So you don't mind the Al-Qaeda version then?
Flight 77, Flight 93, etc...
Many people do wonder if 9/11 was a response to Clinton's usage of cruise missiles. When you don't have boots on the ground, you have no skin in the game. He used thousands of them during his presidency.
Not quite sure what you mean by that. If Al Qaeda had flown planes that weren't hijacked into, say, military bases, then it'd likely be a "legal" act of war.
And why would you want skin in the game, if you could just bomb them from afar? (I'm somewhat playing Devil's Advocate... I'm very leery of drone strikes, as it most likely further dehumanizes us to those we're protecting.)
I'm only presenting a view the other side may see. Drones and missiles are great, but not really seeing your target, you also don't really know the collateral damage. Clinton, with no doubt, used these far too much. Obama it looks like is using them far too much too. By no skin in the game, I mean we do not see how many innocents might be killed, if we really got the target, and our troops are afar and safe. Boots on the ground mean spotters.
Would you consider being in the same locale as a cruise missile aimed at someone else, a terrorist attack?
We have military snipers for a reason. We have covert ops for a reason. I agree that drones and missiles have a place in war, but they are being over used. This is the chicken's way to kill without getting injured in return.
So far, it seems like most Americans don't care about collateral damage sadly, even if it's likely breeding future terrorists. And I'm not quite sure what you mean by "not seeing the target"... drones have cameras on them, and the trigger on the drones is pulled by a remote pilot. The reason why Obama's using them is because it's cheaper to lose a drone then it is to pay lifetime medical costs for soldiers who are injured. The military seems to be behind him 100% on this as well.
I will say that I'm reminded of an old Star Trek episode, in which both sides realized that actual war would cause the destruction of their species... so instead they calculated where bombs would hit, and had a treaty to voluntarily sacrifice the citizens who lived in those areas. Kirk ends up destroying the machine, so they'd have "skin in the game". I can't say I disagreed with his thought process. When war is too easy, it's more often used.
If you have Netflix:
A Taste of Armageddon
^ That's the one WC. It's why I love the original Star Trek.
+1
I watched it yesterday soon after you brought it up. I have the Netflix Streaming. I think it's worth the $7.99/month.
Ever see the original pilot, that was never aired in the 60's? It didn't air till 12/24/88. Parts of it were used in The Menagerie.
Netflix: Unseen Pilot: The Cage
Last edited by Wild Cobra; 10-04-2012 at 02:57 AM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote