Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

cheapdate

(3,811 posts)
84. I see.
Sat Jun 28, 2014, 05:48 PM
Jun 2014

Last edited Sat Jun 28, 2014, 10:00 PM - Edit history (1)

Just for future reference, I asked a general question. I didn't make a statement, except to recognize the major role that the United States played in creating the mess to begin with -- a point which you seem to have overlooked in your rush to reverse-engineer my entire outlook on US foreign policy based on a single, conversational, question.

The United States' illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq caused the deaths of least a half-million people and caused massive and widespread destruction to that county's cities, towns, schools, hospitals, and infrastructure. As well as the physical damage, the war shattered the country's civil and political institutions, destroyed the social fabric, and traumatized the national psyche.

The Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and other affiliated militant, jihadist groups have seized large areas in Iraq and are determined to use any and all means necessary to seize the entire country (and surrounding territories) and replace it's corrupt, ineffective, Shia dominated government with an Islamic Caliphate conforming to their own strict interpretation of Islam.

The United States should not under any circumstances involve itself in these events. We are not obligated by virtue of our role in waging war against them and utterly destroying their country, and further digging in will make it even worse, more unstable, costly, and destructive with piles of victims on our heads.

We can't bomb the toothpaste back in the tube. These events were as predictable as the rising sun. There was no other plausible outcome so therefore any involvement would be foolish.

