Drones, Explained

The United States doesn’t seem to see the inherent ideological and logical inconsistencies in its drone killing program. And I’m not even getting into the fact that it’s a secret program everyone knows about, or the certainty that another country will eventually use them against us, and use us to justify their actions.

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+Share on RedditDigg thisShare on StumbleUponEmail this to someone

12 thoughts on “Drones, Explained

  1. I seem to recall a time when reconnaissance was utilized to determine the enemy’s activity and render judgment as to appropriate action. Drones are ideal for this. But the ruling state of mind nowadays is: “If it moves, kill it!” Tell me again, who is the terrorist? 🙁

    • …from out of nowhere, al Qaeda has found me – droning my camp as I lay by my side. Greater by true love for my crazy country, one little blast and the U.S. good-byeeeeee…….(closing guitar riff)

      • …I sat down to my supper; was a repealed healthcare law… I said my prayers in the hospital bed, and that’s the last they saw of me – So don’t murder me, I beg if you don’t murder me, ple-ease don’t murder me! (nice steel guitar solo)….

  2. What is so infuriating is that no single detail in the cartoon is remotely controversial. It’s all in the public domain, and can easily be referenced to discussions in the NYT, WaPo, etc. The one thing that it just “would not do” in polite circles is to actually put 2 and 2 together to form a full picture of the drone wars, let alone compare them to other crimes and atrocities, past and present. This is why this cartoon is spot-on and the investigative journalism it is based on (like Jeremy Scahill’s work, the Wikileaks and Snowden files…) is so important (even though being routinely dismissed as the stuff everyone knew anyway).

    This disconnect becomes palpable in the apparently serious hand-wringing about Trump being happy to receive foreign strong-men, such as Duterte. At the same time people – sort of – know that a guy like Duterte has nothing on Trump or any American president before him, hence actually the other guy is the one who should worry about shaking hands without wearing disposable gloves.

    Only many people, especially in public, don’t fully go there, except in isolated moments of cynicism. This is a problem even abroad, where most people are perfectly capable of rejecting U.S. wars and extortions while maintaining an openness to U.S. people and culture. But it still “wouldn’t do” to call Shrub or even Trump a war criminal, let alone Obama or Clinton… I hope this is slowly changing, and “we met the enemy and he is us” is increasingly seen as a truism…

  3. Ahh a flashback to the Bush days. “We’re fighting them over there so we don’t have to fight them over here” – While the Al Jazeera version is “We’re killing them over here so we don”t have to kill them over there”

    And yes, Americans are still dying in Afghanistan and Iraq although you wouldn’t know it from US news.

    I’m gonna start a betting pool on when the first (foreign) drone strike occurs on US soil. I’m betting some time in the next five years.

  4. “Explained” to who? Try ‘explaining’ this to a ‘hawk’ republican or even democrat. You see Ted, most people don’t really care about ‘over there’ and are so wrapped up in their own problems that they might concede that while this is not right, will not, or feel that they cannot, do anything about it. There really are a lot of great, patriotic Americans that want to bomb and drone the shit out of them – Trump got erected, didn’t he? 🙂

    • Ted has to explain even if no one wants to know, because if he doesn’t then no one will know.

      “republican or even democrat”

      By your own language you only timidly assert Democratic complicity.

      You should know better.

      • Yes – But who knew that bombing and droning could be so complicated?! 🙂 I am getting so tired of winning…..

Leave a Reply