Afghanistan: The silent war (little media coverage)


The Latest Orchestrated Threat and The End of History - Paul Craig Roberts -> informationclearinghouse.inf … e29228.htm

Emmanuel Goldstein has risen again.


Those goddamn Haqqanis again! … an-taliban


Islamist cleric Anwar Awlaki ‘killed in Yemen’


Is it just me or are drone strikes a kind of cowardly way to carry out a war?


I don’t think they are cowardly in the current context. It’s a technological response to the current threats.

Look at Anwar Awlaki, wasn’t he behind a plot to put explosives in printer cartridges that would have blown up delivery planes. Hardly preaching live and let live was he?


German General Says NATO Mission Has ‘Failed’ -> … 39,00.html

US had ‘frighteningly simplistic’ view of Afghanistan, says McChrystal - Darren Walsh -> … mcchrystal


I think it’s a cheap and effective way of dealing with their various enemies - while at the same time minimizing collateral damage. Surgery not butchery (Afghanistan) is needed for Al Qaeda and the various Islamic extremists.


US forces ‘massing on Afghanistan-Pakistan border’ -> … order.html

Pakistan warns US over unilateral military action ->


Who says that innocent victims hurt have been minimized by drone strikes? Anyway I think it’s kind of disturbing that some US military man/woman can kill someone from Nebraska with a PS2 joystick. At least the chap that did the mail bomb had to handle the explosives and the detonator which can be quite a dangerous activity and probably had to make the explosives himself which is another fraught activity. He also risks capture and death. The only risk the drone pilot has as part of his “job” are the risks associated with a sedentary lifestyle same as the rest of us.


Your logic is disturbing. :sick:

It’s technology, get over it.


You equated the printer cartridge bomber and the drone pilot as generally technologically equalivants. I pointed out that the cartridge bomber undertakes risks in his role whilst the drone pilot doesn’t.

I can’t quite put my finger on what disturbs me about the drones. I don’t want to say it’s unchivalrous but being able to kill anyone via remote control without ever being put in harms way is just seems wrong.


Ha enemies! More like endless phantom menaces. I’ve pointed out the inhumanity and disturbing nature of drone technology put to inhuman use but things are a quickening, :open_mouth:

The above drone reminds me of this from the TV show Voyage to the Bottom Of the Sea, its the flying submarine.


No I don’t believe I said anything like that, I’m not sure how you inferred that either?

To clarify my earlier point, I was talking about cause and effect.

My point was:

  1. He preached violence and intolerance. (Using the technology developed by the same free and open culture he was attacking)
  2. He practiced violence against innocent people.

(I can’t see how any intelligent and rational person would try to justify his actions.)

Had he lived by the golden rule and not done these things he wouldn’t have been a target for a drone attack.

The technology is here, it can’t be undone. I’m sure people felt equally uneasy at the time of the introduction of the machine gun.
History is full of examples of wars where 1 side has a technological advantage over the other side. It’s not sport, it’s war.


Just to clarify Snaps I did not justify his actions. I am not sympathetic to the cause Religious Fundamentalism.

You brought him into the discussion as an example of how a mail bomber and a drone pilot were similar in the amount of risks they took. I disagreed and pointed out that the mail bomber faces death or capture for making the bomb whilst the drone pilot will face no risk to their person.

The difference between now and say the introduction of the Machine gun is that the machine gun operator although having a considerable advantage still is in the line of fire. His commander is putting his life on the line. It’s the same with the drones predecessor the jet pilot and jet fighter. The pilot has an immense advantage over say the Taliban, but they could still hit him with a rocket or a stray round if flying low or he could crash.

The drone pilot and their commanders face none of these risks. In the past to win a war you had to risk some of your own or allies personnel. We are looking at a future where Rich Countries can wage war against Poor ones via remote control. Without the risk of home casualties whats to stop them from perpetual war on the poor?


US drone strike victims in Pakistan plan legal action

It’s impossible to know what’s really happening with this drone war. What are the reasons behind it?

Afghanistan: Pakistan accused of backing Taliban



Pakistan stops NATO supplies after deadly raid -> … 3S20111126


Pakistan, er…what part of the North Atlantic is that in then?

#179 … ml?hpid=z1

Firing across the border

oh they responded alright, they knew who they were nailing. Pakistan is more an enemy now


US-NATO attack on Pakistan was pre-planned -> … e-planned/