Why are people against war drones?

  • Page

    of 6 First / Last

    Previous
  • Ka-blamo 7 May 2013 16:25:52 7,351 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    Surely it's an incredibly good idea, it means we're not unnecessarily risking our soldiers lives.
  • Deleted user 7 May 2013 16:27:33
    They have a higher rate of civilian kills. Man controlling with x box controller blows up village.
  • L_Franko Moderator 7 May 2013 16:28:08 9,694 posts
    Seen 9 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Wrong people getting their hands on them I'd have thought.
  • ronuds 7 May 2013 16:30:46 21,788 posts
    Seen 1 year ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    I'm not against them.
  • Deckard1 7 May 2013 16:31:40 28,002 posts
    Seen 32 seconds ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Terminator
  • IMO 7 May 2013 16:32:34 5,670 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    When you have to put the lives of your solders on the lines, you'd probably give it a bit more thought than if you can send in an easily replaceable bit of hardware to blow stuff up.
  • Deleted user 7 May 2013 16:33:00
    By removing the human element from war you also remove emotion and culpability.
  • disusedgenius 7 May 2013 16:33:15 5,333 posts
    Seen 10 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Isn't it AI drones which people are a bit unsure on? Decision makes, legal culpability etc.

    The thing in Pakistan is probably as much to do with the idea of hi-tech Americans randomly blowing up people living in shitty conditions with X-box controlled toys.
  • glaeken 7 May 2013 16:33:18 11,177 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    The main objection appears to be it's just a new way of doing things. Conventional aircraft can do exactly the same thing.

    Possibly due to the reduced operating costs they are being used more though.
  • neilka 7 May 2013 16:34:33 15,956 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Pepsipop wrote:
    They have a higher rate of civilian kills. Man controlling with x box controller blows up village.
    Woman with Xbox controller crashes into goat

    A map is like comparing velocity and speed.

  • ZuluHero 7 May 2013 16:34:40 4,167 posts
    Seen 27 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    People seem to be against them because they are being used domestically as well (in the USA currently) and that's given fears of nanny states and an era of intrusive state surveillance and may even be used as a means of attacking and killing American citizens (yes, seriously(!)

    EDIT: Oh and that it also threatens to put people out of jobs(!)

    Edited by ZuluHero at 16:36:10 07-05-2013
  • Razz 7 May 2013 16:34:49 61,205 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    We build an army of these things, become increasingly reliant on them, they become increasingly intelligent and one day they realise that the best way to keep us from destroying ourselves is to kill us all or make us slaves.

    Edited by Razz at 16:35:44 07-05-2013

    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    Steam/PSN/XBOX: Razztafarai | 3DS: 1246-9674-8856
    --------------------------------------------------------------------

  • Trane 7 May 2013 16:36:12 4,052 posts
    Seen 2 days ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    It's Damian Lewis' fault.
  • glaeken 7 May 2013 16:37:54 11,177 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    ZuluHero wrote:
    People seem to be against them because they are being used domestically as well (in the USA currently) and that's given fears of nanny states and an era of intrusive state surveillance and may even be used as a means of attacking and killing American citizens (yes, seriously(!)

    EDIT: Oh and that it also threatens to put people out of jobs(!)
    One interesting thing about taking the human element out is apparently the CIA operate their own drones where as they would never be allowed to operate their own piloted aircraft (although they did do that in the cold war. See the A12 spy plane)

    Edited by glaeken at 16:38:18 07-05-2013
  • LeoliansBro 7 May 2013 16:40:11 44,246 posts
    Seen 60 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    I'm more about where the US seems happy putting them. Seems they were only respecting the sovereignty of other countries by not violating their airspace when there was the risk of a downed pilot causing an incident.

    Although assassinating Bin Laden rather suggests that respecting sovereignty is off the table full stop.

    There's also the fact that they are designed to have maximum loiter time. Previously airstrikes were launched with a specific target in mind. These seem rather more inclined to hang around looking for whatever trouble turns up.

    Edited by LeoliansBro at 16:41:13 07-05-2013

    LB, you really are a massive geek.

  • AcidSnake 7 May 2013 16:40:30 7,276 posts
    Seen 19 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    I think it's down to the fear of them being used by a gun-happy superpower which thinks their law should be the law of the whole world...

    I can understand Pakistan thinking that anyway...

    AcidSnake - He can't see your sig, avatar, images or vids and talks about himself in the third person because he's proper old-skool...UID 24017

  • sirtacos 7 May 2013 16:40:41 7,280 posts
    Seen 2 days ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    The ease with which strikes can be conducted can lead to a 'slippery slope' type of deal... where drones are used liberally or excessively.

    The disconnection from the murder that takes place is a Bad Thing maybe. Also, less media attention (because no US soldiers are being killed) = potential blank cheque to conduct more strikes, or do them in a dodgy or sloppy way.

    Also, collateral damage. Drones can't target individuals. That's a pretty big deal when you aim at buildings or villages.

    edit - in the time it took me to write that, my post was made obsolete by better ones above it, nice

    Edited by sirtacos at 16:41:46 07-05-2013
  • LeoliansBro 7 May 2013 16:42:39 44,246 posts
    Seen 60 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    sirtacos wrote:
    Drones can't target individuals.
    Well, they kind of can as much as manned aircraft. Otherwise I agree.

    LB, you really are a massive geek.

  • Deleted user 7 May 2013 16:44:06
    sirtacos wrote:
    The ease with which strikes can be conducted can lead to a 'slippery slope' type of deal... where drones are used liberally or excessively.

    The disconnection from the murder that takes place is a Bad Thing maybe. Also, less media attention (because no US soldiers are being killed) = potential blank cheque to conduct more strikes, or do them in a dodgy or sloppy way.

    Also, collateral damage. Drones can't target individuals. That's a pretty big deal when you aim at buildings or villages.
    Yep. Exactly this. The dehumanisation of war has always happened, though the modern trend is less dehumanising the enemy but dehumanising the soldier. Using drones almost literally removes the soldier from the equation, and reduces warfare to little more than a videogame played by sociopaths-in-training.

    Generalisation alert, but people don't really join the army because they view it as an honorable and noble thing anymore. They join it because they want to "shoot some towel heads" or watch things explode.
  • disusedgenius 7 May 2013 16:45:13 5,333 posts
    Seen 10 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    LeoliansBro wrote:
    There's also the fact that they are designed to have maximum loiter time.
    I think that's a pretty big one as well. Think of it as CCTV with a rocket launcher controlled by some skanky foreigner on steroids. Or something.
  • Whizzo 7 May 2013 16:45:21 43,131 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    It's a lot cheaper to use a drone with a lot less risk so they're probably used more than manned aircraft which potentially means the force using them gets a little bit trigger happy.

    This space left intentionally blank.

  • Razz 7 May 2013 16:45:46 61,205 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    sirtacos wrote:
    Also, collateral damage. Drones can't target individuals. That's a pretty big deal when you aim at buildings or villages.
    Not for much longer:



    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    Steam/PSN/XBOX: Razztafarai | 3DS: 1246-9674-8856
    --------------------------------------------------------------------

  • Khanivor 7 May 2013 16:46:17 40,776 posts
    Seen 27 minutes ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    meme wrote:
    By removing the human element from war you also remove emotion and culpability.
    Something people have been complaining about since the invention of the bow and arrow.
  • LeoliansBro 7 May 2013 16:47:54 44,246 posts
    Seen 60 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    No they haven't.

    LB, you really are a massive geek.

  • glaeken 7 May 2013 16:51:34 11,177 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Whizzo wrote:
    It's a lot cheaper to use a drone with a lot less risk so they're probably used more than manned aircraft which potentially means the force using them gets a little bit trigger happy.
    I thought the whole loitering over targets thing shakes up the dynamic as well. If you can maintain a cheap armed coverage over an area you don't have to go over the process of deciding if you need to launch a mission as the capability is already there. It must make the whole process of deciding to take action far quicker. Maybe if you don't just have the ability to hand whenever you want it there would be more chance to examine your decisions before action is taken.
  • nickthegun 7 May 2013 16:51:42 59,945 posts
    Seen 32 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Yes they have. There is that exact complaint on meter 9 of bayeux tapestry.

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    someone say something funny

  • ronuds 7 May 2013 16:55:18 21,788 posts
    Seen 1 year ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    There's very little "human element" to war for the superpowers. A lot of it is pressing a button from miles away anyway.
  • Deleted user 7 May 2013 16:55:34
    Drones also prove the Xbox has the better controller, wouldn't be able to be accurate enough with the ps3 controller.
  • LeoliansBro 7 May 2013 16:56:13 44,246 posts
    Seen 60 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    nickthegun wrote:
    Yes they have. There is that exact complaint on meter 9 of bayeux tapestry.
    Have we lost our sense of what we do here? Yonder Saxon king just took one to the eye, yet though indeed I loosed the fatal barb I felt nor witnessed not one drop of blood, so far was I from the afray. Perchance we let our passions run ungoverned, so expert have we become at the harsh butchery of warfare. Oh the humanity!

    Edited for rhythm.

    Edited by LeoliansBro at 16:57:15 07-05-2013

    LB, you really are a massive geek.

  • LeoliansBro 7 May 2013 16:56:38 44,246 posts
    Seen 60 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Pepsipop wrote:
    Drones also prove the Xbox has the better controller, wouldn't be able to be accurate enough with the ps3 controller.
    Imagine a waggle drone.

    LB, you really are a massive geek.

  • Page

    of 6 First / Last

    Previous
Log in or register to reply