American Drone Strike Policy Discussion

Black smoke and cac jokes

All Black Everything
Joined
May 14, 2012
Messages
2,919
Reputation
856
Daps
8,270
Now wouldn't it be safe to say that since we aren't fighting a nation state but a faction that borders aren't necessary to justify why you're going into another sovereign nation, especially if they're providing a safe haven allowing that group to recruit, train, etc? Should we respect that nations borders an allow that faction to reup?

Further, what if these nations can't control parts of their country and factions within that country are supporting the enemy?

Over the past decade, annual estimates of the number of gangs have averaged around 25,000 nationally.

Over the past decade, annual estimates of the number of gang members have averaged around 750,000 nationally.

The total number of gang homicides reported by respondents in the NYGS sample averaged nearly 2,000 annually from 2006 to 2010. During the same time period, the FBI estimated, on average, more than 16,000 homicides across the United States

Measuring the Extent of Gang Problems

Washington, D.C., home of the boys and girls who can solve it all, is nearing its own big 100.

Chicago’s murder numbers have hit that magic 500. Baltimore’s murder toll has passed 200. In Philly, it’s up to 324, the highest since 2007. In Detroit, it’s approaching 400, another record. In New Orleans, it’s almost at 200. New York City is down to 414 from 508. In Los Angeles, it’s over 500. In St. Louis it’s 113 and 130 in Oakland. It’s 121 in Memphis and 76 in Birmingham.

Washington, D.C., home of the boys and girls who can solve it all, is nearing its own big 100.

Those 12 cities alone account for nearly 3,200 dead and nearly a quarter of all murders in the United States.

America Doesn’t Have a Gun Problem, It Has a Gang Problem

What about domestic terrorism? Aren't the drone strikes all about eliminating any potential threats on U.S. soil. To remove any potential dangers to American citizens is why we are doing it right? :childplease:

Gangs have been, and still is, the largest hidden issue in the U.S. America has an epidemic of gangs, who by definition in international law, would classify as domestic terrorists. But is that the topic of the discussion? No, it is those foreigners who envy American living standards and hate the liberty this country has. STOP IT. Just fukkin stop it!

It is a fukking pissing contest. To prove to the world that American still have the largest and technological advance military in the world. What politicians are disregarding is how fukkin unimportant that shyt is. People don't dislike America because of their supremacy, but because of their tendency to foolishly exploit the world. How do they do that? Well for starters, their regressive foreign policy which solely focus on military dominance instead of what would really improve safety for Americans, equal access to resources.

I guess that is another debate, and I wish only to point out the flaws in your arguments, so I'll save that for another time.

Furthermore,

. The fiscal year 2012 budget included nearly $5 billion for drone research, development and procurement. This figure represents the known costs; it does not include funding that may be classified. The CIA has about 30 Predator and Reaper drones, which are operated by Air Force pilots from a U.S. military base in an unnamed U.S. state. The Department of Homeland Security has at least nine unarmed Predator drones with a tenth purchase planned for September 2012. The cost per flight hour varies by type of drone. Predator and Reaper drones cost about $2,500-3,500 per flight hour; larger armed systems such as the military’s Global Hawk cost about 10 times as much: approximately $30,000 per flight hour.

Yes, of course we need to increase the defense budget now. It's not like we're in a huge debt, the largest any country has ever seen. Larger than most countries GDP. No that can't be it.

