- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
How Much do you Trust Drone Strikes Against ISIS?
Posted on 8/16/16 at 4:58 pm
Posted on 8/16/16 at 4:58 pm
I'm not really talking about on a political level. Today is pretty much the first day I've got time to pose this question to the OT as I have been training in Bridgeport, CA the last couple weeks.
But, upon getting out of the field and turning my phone on on Friday I got a Fox News update saying a US drone strike had killed a top ISIS leader in Pakistan.
I'm a mortarman. So naturally, I was playing spades in my downtime; I told the group of guys I was playing with and we all more or less came to the conclusion that we didn't know if we could trust the fact that drone strikes are getting these people. Our biggest concern with it is, how can we be positive that they are getting who they tell us they're getting without boots on the ground?
There are many people smarter than I am in here on this matter. So, tell me, can we really trust what this administration is putting out there with the drone strikes.
*if this thread needs to be moved to Poli Board (god I hope it doesn't) then by all means admins, move it*
But, upon getting out of the field and turning my phone on on Friday I got a Fox News update saying a US drone strike had killed a top ISIS leader in Pakistan.
I'm a mortarman. So naturally, I was playing spades in my downtime; I told the group of guys I was playing with and we all more or less came to the conclusion that we didn't know if we could trust the fact that drone strikes are getting these people. Our biggest concern with it is, how can we be positive that they are getting who they tell us they're getting without boots on the ground?
There are many people smarter than I am in here on this matter. So, tell me, can we really trust what this administration is putting out there with the drone strikes.
*if this thread needs to be moved to Poli Board (god I hope it doesn't) then by all means admins, move it*
15
Posted on 8/16/16 at 5:01 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
I don't trust any drones, period.
Posted on 8/16/16 at 5:01 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
I trust that they won't accidentally be blowing up my house and that's all that really matters.
Posted on 8/16/16 at 5:05 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
I don't trust them completely but I do trust them enough to keep using them.
Posted on 8/16/16 at 5:05 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
Those reports are pretty accurate, but they aren't infallible. I would guess that some cases our allies would confirm kills and in other cases the CIA would use their networks and SPEC OPS to confirm.
Posted on 8/16/16 at 5:06 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
quote:
How Much do you Trust Drone S
I know they aren't the ones I'm looking for
Posted on 8/16/16 at 5:06 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
I trust nothing the obama administration feeds us.
Posted on 8/16/16 at 5:07 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
I trust that they will kill someone. Whether its ISIS or innocent bystanders, I dont know, but someone is going to die.
This post was edited on 8/16/16 at 5:08 pm
Posted on 8/16/16 at 5:10 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
I think anytime the government needs to rally the troops they claim they killed some random ISIS/AQ/Taliban leader in a drone strike.
Posted on 8/16/16 at 5:10 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
quote:
how can we be positive that they are getting who they tell us they're getting without boots on the ground?
Oh there are boots on the ground, just not American. We pay good money for good intel.
Most if not all those targeted have been vetted through the targeting process prior to their termination. When real time intel comes in about an opportunity factors such as collateral damage, local politics etc are weighed and then a decision is made.
Posted on 8/16/16 at 5:10 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
It takes cross referencing of Intel to green light a strike. As in: Not just some knucklehead saying "there's a bad guy in that building"
Usually it will be a combination on Human Intelligence tipping off to a meeting location (we pay really, really well). Plus, signals intelligence like intercepted cell phone or radio chatter. And then combine that with visual (video) proof of the "signature" of the target going into a building, getting into a vehicle, etc.
When all those line up, we strike. And from what I can tell, we let a lot more go because we're not 100% than we hit and get wrong.
Usually it will be a combination on Human Intelligence tipping off to a meeting location (we pay really, really well). Plus, signals intelligence like intercepted cell phone or radio chatter. And then combine that with visual (video) proof of the "signature" of the target going into a building, getting into a vehicle, etc.
When all those line up, we strike. And from what I can tell, we let a lot more go because we're not 100% than we hit and get wrong.
Posted on 8/16/16 at 5:19 pm to No Colors
It doesn't seem it would be as satisfying and rewarding though.
This post was edited on 8/16/16 at 5:20 pm
Posted on 8/16/16 at 5:20 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
quote:
can we really trust what this administration is putting out
No one on here trusts obama, because he is the devil.
Posted on 8/16/16 at 5:23 pm to Grandioso
quote:
It doesn't seem it would be as satisfying and rewarding though.
Its not sexy but its effective. The number of troops (and casualties) it would take to get HVTs in the tribal region of Pakistan would run in the tens of thousands from top to bottom.
Posted on 8/16/16 at 5:26 pm to crewdepoo
quote:
can we really trust what this administration is putting out
No one on here trusts obama, because he is the devil.
Military propaganda has always been a strategy to gain support back home. I'm no Obama fan but this isn't limited to him.
Drone strikes have really helped fuel animosity toward the US however. We're not "loved" like many wanted us to be.
Posted on 8/16/16 at 5:29 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
Why would civilians be more certain the government is telling the truth about boots on the ground kills?
They can lie either way
They can lie either way
This post was edited on 8/16/16 at 5:30 pm
Posted on 8/16/16 at 5:31 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
We're not "loved" like many wanted us to be.
Trust me the people getting droned were never going to like us. And because of the relative precision most civilized countries see it as acceptable.
Posted on 8/16/16 at 5:47 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
We save soldiers' lives (Great)--but risk taking innocent lives along with whatever terrorists we kill. That naturally outrages the local populations.
That's the reality.
That's the reality.
Posted on 8/16/16 at 5:58 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
dude, Obama is a drone using muther fricker
In his first 3 1/2 years, he had already ordered 10X the amount of any other president. He's easily in the 30X, 40X these days.
He Kills innocent people around the world, because he got himself over his head in Middle East and refuses to acknowledge he's out of his league as a leader.
We hear ISIS leader taken out, by our glorious liars, but he didn't tell you about the other 20 missiles the past 2 months which hit hospitals and schools.
Man has more blood on his hands than any so called ruthless dictator. He makes guys like Pinochet look like Pacifists.
In his first 3 1/2 years, he had already ordered 10X the amount of any other president. He's easily in the 30X, 40X these days.
He Kills innocent people around the world, because he got himself over his head in Middle East and refuses to acknowledge he's out of his league as a leader.
We hear ISIS leader taken out, by our glorious liars, but he didn't tell you about the other 20 missiles the past 2 months which hit hospitals and schools.
Man has more blood on his hands than any so called ruthless dictator. He makes guys like Pinochet look like Pacifists.
Posted on 8/16/16 at 6:29 pm to Lakeboy7
quote:
Trust me the people getting droned were never going to like us.
Terrorists certainly–but what about innocents killed by accident or as collateral in drone attacks? In many cases, these non-combatants were as anti-ISIS or Taliban or as any of us—even more so, considering they actually live in daily dread of the terrorist/murderers.
In truth, drone attacks have killed allies or people sympathetic to our cause as well as the terrorists we seek to destroy. This has been a prime source of controversy ever since the things were introduced.
quote:
And because of the relative precision most civilized countries see it as acceptable.
I'm sorry but this is simply wrong. Our use of drones has been a matter of debate with all of our biggest traditional allies--England, France, Germany and Canada.
Drones can save American lives while risking the lives of innocent non-combatants. No matter how you feel about their use, this is an inarguable point.
This sword, in other words, is truly double edged.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News