(Credit: Sergey Melkono
Sooner or later we will all have to come to grips with the collateral psychic damage we have wrought in the Middle East with our Drone assassinations on both innocent victims as well as the perpetrators themselves ~ for chaos reins on both sides when accountability ends: Allen L Roland, PhD
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2016/04/25/grim-reaper-in-the-sky-drone-assassinations-with-no-accountability/
“A drone strike is a terror weapon, we don’t talk about it that way. It is; just imagine you are walking down the street and you don’t know whether in 5 minutes there is going to be an explosion across the street from some place up in the sky that you can’t see. Somebody will be killed, and whoever is around will be killed, maybe you’ll be injured if you’re there. That is a terror weapon. It terrorizes villages, regions, huge areas. It’s the most massive terror campaign going on by a long shot.” ~ Noam Chomsky
I prefer drones over placing our troops in the ground in great numbers. Drones cause far less collateral damage than ground troops. Let’s get real, what other method is there to eliminate ISIS terrorists? It is so nice that you chose to quote Noam Chomsky. He’s defended such mass murderers as Pol Pot and Milosevic.
Of all the arguments pro and con drones, plus newly emerging evidence of serious psychological damage that can occur to the “safe and secure” remote-control drone “pilots” far from personal physical danger, there is another facet I haven’t seen discussed, which may be an ingredient in the backlash from drone attacks (i.e. drone attacks are a great ISIS, AQ, etc., recruiting tool): our targets in Afghanistan especially
may fear the drones, but they have zero respect for them. Why? The drone triggermen/women have no actual skin-in-the- game. No one can accuse the Afghans of not having skin-in-the-game. I may not have chosen the exactly right words to express this, but will send it anyway. Something I’ve felt from the get-go.
How do you propose defeating ISIS? Pilots are also far from danger when targeting ISIS.What about missiles? Should the US put several thousand troops on the ground. You’ve stated an alleged problem, what is the solution/ Does Russia get a free pass for their bombing efforts? Are their bombs more pure? I don’t get it.
I don’t know a solution. But if pacification is part of the rationale, it’s not working. Guess it depends on what one means by “working”. As someone said, “War is business and business is good!”
No defeating ISIS is the rationale just like defeating the Nazis was the rationale. ISIS has committed horrific acts of genocide . It’s unfortunate and tragic. that ISIS uses civilians as human shields.