U.S. need to solve their fukking domestic life threatening issues before they even peak out the window and see what the rest of the world is doing. It is fukking ridiculous how people still believe people dislike America for their way of life. You think drone attacks on places that might potentially have 2-3 suspected terrorists make the world safer? No, it makes the people in the surrounding area trust Americans less and what does that lead to? More terrorists.
 

profound

technique
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
5,319
Reputation
985
Daps
5,864

nice program. i didnt know they take in non-pilots.

i wanna command a drone :damn:

see if my in laws wanna talk that shyt on facebook then :shaq:

and fukk pakistan, the worlds largest exporter of terrorism, should have been ashes on 9/12/01.

and fukk yemen slightly less.

and fukk ''blowback'', the whole problem was not being able to kill them b4 they kill us...no longer a problem.
 

newworldafro

DeeperThanRapBiggerThanHH
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
51,421
Reputation
5,343
Daps
115,998
Reppin
In the Silver Lining
The Real Drone Horror ? Revenue Enhancement | The Moderate Voice

The Real Drone Horror — Revenue Enhancement

Feb 25, 2013 by MICHAEL SILVERSTEIN, Wall Street Columnist

It’s now estimated that by the end of this decade, 60,000 – 70,000 drones operated by various federal and local governments will be flying over the United States on a regular basis. The opposition to this technological revolution fears these devices will invade citizen privacy, and that they might even be used for government assassinations the way they are used in some foreign countries.

What nonsense. Such privacy worries are silly. Assassination concerns are absurd. The real fear here should focus on the potential of drones as revenue enhancers.

About privacy. It’s rather late in the day to evoke this worry when it comes to drones. When Essau in the Bible sold his birthright to Jacob for a bowl of porridge, at least he got a good feed out of the deal. What have Americans gotten for their own privacy sell out?

The right to be charged almost 15 percent interest (the present credit card average starting rate) when they buy things with plastic, purchases that are meticulously tracked by marketeers? The right to surf the Internet, with every single click or pause tracked by Internet firms? The right to talk on cell phones while walking down the street that’s tracked by phone service suppliers? The right to drive a new car, vehicles that all now have black boxes installed that let others know where one’s been, if they haven’t already tracked you via your cell phone or other devices?

Why would a government agency need drones to invade the privacy that Americans as a people have so egregiously and foolishly traded away? All a government agency needs do is spend a few bucks with a data mining company to know more about you than any government agency in history.

Governments now have all the technical tools they need to track potential terrorists. All the weapons they need to kill bad guys who deserve to die. Far too many ways to invade privacy already. Drones will therefore serve another purpose. They will provide more of what governments really want.

They want your money.

Revenue enhancement techniques employed by governments, especially local governments, techniques that go beyond simple taxation, have an enormous, largely untapped potential. Drones are a natural instrument, a natural player, in this 21st century revenue enhancement.

Think of drones as flying red-light cameras and you’ll see their future. Unlike present red light cameras that are installed at just a few heavily trafficked locations, drones allow violations to be recorded for going through a red light, stopping in a crosswalk, making a right turn without making a full stop first, on every corner in an entire community. And then allow fines to be generated in a very cost effective manner.

And that’s just starters. Think of all the regulations on local government books, the minor infractions that could generate fines if only there were an economical way to get photographic proof who committed the infraction. There could then be countless fines for jay walking. Parking more than six inches from the curb, any curb. Drinking from a bottle not in a brown paper bag. Spitting. Littering. Not cleaning poop deposited by a dog. Leaving a garbage can with its top off on trash pick up days. Not shoveling your walk after a snowstorm. Not picking the leaves off the sidewalk in front of your house. The list goes on and on.

Drones can spot all such infractions, most of which were never enforced much less fined because it was too expensive for local governments to do so. Soon it will be both practical and cost effective.

And if you think that just because there’s no license plate that would identify a perp for such infractions as is the case with red light camera-like infractions generated by vehicles, that violators could therefore not be identified, think again. There’s software now that has faces collected from all sorts of places. Ball games, school graduations, political protests. at. al. A drone spots a littering violation, the face of the perp is linked to the violation, a computer matches it with a face on a drivers license or voter ID card, and a fine notice is in the mail.

The first time a red light infraction ticket is drone-spawned, or a littering infraction is drone-spawned, there will be public outrage, protests. These will be two-day news cycle events. Then drone-spawned ticketing will become just another rip off that’s accepted because it comes to seem natural, like paying to use an ATM machine or late fees on a credit card payment.

