This latest slaughter of Afghan innocents shows the wisdom of the US drone policy

Last edited Sun Mar 11, 2012, 02:29 PM - Edit history (1)

The US gets all sorts of grief for the behavior of people. People massacre civilians, they form death squads to hunt down civilians for sport, they urinate on corpses, they burn Korans, they constantly cause a mess. Our enemies use these incidents to run down the good name of this great country and endanger the success of our endless wars for democracy and free markets. Drones, on the other hand, bring none of these problems. They can't urinate, at least not yet, they probably lack the dexterity to light a match, and, as far as we know, they can't form the intent to intentionally massacre civilians.

Sure, drones kill innocents by the hundreds, but they don't mean to, so, bingo, there's no blame. As our President explained, those deaths aren't that big a deal. In fact, he implied, if we had relied on the people drones have replaced, the people probably would have slaughtered even more innocents than the drones have. And given all the slaughter and urination and burning the people have engaged in, who could argue with him? Look at this most recent massacre of civilians for proof. If we had been able to send in a drone before that person got to those women and children, we wouldn't be forced to listen to our enemies crow and crow about our demonic behavior blah blah blah blah blah because drones, unlike people, are innocent by design. Drones it is and drones it must be and I say kudos to the Obama administration for having the wisdom and courage to embrace slaughter by drones over slaughter by people as we attempt to bring our noble struggles to a just conclusion.

http://rt.com/usa/news/drones-civilian-death-obama-187/

Hundreds of slaughtered civilians isn't a 'huge number' for Obama
Published: 31 January, 2012, 22:08

<edit>

Tackling a question posed on drone strikes, President Obama defended the ongoing missions on Monday, saying they were necessary to target terrorists in a most effective manner. "For us to be able to get them in another way would involve probably a lot more intrusive military action than the ones we're already engaging in,” the president said on the topic of drones. While an argument could easily be made that operating drone missions in lieu of putting boots on the ground is best for the US Armed Forces, the president put a lot on the line Monday when he downplayed the result of the strikes.

Those drone attacks, carried out by unmanned aircraft controlled thousands of miles away, don’t do a lot of harm, said the president. According to Obama, drones had "not caused a huge number of civilian casualties” and he added that it’s "important for everybody to understand that this thing is kept on a very tight leash.”

more...