Are drone strikes justifiable?

  • 85 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for thebest31406
thebest31406

3775

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#51 thebest31406
Member since 2004 • 3775 Posts
[QUOTE="famicommander"]Not under any circumstances is it okay to kill even a single innocent. ad1x2
Drones don't explicitly target innocent people. War in general sucks and it is inevitable innocent people may get caught in the crossfire but better technology is reducing casualties on both sides of the battlefield in comparison to previous wars.

Unless there's no justifiable cause to perpetuate a conflict, then the whole "better tech to reduce casualties" gimmick holds no water.
Avatar image for thebest31406
thebest31406

3775

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#52 thebest31406
Member since 2004 • 3775 Posts

[QUOTE="thebest31406"][QUOTE="themajormayor"] From my perspective they are not. I'm on their side. Why would I support the bombing of my own side? How come the bombing of Berlin was ok but not of London?

themajormayor

That's no moral argument.

Cool?

It's true though, if I was a member of Hamas I certainly would not like the Israelis using drone strikes. It's not hypocritical. You want your side to win and the other side to lose.

Again though, from an objective point of view, as I already stated before I wouldn't see their use of drones in itself as any less justifiable than Israelis using them, provided it is used in a moral manner. However I would be against the reason it is used.

Distinction, not against the use in itself but the reason for its use (i.e to destroy Israel or w/e).

Analogy. I would be against the Nazi invasion of Poland involving tanks or w/e. But I wouldn't be against the actual use of tanks by either side. Now maybe you could say I would be against the Nazi use of tanks due to the invasion being a prerequisite for the use of tanks. But even then it would stand against your accusations of hypocracy since then really the two sides would not be comparable.

No, the hypocrisy comes from the fact that forcing drones on State that doesn't want them, on a people that don't them, is perfectly fine - just as long as it isn't your state.
Avatar image for The_Gaming_Baby
The_Gaming_Baby

6425

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 117

User Lists: 52

#53 The_Gaming_Baby
Member since 2010 • 6425 Posts

Violence is never the answer, unless the government wants your shit

Avatar image for RedCore119
RedCore119

286

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#54 RedCore119
Member since 2013 • 286 Posts

it's all about survival my friends

Avatar image for ultimate-k
ultimate-k

2348

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#55 ultimate-k
Member since 2010 • 2348 Posts

No, it is a coawrds way to fight, it maybe justtifable if it only target a genuine threat to humanity, but half of drone strikes kill innoent people.

 

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/05/22/304751/terror-drones-mostly-kill-civilians/

 

Disgusting

Avatar image for ad1x2
ad1x2

8430

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#56 ad1x2
Member since 2005 • 8430 Posts
[QUOTE="ad1x2"][QUOTE="famicommander"]Not under any circumstances is it okay to kill even a single innocent. thebest31406
Drones don't explicitly target innocent people. War in general sucks and it is inevitable innocent people may get caught in the crossfire but better technology is reducing casualties on both sides of the battlefield in comparison to previous wars.

Unless there's no justifiable cause to perpetuate a conflict, then the whole "better tech to reduce casualties" gimmick holds no water.

War is going to happen whether we like it or not. Better technology is part of the reason why we had 58,000 deaths in Vietnam, more than ten times the amount of deaths we have had in Afghanistan since 2001. People want to ban drones because they think they are so "scary" but what is the difference between a drone and a fighter jet besides one not having a pilot present? Or are you scared Black Ops 2's storyline where the bad guy hacked all of America's drones will come true?
Avatar image for ad1x2
ad1x2

8430

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#58 ad1x2
Member since 2005 • 8430 Posts

No, it is a coawrds way to fight, it maybe justtifable if it only target a genuine threat to humanity, but half of drone strikes kill innoent people.

 

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/05/22/304751/terror-drones-mostly-kill-civilians/

 

Disgusting

ultimate-k
So you think we should just send platoons of troops on missions to do the job of drones? It is easy to call it a coward's way to fight when you are at home and somebody else you never met will have to be the one going on those missions.

Besides, I already mentioned that drone policies have been updated and most stories claiming drone strikes mostly kill civilians are either outdated or are using false information fed to them by biased sources.

One thing I have learned about statistics is they can twist numbers to make one side sound worse. Saying only 2% were high level targets can be misleading because they don't mention who the other 98% were and without flat out saying it try to imply that the other 98% were innocent civilians.

In reality, any combination of the other 98% could be underlings who worked for the terrorists. A high value target would be the leader of a specific terrorist cell and he may have dozens, if not hundreds of lower guys working for him that may have been killed.
Avatar image for Jimn_tonic
Jimn_tonic

913

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#59 Jimn_tonic
Member since 2013 • 913 Posts

Of course they are. Not the way they are currently being used (signature strikes, double taps etc), but there is appropriate ways to use them in war.

