next 5,000 years we would not be able to figure out what to do with nuclear waste.

I challenged that assumption.

That is not claiming "the government has a 5000 year plan to deal with nuclear waste".

My God, you are dense! I'm starting to feel like I am beating up an actual retard.

 

[Freewill]

Still no links to bills from the far left that controls the senate on how they care about the collateral damage?

Here is a bill from Senate Democrats submitted last month: http://www.intelligence.senate.gov/intelauthfy14/113intelauthfy14.pdf

SEC. 312. UNCLASSIFIED ANNUAL REPORT ON THE USE OF TARGETED LETHAL FORCE OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES.

(a) REQUIREMENT FOR ANNUAL REPORT.—For each year, the President shall prepare and make public an annual report that sets forth the following:

(1) The total number of combatants killed or injured during the preceding year by the use of targeted lethal force outside the United States by remotely piloted aircraft.

(2) The total number of noncombatant civilians killed or injured during the preceding year by such use of targeted lethal force outside the United States.

(b) TARGETED LETHAL FORCE DEFINED.—In this section, the term ‘‘targeted lethal force’’ means the act of directing lethal force at a particular person or group with the specific intent of killing those persons.

(c) EXCEPTION.—A report required by subsection (a) shall not include—

(1) any use of targeted lethal force in Afghanistan prior to the end of combat operations by the United States; or (2) any use of targeted lethal force in a foreign country described by a future declaration of war or authorization for the use of military force.

If passed, it would be the first time American law required the reporting of the number of civilian casualties from drone strikes.

How does it feel to keep getting your ass handed to you, Kosh?

Gosh darn this is just plain fun.

H.R. 3381: Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014

Introduced:Oct 30, 2013Sponsor:Rep. Mike Rogers [R-MI8]Status:Reported by Committee

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hr3381

You do understand what the R means??? No?

 

[Kosh]

No one made that claim.

Check out your post here:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/energy/332194-the-solar-swindle-5.html

Yes, please check them out. Actually read them instead of letting the voices in your head speak for me.

You made an assumption that in the next 5,000 years we would not be able to figure out what to do with nuclear waste.

I challenged that assumption.

That is not claiming "the government has a 5000 year plan to deal with nuclear waste".

My God, you are dense!

Oh my!

"Ok show the plans and the cost projections for the next 5000 years to up keep this waste. "

Just like that thread you got caught and you got caught on this thread posting links and making claims that were untrue.

Just admit you have nothing! Which would be the first time posting the truth for you.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Whenever I read comments by politicians defending the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Predator and Reaper program – aka drones – I wish I could ask them a few questions. I'd start with: "How many women and children have you seen incinerated by a Hellfire missile?" And: "How many men have you seen crawl across a field, trying to make it to the nearest compound for help while bleeding out from severed legs?" Or even more pointedly: "How many soldiers have you seen die on the side of a road in Afghanistan because our ever-so-accurate UAVs [unmanned aerial vehicles] were unable to detect an IED [improvised explosive device] that awaited their convoy?"

Few of these politicians who so brazenly proclaim the benefits of drones have a real clue of what actually goes on. I, on the other hand, have seen these awful sights first hand.

I knew the names of some of the young soldiers I saw bleed to death on the side of a road. I watched dozens of military-aged males die in Afghanistan, in empty fields, along riversides, and some right outside the compound where their family was waiting for them to return home from the mosque.

I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on | Heather Linebaugh | Comment is free | theguardian.com

Interesting take from an actual drone pilot. Turns out they're not as precise as the government would have us believe, as if there was any doubt, and they don't simply target militants since they sometimes have no idea who they're targeting at all. Again, as if there was any doubt.

Cry me a river, Gertrude...if you don't want to get droned, stop fighting.

I'm sorry, was the wedding party that got droned in Yemen a few weeks back fighting somebody? Do you have evidence? Does that standard apply to the United States as well? Can Pakistan start drone bombing "terrorists" in Oklahoma now since the U.S. is fighting?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Whenever I read comments by politicians defending the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Predator and Reaper program – aka drones – I wish I could ask them a few questions. I'd start with: "How many women and children have you seen incinerated by a Hellfire missile?" And: "How many men have you seen crawl across a field, trying to make it to the nearest compound for help while bleeding out from severed legs?" Or even more pointedly: "How many soldiers have you seen die on the side of a road in Afghanistan because our ever-so-accurate UAVs [unmanned aerial vehicles] were unable to detect an IED [improvised explosive device] that awaited their convoy?"