Besides, no new laws need go on the books to make this government revenue enhancement bonanza possible. There are already laws in place about jay walking, littering. et. al. Who could protest such long established laws, just because they are finally being enforced?

Political tyranny was a 20th century thing. At least in the Western world. Monetary tyranny is what this century is getting to be all about. You already see this with banks that increasingly shape government policies to serve their own interests at everyone else’s expense. Banks don’t do this to cause pain. They just want your money.

Financially strapped governments are going the same way, and not because they want to steal your liberties. They don’t care what religion you practice, what you say, what you read, what you think, the guns you own. They, too, just want your money.

That’s where the present is headed. That’s the future.

Look! Up in the sky. It’s a bird. It’s a plane. No, it’s a flying $25 littering ticket generator
 

Ian1362

david ruffin in the flesh
Supporter
Joined
May 26, 2012
Messages
3,415
Reputation
790
Daps
6,033
Reppin
NY
Anyone watching the senate session right now?


Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, and Mike Lee are filibustering the Brennan nomination over the drone issue.

Cruz and Paul are going in on the DOJ ignoring the law
 

newworldafro

DeeperThanRapBiggerThanHH
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
51,421
Reputation
5,343
Daps
115,998
Reppin
In the Silver Lining
Drones to be used to find lost dogs, cats?

Drones used to find lost dogs, cats?

Watch shock statements by ABC News reporter

byAaron Klein

An ABC News reporter suggested on air that drones will become such a routine part of American life that they eventually will be used to find lost dogs and cats.

The comments were made by ABC’s John Muller, who was reporting last night on a possible drone sighting near JFK Airport in New York as commercial planes were taking off and landing.

“Now experts say drones will eventually become a day-to-day part of life used in weather and traffic reports. Even for finding lost dogs and cats,” Muller stated.

Muller reported the unknown flying object was sighted by an Alitalia pilot who was in his final approach into JFK when he said he saw something hovering about 200 feet away.

The New York Post quoted unnamed sources saying the “drone” was black and had helicopter rotors on its corners.

In an audio recording played on ABC, the Alitalia pilot says: “We saw a drone, a drone aircraft.”

The control tower is then heard warning other aircraft, telling one: “Delta 1368, use caution. There was a report of a drone aircraft on about a five-mile funnel 1,500 feet.”

The Joint Terror Task Force and Federal Aviation Administration are reportedly probing the alleged drone sighting.

FAA spokeswoman Laura Brown said in a statement to CNN yesterday: “The FAA is investigating a report. … He saw a small, unmanned or remote-controlled aircraft while on final approach to Runway 31 Right.”

CNN pointed out it is illegal to operate drones within three miles of an airport without first notifying air traffic controllers.

The news network added that “flying unmanned aerial vehicles is illegal for most business purposes; however, governments and public entities such as police departments can apply for permission to operate them.”

Got a drone for that?.......................................................................:beli:
 

newworldafro

DeeperThanRapBiggerThanHH
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
51,421
Reputation
5,343
Daps
115,998
Reppin
In the Silver Lining
http://www.prisonplanet.com/new-drone-could-snatch-humans-off-the-street.html

New Drone Could ‘Snatch Humans Off the Street’

UAV mimics how an eagle grabs its prey.

"Avian-Inspired Grasping For Quadrotor Micro Aerial Vehicles"




Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
March 15, 2013

A new flying drone developed by researchers at the University of Pennsylvania could one day be used to snatch humans off the street.

Justin Thomas and his colleagues at the GRASP Lab have produced an “avian-inspired” claw drone that mimics the way an eagle uses its talons to grab a fish out of the ocean.

