Comments on: Why you’ll always lose with drones alone http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/07/12/to-accurately-strike-islamic-state-the-pentagon-needs-boots-on-the-ground/ Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:57:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: Solidar http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/07/12/to-accurately-strike-islamic-state-the-pentagon-needs-boots-on-the-ground/#comment-1081291 Mon, 13 Jul 2015 19:50:38 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=42024#comment-1081291 You may always lose with drones alone, but what do you lose? A few drones? Some good will that never existed anyway? Keep using them. Keep killing lunatics in the desert.

Far better to lose a machine than the 4,000 US lives Bush and Cheney lost for nothing.

]]>
By: brotherkenny4 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/07/12/to-accurately-strike-islamic-state-the-pentagon-needs-boots-on-the-ground/#comment-1081288 Mon, 13 Jul 2015 19:35:56 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=42024#comment-1081288 First, eyes on the ground could be had in the form of Iraqis. If we have no one there who can be trusted then they support ISIS and we should leave to allow them to have the lives of degradation and torture that so many religious fanatics desire.
Second, We bombed civilians intentionally in WWII, Korea and Viet Nam. Are you going to say that the greatest generation was wrong? If we really think that ISIS is the great threat that our leaders fear us up about then civilian deaths are inconsequential to the severity of the issue at hand.

More than likely the use of drones is to create more terrorists and your attempt at justifying the human involvement has more to do with what the military industrial complex wants to get out of these efforts. That is a sustained continuous and costly war that never ends and shifts much of the federal budget from things that benefit the people who pay taxes to those that kill randomly for a living in a supposed effort to protect us from evil

]]>
By: SaigonQ2 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/07/12/to-accurately-strike-islamic-state-the-pentagon-needs-boots-on-the-ground/#comment-1081099 Mon, 13 Jul 2015 13:39:09 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=42024#comment-1081099 Don’t worry, Obama has the free Syrian army in training, as the key arm of US foreign policy. I believe they have already got some 60 people in training according to the Pentagon. If they’re not manning a checkpoint or two maybe they could help out with some spotting too, or drawing some red lines..

]]>
By: LetBalanceCome http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/07/12/to-accurately-strike-islamic-state-the-pentagon-needs-boots-on-the-ground/#comment-1081062 Mon, 13 Jul 2015 12:48:48 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=42024#comment-1081062 “. As long as Washington refuses to deploy human spotters against Islamic State,” Please volunteer, author. I’d love to see you over there on the ground at the front.

]]>
By: alowl http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/07/12/to-accurately-strike-islamic-state-the-pentagon-needs-boots-on-the-ground/#comment-1081042 Mon, 13 Jul 2015 12:24:19 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=42024#comment-1081042 14 yrs and counting for the high tech dependent military to defeat 2 no tech foes. What happens when we have to fight an enemy that has air
power?

Drones as eyes are ok; when you start mounting weapons on them that costs escalate.

]]>
By: peetee http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/07/12/to-accurately-strike-islamic-state-the-pentagon-needs-boots-on-the-ground/#comment-1080785 Mon, 13 Jul 2015 07:10:01 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=42024#comment-1080785 It would be interesting to get a view from a camera manufacturer as to why these military drones cannot take a clear picture to determine the target. Small drones are used by wedding photographers and the pictures are crystal clear: the little drones shoot by overhead and are gone before you can say cheese.

]]>