Few of these politicians who so brazenly proclaim the benefits of drones have a real clue of what actually goes on. I, on the other hand, have seen these awful sights first hand.

I knew the names of some of the young soldiers I saw bleed to death on the side of a road. I watched dozens of military-aged males die in Afghanistan, in empty fields, along riversides, and some right outside the compound where their family was waiting for them to return home from the mosque.

I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on | Heather Linebaugh | Comment is free | theguardian.com

Interesting take from an actual drone pilot. Turns out they're not as precise as the government would have us believe, as if there was any doubt, and they don't simply target militants since they sometimes have no idea who they're targeting at all. Again, as if there was any doubt.

Having no idea who a terrorist (suspected) is is not the same thing as targeting an innocent. Not as precise? What precisely does that mean?

They're purposefully targeting people that they don't know are militants, and then lying about it. That is targeting innocents, however you want to spin it.

 

[Kosh]

I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on | Heather Linebaugh | Comment is free | theguardian.com

Interesting take from an actual drone pilot. Turns out they're not as precise as the government would have us believe, as if there was any doubt, and they don't simply target militants since they sometimes have no idea who they're targeting at all. Again, as if there was any doubt.

Cry me a river, Gertrude...if you don't want to get droned, stop fighting.

I'm sorry, was the wedding party that got droned in Yemen a few weeks back fighting somebody? Do you have evidence? Does that standard apply to the United States as well? Can Pakistan start drone bombing "terrorists" in Oklahoma now since the U.S. is fighting?

The far left does NOT care.

They only cared when Bush was president as they claimed that the drone strikes in Pakistan was "Bush invading yet another sovereign nation".

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Cry me a river, Gertrude...if you don't want to get droned, stop fighting.

I'm sorry, was the wedding party that got droned in Yemen a few weeks back fighting somebody? Do you have evidence? Does that standard apply to the United States as well? Can Pakistan start drone bombing "terrorists" in Oklahoma now since the U.S. is fighting?

The far left does NOT care.

They only cared when Bush was president as they claimed that the drone strikes in Pakistan was "Bush invading yet another sovereign nation".

That is true of many on the left, but it is not true of many on the left as well. Can we end this stupid argument now?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yes the far left controls the senate and the WH and the drone strikes have intensified and collateral damage is ten fold of that before Nov 2008.

Sure the far left cares and anyone believing that is just a far left Obama drone.

Are you drinking earlier than usual, because we have had folks on this forum divided on the issue forever but not because of political affiliation.

I supported Bush on this. I support Obama. There are righties and lefties who oppose that on the Board.

Kill the bad guys from the next continent if we can without risking our folks.

 

[Kosh]

Yes the far left controls the senate and the WH and the drone strikes have intensified and collateral damage is ten fold of that before Nov 2008.

Sure the far left cares and anyone believing that is just a far left Obama drone.

Are you drinking earlier than usual, because we have had folks on this forum divided on the issue forever but not because of political affiliation.

I supported Bush on this. I support Obama. There are righties and lefties who oppose that on the Board.

Kill the bad guys from the next continent if we can without risking our folks.

And this just proves my point the far left does NOT care about collateral damage, unless it is politically convenient for them to care.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Whenever I read comments by politicians defending the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Predator and Reaper program – aka drones – I wish I could ask them a few questions. I'd start with: "How many women and children have you seen incinerated by a Hellfire missile?" And: "How many men have you seen crawl across a field, trying to make it to the nearest compound for help while bleeding out from severed legs?" Or even more pointedly: "How many soldiers have you seen die on the side of a road in Afghanistan because our ever-so-accurate UAVs [unmanned aerial vehicles] were unable to detect an IED [improvised explosive device] that awaited their convoy?"

Few of these politicians who so brazenly proclaim the benefits of drones have a real clue of what actually goes on. I, on the other hand, have seen these awful sights first hand.