A video clip of the drone shows the UAV swooping down at high speed to snatch an object using its 3D printed mechanical claw. By mimicking how a bald eagle sweeps its legs and claws backwards to aerodynamically close in on its prey without the need to slow down, the drone is able to grasp a stationary object with precise efficiency.


Drexel University’s Christopher Korpela is simultaneously developing flight stability software for drones with arms that would enable the UAV’s to carry a weighty object without them falling out of the air. The eventual purpose of the drones would be focused around “interacting with people or the environment,” although that is still a long way off according to Korpela.

Technology journalist Adario Strange envisages a future scenario where a larger version of the eagle claw drone could be used by law enforcement or military to pluck humans off the ground.

“The optimistic view of this development offers a vision of an emergency situation in which a drone could rapidly fly in and save a person from a perilous situation, but it’s also fairly easy to imagine law enforcement and the military using this development to grab human targets in coming years,” writes Strange, reporting for DVice.com.

“We may be about to see a return to the days when unseen hunters lurking in the sky could easily snatch a human right off the street,” he adds, referring to the pterosaur, a flying reptile that existed 65 million years ago.

Although this incarnation of the eagle claw drone is far too small to snatch and grab a human, the potential that larger models could be deployed for that very purpose in future is sure to make many nervous.

As we reported yesterday, military insiders like Lt. Col. Douglas Pryer are warning that drone technology will soon metastasize into armies of remorseless killer robots which will be used to stalk and incapacitate human targets.


Noel Sharkey, professor of artificial intelligence and robotics at the University of Sheffield, has also repeatedly warned that the robots currently being developed under the auspices of DARPA will eventually be used to kill.

“Of course if it’s used for combat, it would be killing civilians as well as it’s not going to be able to discriminate between civilians and soldiers,” said Sharkey.













































ani_wtf_cube.gif
 
Last edited by a moderator:

No1

Retired.
Supporter
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
32,202
Reputation
5,472
Daps
73,213
As U.S. drone monopoly frays, Obama seeks global rules | Reuters

As U.S. drone monopoly frays, Obama seeks global rules

1:08am EDT
By Tabassum Zakaria

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama, who vastly expanded U.S. drone strikes against terrorism suspects overseas under the cloak of secrecy, is now openly seeking to influence global guidelines for their use as China and other countries pursue their own drone programs.
The United States was the first to use unmanned aircraft fitted with missiles to kill militant suspects in the years after the September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington.


But other countries are catching up. China's interest in unmanned aerial vehicles was displayed in November at an air show . According to state-run newspaper Global Times, China had considered conducting its first drone strike to kill a suspect in the 2011 murder of 13 Chinese sailors, but authorities decided they wanted the man alive so they could put him on trial. :merchant:

"People say what's going to happen when the Chinese and the Russians get this technology? The president is well aware of those concerns and wants to set the standard for the international community on these tools," said Tommy Vietor, until earlier this month a White House spokesman.

As U.S. ground wars end - over in Iraq, drawing to a close in Afghanistan - surgical counterterrorism targeting has become "the new normal," Vietor said.
Amid a debate within the U.S. government, it is not yet clear what new standards governing targeted killings and drone strikes the White House will develop for U.S. operations or propose for global rules of the road.
Obama's new position is not without irony. The White House kept details of drone operations - which remain largely classified - out of public view for years when the U.S. monopoly was airtight.

That stance is just now beginning to change, in part under pressure from growing public and Congressional discomfort with the drone program. U.S. lawmakers have demanded to see White House legal justifications for targeting U.S. citizens abroad, and to know whether Obama thinks he has the authority to use drones to kill Americans on U.S. soil.

On Friday, a three-judge federal appeals court panel unanimously ruled that the CIA gave an inadequate response to a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union seeking records about drone strikes. The CIA had said it could neither confirm nor deny whether it had drone records because of security concerns.
The judge who wrote the ruling noted that the president had publicly acknowledged that the United States uses drone strikes against al Qaeda.

