100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: What about the culture? | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
In the United States, the dominant narrative about the use of drones in Pakistan is of a surgically precise and effective tool that makes the US safer by enabling “targeted killing” of terrorists, with minimal downsides or collateral impacts.[1]
all thats really questionable is if it makes the 'US' safer I havent seen the numbers disputing that it doesnt cause MINIMAL/LESS downside or collateral impact than other forms of combat would..... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
should our guns be more precise and deadly than our military tactics?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Sojourning_Soul
on
Wed 01/02/13 11:01 AM
|
|
Kids killed by Drone is Illegal. The Drones are equipped with cameras. The Barry ordered operator knows, before the missile is launched, what individual or group they are going to kill. They killed one dude on a rooftop. They claim he was a terrorist. His old lady was massaging his legs. You see that in the video. Who knows where her heart was? Who knows what info she was privy to? She was not the target but Barry deemed her unworthy to live. Dead Paki Babies, dead ghetto rats don't make good argument to ban guns. BTW. If gun bans are supposed to be worldwide, why are the ME folks allowed to open-carry whatever they want? ban- to prohibit especially by legal means as in: Marriage to a minor is (prohibited, banned, ) in america regulate- REGULATE- a: to govern or direct according to rule as in: Marriage is a REGULATED institution in AMerica ,,,,notice in the first sentence, there is a ban on a specific marital situation,, not on MARRIAGE ITSELF in the second sentence- MARRIAGE IS ALIVE AND WELL STILL,,,has not been 'banned' somehow, the two issues keep getting blurred The blurring is in the fact that gov't has no "right" to impose either of them. They falsely convince people that they do, and the gullible believe it, making it easy to enforce on those who know better. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the United States, the dominant narrative about the use of drones in Pakistan is of a surgically precise and effective tool that makes the US safer by enabling “targeted killing” of terrorists, with minimal downsides or collateral impacts.[1] This narrative is false. all thats really questionable is if it makes the 'US' safer I havent seen the numbers disputing that it doesnt cause MINIMAL/LESS downside or collateral impact than other forms of combat would..... Fixed it for you, you omitted the most important part... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Wed 01/02/13 11:15 AM
|
|
In the United States, the dominant narrative about the use of drones in Pakistan is of a surgically precise and effective tool that makes the US safer by enabling “targeted killing” of terrorists, with minimal downsides or collateral impacts.[1] This narrative is false. all thats really questionable is if it makes the 'US' safer I havent seen the numbers disputing that it doesnt cause MINIMAL/LESS downside or collateral impact than other forms of combat would..... Fixed it for you, you omitted the most important part... thanks, I was under the impression something required 'proof' of its validity to be true or false 'safer' is not an easily quantifiable measure, even harder to prove or disprove because of it same with 'minimal'(although Im sure it could be shown whether casualties and injuries were 'less' in number) so ,, stating the sentence is true or false, is a bit misleading saying it isnt 'necessarily' proven to be true,, would be more intellectually honest,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the United States, the dominant narrative about the use of drones in Pakistan is of a surgically precise and effective tool that makes the US safer by enabling “targeted killing” of terrorists, with minimal downsides or collateral impacts.[1] all thats really questionable is if it makes the 'US' safer I havent seen the numbers disputing that it doesnt cause MINIMAL/LESS downside or collateral impact than other forms of combat would..... In a gang war, made dead Ghetto Rats are collateral damage, no? Wonder who here would cry foul if their kid became collateral damage? Certainly not a liberal. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Wed 01/02/13 11:19 AM
|
|
In the United States, the dominant narrative about the use of drones in Pakistan is of a surgically precise and effective tool that makes the US safer by enabling “targeted killing” of terrorists, with minimal downsides or collateral impacts.[1] all thats really questionable is if it makes the 'US' safer I havent seen the numbers disputing that it doesnt cause MINIMAL/LESS downside or collateral impact than other forms of combat would..... In a gang war, made dead Ghetto Rats are collateral damage, no? Wonder who here would cry foul if their kid became collateral damage? Certainly not a liberal. all life is precious, even life on death row and life yet unborn but neither of those are the subject here either death is always unavoidable as a reality of our life,,sometimes we determine deaths to be 'natural', sometimes 'accidental', sometimes 'intentional' the details matter,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Leigh2154
on
Wed 01/02/13 11:20 AM
|
|
In the United States, the dominant narrative about the use of drones in Pakistan is of a surgically precise and effective tool that makes the US safer by enabling “targeted killing” of terrorists, with minimal downsides or collateral impacts.[1] This narrative is false. all thats really questionable is if it makes the 'US' safer I havent seen the numbers disputing that it doesnt cause MINIMAL/LESS downside or collateral impact than other forms of combat would..... Fixed it for you, you omitted the most important part... thanks, I was under the impression something required 'proof' of its validity to be true or false 'safer' is not an easily quantifiable measure, even harder to prove or disprove because of it same with 'minimal'(although Im sure it could be shown whether casualties and injuries were 'less' in number) so ,, stating the sentence is true or false, is a bit misleading saying it isnt 'necessarily' proven to be true,, would be more intellectually honest,,, What you should do is read the whole study....It contains a lot of credible information.... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the United States, the dominant narrative about the use of drones in Pakistan is of a surgically precise and effective tool that makes the US safer by enabling “targeted killing” of terrorists, with minimal downsides or collateral impacts.[1] This narrative is false. all thats really questionable is if it makes the 'US' safer I havent seen the numbers disputing that it doesnt cause MINIMAL/LESS downside or collateral impact than other forms of combat would..... Fixed it for you, you omitted the most important part... thanks, I was under the impression something required 'proof' of its validity to be true or false 'safer' is not an easily quantifiable measure, even harder to prove or disprove because of it same with 'minimal'(although Im sure it could be shown whether casualties and injuries were 'less' in number) so ,, stating the sentence is true or false, is a bit misleading saying it isnt 'necessarily' proven to be true,, would be more intellectually honest,,, What you should do is read the whole study....It contains a lot of credible information.... Im sure it does I have read plenty of information from studies on both sides, with credible information. I dont question credibility, I just question the conclusions reached,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the United States, the dominant narrative about the use of drones in Pakistan is of a surgically precise and effective tool that makes the US safer by enabling “targeted killing” of terrorists, with minimal downsides or collateral impacts.[1] This narrative is false. all thats really questionable is if it makes the 'US' safer I havent seen the numbers disputing that it doesnt cause MINIMAL/LESS downside or collateral impact than other forms of combat would..... Fixed it for you, you omitted the most important part... thanks, I was under the impression something required 'proof' of its validity to be true or false 'safer' is not an easily quantifiable measure, even harder to prove or disprove because of it same with 'minimal'(although Im sure it could be shown whether casualties and injuries were 'less' in number) so ,, stating the sentence is true or false, is a bit misleading saying it isnt 'necessarily' proven to be true,, would be more intellectually honest,,, What you should do is read the whole study....It contains a lot of credible information.... Im sure it does I have read plenty of information from studies on both sides, with credible information. I dont question credibility, I just question the conclusions reached,,,, Say what!  ...No wonder you're confused!!...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I personally love the term "collateral damage." It turns the wrongful deaths of innocent people into something equivalent to a dented fender.
Kudos to Murder Incorporated's PR man for coming up with the term. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I personally love the term "collateral damage." It turns the wrongful deaths of innocent people into something equivalent to a dented fender. Kudos to Murder Incorporated's PR man for coming up with the term. On this we agree...sad truth that it is.. By the way Duck, Happy New Year...Quack, quack!!..... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I personally love the term "collateral damage." It turns the wrongful deaths of innocent people into something equivalent to a dented fender. Kudos to Murder Incorporated's PR man for coming up with the term. On this we agree...sad truth that it is.. By the way Duck, Happy New Year...Quack, quack!!.....
The U.S.A. has unfortunately turned into a terrorist country. I don't condone the drone killings as it does inflict collateral damage. Either way you paint it, it is not a pretty picture. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I personally love the term "collateral damage." It turns the wrongful deaths of innocent people into something equivalent to a dented fender. Kudos to Murder Incorporated's PR man for coming up with the term. On this we agree...sad truth that it is.. By the way Duck, Happy New Year...Quack, quack!!.....
Qua*quack* quack*quak*...(translation from Canardese...Happy New Year to you too! ) I guess the old Chinese curse must be true...This coming year promises to be very interesting indeed. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I personally love the term "collateral damage." It turns the wrongful deaths of innocent people into something equivalent to a dented fender. Kudos to Murder Incorporated's PR man for coming up with the term. On this we agree...sad truth that it is.. By the way Duck, Happy New Year...Quack, quack!!.....
The U.S.A. has unfortunately turned into a terrorist country. I don't condone the drone killings as it does inflict collateral damage. Either way you paint it, it is not a pretty picture. Yes Hippy, it is far from pretty! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
other forms of combat would..... We need to demand that the US is not engaged in war like activity without congress. If technology alone means that our previous standards no longer apply, what does that mean for other such standards . . . . Geneva? Seems Due process is trite and tired as well. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
JustDukkyMkII
on
Wed 01/02/13 01:00 PM
|
|
Seems Due process is trite and tired as well. ...Only in the deluded, legalistic minds of people like Holder & Obama. They actually have the nerve to try to divorce "due process" from the rule of law and therefore say something it was never intended to mean. Their interpretation of a full service "all you can eat" restaurant offer, would be to serve the customers a sprig of parsley and, if anyone were to complain, simply tell them that is "all you can eat." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Where kin I git me one of them thar Exekutive Privilege Cards?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Where kin I git me one of them thar Exekutive Privilege Cards? I think they're available at the Fed, as long as you do whatever they want. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Where kin I git me one of them thar Exekutive Privilege Cards? I think they're available at the Fed, as long as you do whatever they want. I do have a list of some that could use a little droning. As long as I get the joy-stick!!!! 
Now, I know why they call it a joy-stick. Mine is all worn out. 
|
|
|
|
|
