7 ms·
You're a sack of shit: >I'm not here to argue for or against the drones. Congrats on being a mediocre person who doesn't believe in anything or have any opini
by TruthElixirX 13y ago
You're a sack of shit:
>I'm not here to argue for or against the drones.
Congrats on being a mediocre person who doesn't believe in anything or have any opinions. This is the most offensive thing I think, even more than me disagreeing with you. Just picking middle of the road bland boring contrariness.
>We all know war is hell.
Apparently "we" don't because people continue to wage war.
>We know using weapons to attack people creates horrific, real human harm.
No, making it into a game complete with an Xbox controller abstracts the realness from it.
> So starting off listing the effects of weaponry on humans tells us nothing about drones. It just tells us about the horrors of war. Given this is an article about drones it should be very drone specific.
It isn't about drones, its about killing people. Who gives a fuck if it is a drone or a spoon. It is clearly an article about shitty wars being pursued by shitty people, not about how technologically advanced drones are.
>Today if we make a mistake we bomb the wrong home and kill everyone. 25 years ago we bombed the entire village.
What a false fucking dichotomy. How about not bombing fucking anyone? And who the fuck is "we"? I didn't bomb anyone and will continue to not bomb anyone.
>"The view is so pixelated it makes decisions tough" Can you imagine military people who fight/fought on the ground in real combat and order in strikes reading that? Surrounded by smoke and fire and deafening noise and hoping (or maybe not caring) that the strike they call in hits the right target/s vs all the nearby civilians also hiding and cowering in a village?
Again, false dichotomy. It does not have to be grainy drone feeds or confused soldiers on the ground. There are more options than A or B.
>The military is aware of the impact on these operators.
That doesn't mean they give a shit. I am aware of the drug addict a few houses down. I don't care.
>Lastly, imagine how you'd feel reading a similar opinion piece on Fox News from a gun ho former operator talking about all the American lives he saved by observing and taking out "the bad guys".
I wouldn't care. I don't care about "American lives" and I don't care about insurgency lives. I care about people regardless of nationality. I feel bad for the jack asses on both sides that eat up the lies of their leaders and kill each other in the name of nothing.
>What's even better with drones we're not losing American solider lives and dramatically reducing the number of innocent civilians killed vs how we would have approached the same problem just 25 years ago.
Its amazing how redefining anyone that is an adult male who dies as an enemy combatant reduces civilian deaths as well.
>War is hell. The issues are complex. Trusted new sources add to the debate. Biased ones feed their viewership what they know they'll eat up and do little, maybe even damage, the search for truth.
Being a boring middle of the road stick in the mud does more damage than anything.
- jboydyhacker 13y agoPointing out an opposing view, or the downside of the alternative to drones (boots on the ground) does not make the author a sack of shit. War will be around until humans work harder to understand each others perspectives and evolve socially as quickly as we have with technology. You can help us all to that end by not being name calling anonymously on the internet.
- TruthElixirX 13y agoHe isn't a sack of shit for having an opposing view point. He is a sack of shit for this middle ground all sides have a valid point and the truth is somewhere in the middle bullshit.
- alexeisadeski3 13y agoHe actually doesn't take the middle ground. He's avoiding the drone vs anti-drone argument to make a perfectly valid and legitimate point about the Guardian article.
- jusben1369 13y agoThank you. Precisely right.
- yardie 13y agoI read his response and he actually makes no point. Just reiterating "war is hell" twice.
- Casseres 13y agoAnd that's one reason why people go to war; they can't understand the arguments of both sides of a conflict, so it escalates to something that even unintelligent people can do: fight. If more people would take the time to discover the root of their conflicts, they wouldn't just take the easy way out and start name calling or throwing punches. Very few people want to be evil or wrong for the sake of being evil or wrong - they believe they are right and they just have a different perspective on how to be right. Truth is just the perception of fact. Depending on one's values, the truth can be viewed differently by different people. That's why it's very difficult to find "one right answer".