LETHAL ACTION

Strikes by missile-armed Predator and Reaper drones against terrorism suspects overseas began under former President George W. Bush and were expanded by Obama.

The ramp-up started in 2008, the last year of Bush's term, when there were 35 air strikes in Pakistan, and escalated under Obama to a peak of 117 in 2010, according to The Long War Journal ( here ).

That jump in use of armed drones resulted from the authorization to use "signature" strikes, which allowed targeting terrorism suspects based on behavior and other characteristics without knowing their actual identity, a U.S. official said on condition of anonymity.

Caitlin Hayden, a spokeswoman for the White House National Security Council, said the administration is committed to explaining to Congress and the public as much as possible about its drone policies, including how decisions to strike are made.

"We are constantly working to refine, clarify, and strengthen the process for considering terrorist targets for lethal action," Hayden said.
The administration recognizes "we are establishing standards other nations may follow," she said.

James Lewis, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies think tank, said other countries, including Russia, have unarmed reconnaissance drones. China says it has an armed drone, but "we don't know if it works," he said.

"Getting agreement on the applicability of existing humanitarian law to the new technologies is crucial," he said, because China and Russia do not endorse applying laws of armed conflict to new military technologies.
One of the Obama administration's goals is to "regularize" the drone program, making it more a part of accepted U.S. practice in the future, Lewis said. "This is going to be part of warfare."

While the Obama administration moves toward refinement and transparency of standards, drone strikes continue to spark outrage in countries where they are conducted. Washington has sought to portray civilian casualties from drone strikes as minimal, but groups collecting data on these attacks say they have killed hundreds of civilians.

A U.N. human rights investigator who is looking into drone strikes worldwide said on Friday the U.S. campaign had violated Pakistan's sovereignty.


INTERNAL DEBATES


One focus of U.S. officials' internal debate is whether to shift drone operations to the Pentagon from the CIA.
That would allow the CIA to return to more traditional operations of espionage and intelligence analysis, and put the killing of terrorism targets in the hands of the military.

It would probably be a "phased approach" that would account for differences in the threat and political sensitivities, said a second U.S. official. "There would have to be some tailoring."
In Pakistan, where the U.S. military is not in ground combat, the Obama administration would probably not want drone strikes to appear as being conducted by the military.

In Yemen, there may not be the same sensitivities. U.S. military personnel are on the ground working with Yemenis in counterterrorism operations.
The United States has also carried out drone strikes in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Somalia.

"I think if they moved it, not as a covert action program, but one of the tools of the warfighter, then the result of it is probably going to be more public exposure about what they are doing," Stephen Hadley, national security adviser under Bush, said.
The "center of gravity" in internal administration debates is the goal of greater consistency on how drone strikes are managed, decided upon, and executed, the second official said.

(Editing by Warren Strobel and Mohammad Zargham)

I'll merge this into the drone strike thread later, but I figured it would be better to get it noticed here first. It's an interesting development and like the article says, not without :beli:.
 

Shogun

Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
25,584
Reputation
6,087
Daps
63,269
Reppin
Knicks
This is how America been operating for years. If the rest of the world doesn't like it...they can come at the throne :yeshrug:

otherwise,

obamadealwithit_gif.gif
 

Hiphoplives4eva

Solid Gold Dashikis
Supporter
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
42,422
Reputation
3,676
Daps
152,141
Reppin
black love, unity, and music
Obama's outrageous hypocritical stances are so commonplace its sickening. The dude has no morals when it comes to the use of drones, so he should expect other countries to have no morals in their use as well.
 

Shogun

Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
25,584
Reputation
6,087
Daps
63,269
Reppin
Knicks
Obama's outrageous hypocritical stances are so commonplace its sickening. The dude has no morals when it comes to the use of drones, so he should expect other countries to have no morals in their use as well.

your outrage is cute....actin like other countries' leaders act with morality over their own best interest :obamalol:
 
Top