|SolRo - 2013-03-12 |
It's like a badly done CG heavy episode of The Outer Limits with some dystopian message, except real*!
I just think the air force wants carpet bombing of cities allowed...because self-guiding explosives that stay active for months and move around on their own totally doesn't sound like it would be a war crime!
|wtf japan - 2013-03-12 |
Well, it's about damn time!
|Old_Zircon - 2013-03-12 |
As someone who grew up in a town that had cicadas, I have a strong suspicion that they're greatly exaggerating the potential stealthiness of these things.
I get the feeling most of this video is wishful thinking.
|Bort - 2013-03-12 |
I'm going to take the other side on this one. People don't like drone strikes because they're imprecise (even though they're far more imprecise than any other tactic available to us) and they kill innocent people (even though they kill far fewer innocent people than any other tactic available to us). Well, these little fuckers may allow for crazy precision and low low collateral damage.
This is assuming that the AUMF is still in place and we're still going after al Qaeda, of course. I think there's a lot that needs to be worked out, mostly in terms of oversight, if we're still going to be going after al Qaeda; but if we are, these MAVs would be an improvement over drones.
"... far more PRECISE". Goddammit.
People don't like drone strikes? Last I heard they had something like 70% approval in most polls.
Also I can think of at least one tactic that would kill fewer innocent people.
About that one tactic that would kill fewer innocent people ... are you factoring in whom we're going after and why we're going after them? Tell me you would have begrudged a drone strike against bin Laden in 1998 or so, preventing 9/11 and two wars.
Just to be clear, I am entirely in favor of more oversight, to make sure we're going after targets who legitimately pose a threat, as opposed to people we kinda sorta think might belong to al Qaeda. But once that determination is made, this becomes a real life ethics class trolley problem, where the administration has to decide whether to send the trolley to kill the group of five people, one of whom is a serial killer.
You know Al Quaeda isn't actually a real organization, right? Going after Al Quaeda is literally exactly like going after Anonymous, except the stakes are much higher on both sides.
It's not a real organization to the extent that it doesn't lend itself to an org chart and a rigid chain of command, I'll grant you that. But I'd say a truer analogy would be the French Resistance.
"People" (that is, Americans) like drone strikes because the US is light years ahead of their enemies in this department and can currently use them with basically impunity.
A Hellfire missile from a drone is no different from a well-placed car bomb, only the fact that somewhere miles away there's a guy in a uniform pushing a button, so it's not a war crime.
When others have drones with lethal capability the US will be scrambling to declare that all other drones are somehow a war crime while theirs are perfectly legal, I'm sure.
Here's the latest PEW research poll on drone strikes:
More than 50% approve of them in places like Pakistan, sure. It's when you ask about civilian casualties that you get closer to 70%... among Democrats and Independents. Republicans only have 37% of their respondents concerned that innocent people will get killed.
Since when are drone strikes imprecise? When you hear about a drone slamming a missle into a wedding, are you actually under the impression that they weren't aiming at the wedding?
Innocents are getting killed not because the strikes are off target, but because there's people standing beside the target and the military just doesn't care.
Whatever happened to just bombing your enemies into the stone age and sticking them with the costs for the entire war?
It worked against my people...well, for about 20 years.
That's a point that critics of drones ought to acknowledge, I think; if you're going to hate something, hate it for the right reasons. Drones ARE a much less indiscriminate killer than widespread bombing, or sanctions, full-scale invasion. Now you can easily argue that drones are still employed too readily and cause too many civilian deaths, but make no mistake, if we were truly indifferent to civilian casualties, we wouldn't limit ourselves to drones.
|SteamPoweredKleenex - 2013-03-12 |
It's finally happened. We now have flying iPhones that can kill you.
|PegLegPete - 2013-03-12 |
So they recently cut off tuition assistance for active duty military for all the branches because of sequestration. Haven't heard anything about any kind of funding like this being cut-off. Priorities, you know.
|Dynamicuno - 2013-03-12 |
At the 1:05 mark.
Did Dwayne join Al qaeda or has Bill turned to the Military to keep an eye on him?
|Gmork - 2013-03-12 |
5 for evil.
Prepare for dystopia, everybody!
|Triggerbaby - 2013-03-12 |
It's interesting how the narrator describes this as a military technology, while the visuals essentially show law enforcement applications.
isnt that what we're doing though?
|William Burns - 2013-03-12 |
Hopefully this is just some slick viral marketing for the Robocop reboot. It's going to be a shitty disaster set in a dystopian future either way.
|James Woods - 2013-03-13 |
ACHEIVEMENT UNLOCKED: KILL SNIPER WITH MAV
YOUVE BEEN PROMOTED TO PVT II CLASS
BLAIRING GUITARS AND HEAVY ROCK DRUMMIMG!
|Mister Yuck - 2013-03-13 |
So the Air Force is gonna get started on this right after they figure out what's suffocating F-22 pilots right? Oh, they just gave up on figuring that out? Oh, so then they'll just get right on this after they get the F-35 working okay, then? Right? Well, anyway, I'm sure the dystopian future will be working right out of the box then, sure.
| Register or login To Post a Comment|