The problem with drones lies with the rules of engagement for their use. Maedhros Jun 2014 #1
Brace yourself...get ready to be called "babykiller". cheapdate Jun 2014 #2
But this is not an "either or" quesiton. It is a "whether at all" question. morningfog Jun 2014 #7
I don't have an answer to the "whether at all" question. cheapdate Jun 2014 #62
Yes, turning killing into a video game with no moral component whatchamacallit Jun 2014 #3
+1 SomethingFishy Jun 2014 #17
+1 whatchamacallit Jun 2014 #21
Amused to Death is one of my all time favorites Lucinda Jun 2014 #26
Brilliant is a great description.... think Jun 2014 #29
I wasn't sure if anyone would know what it was... SomethingFishy Jun 2014 #31
How very cool! I'd love to meet him. Lucinda Jun 2014 #35
More relevant today than ever... SomethingFishy Jun 2014 #36
Sadly, this board is far from liberal now. So is the Dem Party. n/t cui bono Jun 2014 #100
But...but...but... Lancero Jun 2014 #25
The news I have read shows some of the pilots quaker bill Jun 2014 #113
Certainly makes it easier to rationalize our involvement in a crime. 1000words Jun 2014 #4
Manned aircraft are flying over Iraq, too. morningfog Jun 2014 #5
Well, no actually... Kelvin Mace Jun 2014 #6
A poem for you, by Thomas Merton . . . Journeyman Jun 2014 #8
+1 xchrom Jun 2014 #9
Not killing is better than either. Tierra_y_Libertad Jun 2014 #10
Yes. 840high Jun 2014 #77
Boots on the ground lunatica Jun 2014 #11
I think you are wrong. Savannahmann Jun 2014 #12
This message was self-deleted by its author Corruption Inc Jun 2014 #13
There are more reputable lines of work woo me with science Jun 2014 #14
wow. UNREC m-lekktor Jun 2014 #15
Why don't you support PBO? Michigander_Life Jun 2014 #16
~facepalm~ Marrah_G Jun 2014 #33
I don't support him when I disagree. morningfog Jun 2014 #82
Herpa Derp bobduca Jun 2014 #88
That is your argument? Warren Stupidity Jun 2014 #98
"Wow. Unrec" is worthy of argument? Michigander_Life Jun 2014 #99
You think drones will end the "War on Terror"? SomethingFishy Jun 2014 #18
Better why? So we can covertly kill at will, minimizing blowback and costs at home? TheKentuckian Jun 2014 #19
It minimizes American casualties Michigander_Life Jun 2014 #20
Only from a highly privileged perspective and then if dealing death is TheKentuckian Jun 2014 #22
Like coffee without caffeine. You can drink it all day and not get the shits. Gravitycollapse Jun 2014 #41
Exactly Puzzledtraveller Jun 2014 #23
And what about the violence, oppression, dislocation, and murder carried ouy by ISIS? cheapdate Jun 2014 #72
What about the violence, oppression, dislocation, disenfranchisement, and murder of the puppet TheKentuckian Jun 2014 #78
excellent post, and wise grasswire Jun 2014 #83
I see. cheapdate Jun 2014 #84
"Battle not with monsters lest ye become one." CrispyQ Jun 2014 #104
drones just give the illusion of clean hands. WE are the merchants of their misdeeds bigtree Jun 2014 #24
And what would Hildy write about this, I wonder? historylovr Jun 2014 #37
K & R Thinkingabout Jun 2014 #27
American weapons are best when used moderately. countryjake Jun 2014 #28
K&R Jamaal510 Jun 2014 #30
That is a thought provoking piece there. I am thinking about your excerpt: freshwest Jun 2014 #42
The use of drones is merely expedient, and shady as hell IMO. Lucinda Jun 2014 #32
The incessant propaganda grows old. woo me with science Jun 2014 #34
Does my post say war is good? Michigander_Life Jun 2014 #43
Yes, by attempting a lame and disgustingly invalid "lesser of two evils" argument, woo me with science Jun 2014 #44
If there are two options Michigander_Life Jun 2014 #45
No, there aren't. woo me with science Jun 2014 #46
Your attacks on Obama are transparent. Michigander_Life Jun 2014 #47
Right on cue. woo me with science Jun 2014 #48
Cue on right. Michigander_Life Jun 2014 #49
That was predictable, too. woo me with science Jun 2014 #50
With all this predictability, you should change your name to Miss Cleo. Michigander_Life Jun 2014 #51
Wow. "In the mean time, those of us who aren't blinded by racism...." woo me with science Jun 2014 #52
wow. they ran through the shtick 4 posts! KG Jun 2014 #64
That was really low, lame, and ugly. You should delete your smear. Comrade Grumpy Jun 2014 #53
Do you deny that PBO has been attacked by racists since his presidency began? Michigander_Life Jun 2014 #54
Sure he has. But that doesn't make criticism of his policies racist. Comrade Grumpy Jun 2014 #55
bullshit, bullshit grasswire Jun 2014 #57
Your "arguments" are laughably inept. Maedhros Jun 2014 #69
Who says no one is "worked up over the bombing itself"? cui bono Jun 2014 #73
What site? Michigander_Life Jun 2014 #75
You emotarian, you. morningfog Jun 2014 #94
You should delete your post. CrispyQ Jun 2014 #106
Project much? bobduca Jun 2014 #89
Is that the new catch phrase? Michigander_Life Jun 2014 #91
You are combative and transparent bobduca Jun 2014 #92
Signature strikes are not ethical. Maedhros Jun 2014 #67
Do those strikes become ethical Michigander_Life Jun 2014 #68
No. As is said in my first response, the problem is not the technology Maedhros Jun 2014 #71
So there's nothing inherently wrong with drone strikes Michigander_Life Jun 2014 #74
Collective psychological punishment of entire villages and regions (http://www.livingunderdrones.org woo me with science Jun 2014 #70
how about we just send boots annm4peace Jun 2014 #38
Sounds much better to me /nt think Jun 2014 #103
Hear Hear! Alex P Notkeaton Jun 2014 #39
As Slavoj Zizek puts it, this is like coffee without the caffeine, soda without the sugar... Gravitycollapse Jun 2014 #40
Far more sanitary way to kill them pesky furrners. Warren Stupidity Jun 2014 #56
Far less risky for our servicemen and women. Michigander_Life Jun 2014 #87
Like I said, sanitary furriner extermination. Warren Stupidity Jun 2014 #93
don't drones require spotters on the ground? grasswire Jun 2014 #58
No they don't, they have cameras that relay back to the operator Michigander_Life Jun 2014 #59
how does a camera identify a terrorist? nt grasswire Jun 2014 #60
How does a surveillance camera read the text messages on your phone as you peruse through a store? Michigander_Life Jun 2014 #61
here, for your edification... grasswire Jun 2014 #65
Surely there is an immeasurable amount of intelligence proceeding drone strikes Michigander_Life Jun 2014 #66
Remember, they changed the definition woo me with science Jun 2014 #63
They remember, they just want everyone else to forget so they can spin the fairy tales of goodness TheKentuckian Jun 2014 #76
I heart this post for its brutal honesty. woo me with science Jun 2014 #79
This is one of the most amoral positions I have ever seen taken on DU Bluenorthwest Jun 2014 #80
So manned aircraft are somehow not as bad as unmanned ones? Michigander_Life Jun 2014 #86
A reasonable, logical and ethical question... countryjake Jun 2014 #81
Well, it costs less money and less US blood. JEB Jun 2014 #85
If a country is going to insist on waging war, then it damend well SHOULD cost that country! markpkessinger Jun 2014 #112
We are paying a huge price for using drones the way we do. JEB Jun 2014 #114
Nope. Zero credit. Bonobo Jun 2014 #90
Drones are not better than boots. Orsino Jun 2014 #95
Death from above is never justified. mattclearing Jun 2014 #96
Your use of absolutes diminishes the value of your post. Michigander_Life Jun 2014 #97
If you say so. nt mattclearing Jun 2014 #110
... SammyWinstonJack Jun 2014 #101
For whom? rug Jun 2014 #102
No, "we" are NOT "all in agreement"! scarletwoman Jun 2014 #105
So boots on the ground is better than an unmanned plane in the sky? Michigander_Life Jun 2014 #107
What part of "NO U.S. military action" do you not get? (nt) scarletwoman Jun 2014 #108
You're painting yourself into a corner Michigander_Life Jun 2014 #109
Yes I believe POTUS is a good man but.... Jasana Jun 2014 #111
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Give Obama Credit: Drones...»Reply #84