I knew the names of some of the young soldiers I saw bleed to death on the side of a road. I watched dozens of military-aged males die in Afghanistan, in empty fields, along riversides, and some right outside the compound where their family was waiting for them to return home from the mosque.

I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on | Heather Linebaugh | Comment is free | theguardian.com

Interesting take from an actual drone pilot. Turns out they're not as precise as the government would have us believe, as if there was any doubt, and they don't simply target militants since they sometimes have no idea who they're targeting at all. Again, as if there was any doubt.

Lasers are precise. Everything else is going to miss a significant amount of the time. Much ado about nothing though. It's war, if ya don't like the visuals protest wars. ...Please.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Whenever I read comments by politicians defending the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Predator and Reaper program – aka drones – I wish I could ask them a few questions. I'd start with: "How many women and children have you seen incinerated by a Hellfire missile?" And: "How many men have you seen crawl across a field, trying to make it to the nearest compound for help while bleeding out from severed legs?" Or even more pointedly: "How many soldiers have you seen die on the side of a road in Afghanistan because our ever-so-accurate UAVs [unmanned aerial vehicles] were unable to detect an IED [improvised explosive device] that awaited their convoy?"

Few of these politicians who so brazenly proclaim the benefits of drones have a real clue of what actually goes on. I, on the other hand, have seen these awful sights first hand.

I knew the names of some of the young soldiers I saw bleed to death on the side of a road. I watched dozens of military-aged males die in Afghanistan, in empty fields, along riversides, and some right outside the compound where their family was waiting for them to return home from the mosque.

I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on | Heather Linebaugh | Comment is free | theguardian.com

Interesting take from an actual drone pilot. Turns out they're not as precise as the government would have us believe, as if there was any doubt, and they don't simply target militants since they sometimes have no idea who they're targeting at all. Again, as if there was any doubt.

Lasers are precise. Everything else is going to miss a significant amount of the time. Much ado about nothing though. It's war, if ya don't like the visuals protest wars. ...Please.

This is how you protest wars, by pointing out how terrible they are.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Absent art, good luck with that. Wanna protest war SHOW what you're talking about. Now a history lesson:

Phan Thi Kim Phuc - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Phan Thị Kim Phúc running down a road near Trảng Bàng, Vietnam, after a napalm bomb was dropped on the village of Trảng Bàng by a plane of the Vietnam Air Force. The village was suspected by United States Army forces of being a Viet Cong stronghold. Kim Phúc survived by tearing off her burning clothes."

Know there's a 'graphic imagery' thing here so if ya want the visual (you really don't) can google it. Is on the wiki entry too.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Absent art, good luck with that. Wanna protest war SHOW what you're talking about. Now a history lesson:

Phan Thi Kim Phuc - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Phan Thị Kim Phúc running down a road near Trảng Bàng, Vietnam, after a napalm bomb was dropped on the village of Trảng Bàng by a plane of the Vietnam Air Force. The village was suspected by United States Army forces of being a Viet Cong stronghold. Kim Phúc survived by tearing off her burning clothes."

Know there's a 'graphic imagery' thing here so if ya want the visual (you really don't) can google it. Is on the wiki entry too.

You do it your way, and I'll do it mine.

 

[g5000]

During World War II, both sides of the conflict deliberately targeted civilian targets. V-2 rockets, the Dresden bombing, Hiroshima, Coventry, etc.

Unlike that period, the US does not have a policy of deliberately attacking civilian targets. Our government does its best to avoid civilian casualties. To imply otherwise is no different than calling our troops baby killers.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

During World War II, both sides of the conflict deliberately targeted civilian targets. V-2 rockets, the Dresden bombing, Hiroshima, Coventry, etc.

Unlike that period, the US does not have a policy of deliberately attacking civilian targets. Our government does its best to avoid civilian casualties. To imply otherwise is no different than calling our troops baby killers.

The U.S. has a policy of deliberately targeting people that it has no idea whether they're militants or not. In other words, targeting innocent civilians. And plenty of "our" troops have killed babies. Whether they're drone operators or soldiers on the ground, and whether intentional or not.