Avatar image for themajormayor
themajormayor

25729

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#60 themajormayor
Member since 2011 • 25729 Posts

[QUOTE="themajormayor"]

[QUOTE="thebest31406"] That's no moral argument.thebest31406

Cool?

It's true though, if I was a member of Hamas I certainly would not like the Israelis using drone strikes. It's not hypocritical. You want your side to win and the other side to lose.

Again though, from an objective point of view, as I already stated before I wouldn't see their use of drones in itself as any less justifiable than Israelis using them, provided it is used in a moral manner. However I would be against the reason it is used.

Distinction, not against the use in itself but the reason for its use (i.e to destroy Israel or w/e).

Analogy. I would be against the Nazi invasion of Poland involving tanks or w/e. But I wouldn't be against the actual use of tanks by either side. Now maybe you could say I would be against the Nazi use of tanks due to the invasion being a prerequisite for the use of tanks. But even then it would stand against your accusations of hypocracy since then really the two sides would not be comparable.

No, the hypocrisy comes from the fact that forcing drones on State that doesn't want them, on a people that don't them, is perfectly fine - just as long as it isn't your state.

Did you even read what I wrote? I have already adressed your moronic post now about hundred times

Avatar image for Dark_Knight6
Dark_Knight6

16619

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#61 Dark_Knight6
Member since 2006 • 16619 Posts

As long as precautions are being taken to avoid civilian causalities, then I don't see how it's any less legal than manned strikes.  And none of the "they weren't civilians because they were potential combatants" bullshit rhetoric that's being spouted by the current administration.

Avatar image for curono
curono

7722

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 21

User Lists: 0

#62 curono
Member since 2005 • 7722 Posts
Not the way they have been currently done. Some drone attacks literally DO NOT KNOW who were they targeting. It is sickening.
Avatar image for CongressManStan
CongressManStan

918

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#63 CongressManStan
Member since 2010 • 918 Posts
I spent an entire semester researching and writing a paper on this exact topic. They definitely have their benefits, but the current U.S. use of the technology is actually causing more difficulties for U.S. forces. The strikes are very, very unpopular by civilians in countries like Pakistan which is causing increased resistance and violence within certain regions.
Avatar image for MakeMeaSammitch
MakeMeaSammitch

4889

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#64 MakeMeaSammitch
Member since 2012 • 4889 Posts

opponents just have huge gaping vaginas

Avatar image for RahXephon101
RahXephon101

501

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#65 RahXephon101
Member since 2005 • 501 Posts

Only if the US does it...if any other nations, say Russia decided to launch a drone strike into Georgia, people would denounce it and that would be fine. But question US policy and your asking for trouble.

Avatar image for frannkzappa
frannkzappa

3003

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#66 frannkzappa
Member since 2012 • 3003 Posts

Only if the US does it...if any other nations, say Russia decided to launch a drone strike into Georgia, people would denounce it and that would be fine. But question US policy and your asking for trouble.

RahXephon101

Frankly i don't think there are any other countries of enough merit (maybe china in the future, israel in the far far future) to question US policy.

Avatar image for RahXephon101
RahXephon101

501

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#67 RahXephon101
Member since 2005 • 501 Posts

[QUOTE="RahXephon101"]

Only if the US does it...if any other nations, say Russia decided to launch a drone strike into Georgia, people would denounce it and that would be fine. But question US policy and your asking for trouble.

frannkzappa

Frankly i don't think there are any other countries of enough merit (maybe china in the future, israel in the far far future) to question US policy.

True, my point was more that if China or Russia carried out a drone strike it would be condemned as a horrible act by the many of the same people who openly support the US actions. If you think drone strikes are justifiable than do not get mad if Russia launches a drone strike into a neighbouring country on the justificiation of defence.

Avatar image for ad1x2
ad1x2

8430

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#68 ad1x2
Member since 2005 • 8430 Posts

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

[QUOTE="RahXephon101"]

Only if the US does it...if any other nations, say Russia decided to launch a drone strike into Georgia, people would denounce it and that would be fine. But question US policy and your asking for trouble.

RahXephon101

Frankly i don't think there are any other countries of enough merit (maybe china in the future, israel in the far far future) to question US policy.

True, my point was more that if China or Russia carried out a drone strike it would be condemned as a horrible act by the many of the same people who openly support the US actions. If you think drone strikes are justifiable than do not get mad if Russia launches a drone strike into a neighbouring country on the justificiation of defence.

