President Romney Can Thank Obama for His Permanent Robotic Death List

Gitanjali · Oct 26, 2012

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/10/disposition-matrix/

It’s a good thing that Mitt Romney endorsed President Obama’s counterterrorism agenda. Should he win the election in two weeks, Romney will inherit an institutionalized, bureaucratic machine for using lethal robots to target and kill suspected terrorists and their allies. Killing Osama bin Laden was a one-time event; this “Disposition Matrix” is Barack Obama’s real national-security legacy.

The Matrix, as detailed in a blockbuster Washington Post expose, is a master list maintained by the National Counterterrorism Center of suspected terrorists around the world, matched with methods for dealing with them. Most often, that means killing them; and most often, that means using an expanding fleet of armed drones to do so, taking off from hubs in the Arabian Peninsula, eastern Afghanistan and Djibouti’s Camp Lemonnier. Despite bin Laden’s death and the supposed disruption of al-Qaida’s old leadership, the Matrix keeps adding names, as fast or faster than the drones drop bodies.

The article notes that online databases show over 3,000 people have been killed in US drone use overseas. There are a number of independent, nonpartisan sources that indicate well over 10% of those that die from remote-piloted vehicles like drones and UAVs are civilians, including children. Since the signing off of their use nearly ten years ago, over 300 drone strikes have taken place in some countries we're not even publicly "at war" with, including Pakistan. If a country struck us with a UAV it'd be an act of war. Its a good thing Obama knows 3rd world states like Yemen and Somalia don't possess said technology.

shadowwalker · Oct 26, 2012

"Since the signing off of their use nearly ten years ago" - so it's not actually Obama's thing, is it? He just continued to use it, just as Romney will if he manages to win.

Gitanjali · Oct 26, 2012

shadowwalker said:
"Since the signing off of their use nearly ten years ago" - so it's not actually Obama's thing, is it? He just continued to use it, just as Romney will if he manages to win.

Obama put the "okay" on 85% of every drone strike that occurred since Bush signed off on allowing RPV/UAVs to become a tool in their military arsenal/toolbox. Between Bush and Obama, drone strikes are absolutely an Obama "thing."

Alessandra Kelley · Oct 26, 2012

Gitanjali, just about every one of your threads is like this, a link to some highly partisan news article with no apparent attempt to argue anything.

Furthermore, all of your posts are either on threads you have started yourself in P&CE or on the lightest of frivolous threads elsewhere.

May I suggest you take a step back, stop starting new threads, read the Newbie Guide very carefully, read some pages back of the P&CE threads (which are on average far deeper and more interesting than the ones you have started), and only then try to actually engage the good people discussing current events and political issues here.

Gitanjali · Oct 26, 2012

Alessandra Kelley said:
Gitanjali, just about every one of your threads is like this, a link to some highly partisan news article with no apparent attempt to argue anything.

Furthermore, all of your posts are either on threads you have started yourself in P&CE or on the lightest of frivolous threads elsewhere.

May I suggest you take a step back, stop starting new threads, read the Newbie Guide very carefully, read some pages back of the P&CE threads (which are on average far deeper and more interesting than the ones you have started), and only then try to actually engage the good people discussing current events and political issues here.

If you attacked the topic as well as you attacked my posts in general, we'd have that discussion you seem to be campaigning for. You're simply not contributing to the subject matter. And since when has "Wired" been anti-Obama? This is an article detailing Obama's use of drone strikes and killing civilians. That does not appear to be very pro-Obama.

Opty · Oct 26, 2012

I think it's the fact that you're spamming the forum as if you were some RSS- feed bot that's annoying people. You've posted around four or five of these in one day? You're not really posting any ideas that are engaging or thought-provoking or offering anything one can't get from the google news page.

Gitanjali · Oct 26, 2012

Opty said:
I think it's the fact that you're spamming the forum as if you were some RSS- feed bot that's annoying people. You've posted around four or five of these in one day? You're not really posting any ideas that are engaging or thought-provoking or offering anything one can't get from the google news page.

While your strawman is enjoyable, it has nothing to do with drone strikes or civilian deaths.

Opty · Oct 26, 2012

You need to look up what a strawman is so that you'll know that my post wasn't even close to one. Nice try, though.

benbradley · Oct 26, 2012

Gitanjali said:
Obama put the "okay" on 85% of every drone strike that occurred since Bush signed off on allowing RPV/UAVs to become a tool in their military arsenal/toolbox. Between Bush and Obama, drone strikes are absolutely an Obama "thing."

Okay, suppose McCain had been elected in 2008, do you think there would be more UAV strikes, or fewer?

Gitanjali · Oct 26, 2012

Opty said:
You need to look up what a strawman is so that you'll know that my post wasn't even close to one. Nice try, though.

I made a post about the use of drone strikes over seas. You harp not on my post about drone strikes over seas, but about my "spam" and "ideas." You attacked said "spam" and "ideas" and disregarded my post on drone strikes over seas. How is that not the definition of strawman?

benbradley said:
Okay, suppose McCain had been elected in 2008, do you think there would be more UAV strikes, or fewer?

Do you? Its a hypothetical. As I mentioned previously the use of drones is a singular tool in the wide-ranging toolbox of the US military. If I knew that said tool killed one civilian in ten, that would be too much collateral damage.

Alessandra Kelley · Oct 26, 2012

Gitanjali said:
If you attacked the topic as well as you attacked my posts in general, we'd have that discussion you seem to be campaigning for. You're simply not contributing to the subject matter. And since when has "Wired" been anti-Obama? This is an article detailing Obama's use of drone strikes and killing civilians. That does not appear to be very pro-Obama.

I think you may be confused. My post made no mention of the source, content, or political bent of the article you cited, only that, as with all of the threads you have begun, it was highly partisan.

The direction of the antipathy in the articles you have been linking is of less concerm to me than that they are all antipathetic to some political figure or other, and that you are adding nothing to their talking points.

This is simply not the way to have a political discussion.

Do you actually have any opinions on these articles, or are you simply repeating them?

Opty · Oct 26, 2012

I again question why the 50-post minimum to qualify for posting in this forum was lifted. We've had more than a few trolls and quasi-trolls meander in here lately.

benbradley · Oct 26, 2012

Gitanjali said:
Do you?

ETA: Damn, that was quick.

President Romney Can Thank Obama for His Permanent Robotic Death List

Gitanjali

shadowwalker

empty-nester!

Gitanjali

Alessandra Kelley

Sophipygian

Gitanjali

Opty

Gitanjali

Opty

benbradley

It's a doggy dog world

Gitanjali

Alessandra Kelley

Sophipygian

Opty

benbradley

It's a doggy dog world