Part of the reason the US can get away with drone strikes in Afghanistan and Pakistan is because those countries' respective police and military forces haven't been stepping up to arrest or kill Taliban forces themselves. Then those forces turn around and launch attacks against NATO forces currently deployed in Afghanistan. The US wouldn't be able to justify launching drone strikes in a place like the UK because for the most part they have their law enforcement under control and UK radicals aren't directly threatening US troops.

If China or Russia was taking out targets who have been planning to launch suicide attacks and other mayham in their respective countries or against their forces more than likely the people who don't condemn US drones wouldn't condemn them either.
Avatar image for frannkzappa
frannkzappa

3003

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#69 frannkzappa
Member since 2012 • 3003 Posts

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

[QUOTE="RahXephon101"]

Only if the US does it...if any other nations, say Russia decided to launch a drone strike into Georgia, people would denounce it and that would be fine. But question US policy and your asking for trouble.

RahXephon101

Frankly i don't think there are any other countries of enough merit (maybe china in the future, israel in the far far future) to question US policy.

True, my point was more that if China or Russia carried out a drone strike it would be condemned as a horrible act by the many of the same people who openly support the US actions. If you think drone strikes are justifiable than do not get mad if Russia launches a drone strike into a neighbouring country on the justificiation of defence.

You seem to think the world operates on an honor sytem...it doesn't nor should it.

Avatar image for MakeMeaSammitch
MakeMeaSammitch

4889

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#70 MakeMeaSammitch
Member since 2012 • 4889 Posts

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

[QUOTE="RahXephon101"]

Only if the US does it...if any other nations, say Russia decided to launch a drone strike into Georgia, people would denounce it and that would be fine. But question US policy and your asking for trouble.

RahXephon101

Frankly i don't think there are any other countries of enough merit (maybe china in the future, israel in the far far future) to question US policy.

True, my point was more that if China or Russia carried out a drone strike it would be condemned as a horrible act by the many of the same people who openly support the US actions. If you think drone strikes are justifiable than do not get mad if Russia launches a drone strike into a neighbouring country on the justificiation of defence.

If they were killing terrorists,nobody would care.

Except grayfox.

Avatar image for quadraleap
quadraleap

36581

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#71 quadraleap
Member since 2004 • 36581 Posts
We could send in some WWII bombers and carpet bomb if you would prefer.
Avatar image for thebest31406
thebest31406

3775

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#72 thebest31406
Member since 2004 • 3775 Posts
[QUOTE="ad1x2"][QUOTE="thebest31406"][QUOTE="ad1x2"] Drones don't explicitly target innocent people. War in general sucks and it is inevitable innocent people may get caught in the crossfire but better technology is reducing casualties on both sides of the battlefield in comparison to previous wars.

Unless there's no justifiable cause to perpetuate a conflict, then the whole "better tech to reduce casualties" gimmick holds no water.

War is going to happen whether we like it or not. Better technology is part of the reason why we had 58,000 deaths in Vietnam, more than ten times the amount of deaths we have had in Afghanistan since 2001. People want to ban drones because they think they are so "scary" but what is the difference between a drone and a fighter jet besides one not having a pilot present? Or are you scared Black Ops 2's storyline where the bad guy hacked all of America's drones will come true?

I don't play war/military type games so I have no idea what you're talking about. Regarding your first point, some countries are going to commit aggression regardless of consent. That's obvious.. I just find it hilarious when folks attempt to sell people on the use of drones when they haven't even accomplished the sale of aggression towards a sovereign country that poses no threat and has done no harm - drones not withstanding.
Avatar image for thebest31406
thebest31406

3775

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#73 thebest31406
Member since 2004 • 3775 Posts
[QUOTE="thebest31406"][QUOTE="ad1x2"] Cool?

It's true though, if I was a member of Hamas I certainly would not like the Israelis using drone strikes. It's not hypocritical. You want your side to win and the other side to lose.

Again though, from an objective point of view, as I already stated before I wouldn't see their use of drones in itself as any less justifiable than Israelis using them, provided it is used in a moral manner. However I would be against the reason it is used.

Distinction, not against the use in itself but the reason for its use (i.e to destroy Israel or w/e).

Analogy. I would be against the Nazi invasion of Poland involving tanks or w/e. But I wouldn't be against the actual use of tanks by either side. Now maybe you could say I would be against the Nazi use of tanks due to the invasion being a prerequisite for the use of tanks. But even then it would stand against your accusations of hypocracy since then really the two sides would not be comparable.

ad1x2

No, the hypocrisy comes from the fact that forcing drones on State that doesn't want them, on a people that don't them, is perfectly fine - just as long as it isn't your state.

Did you even read what I wrote? I have already adressed your moronic post now about hundred times

Okay, so you'd be fine with a foreign country imposing the use of their drones against Israel's wishes in order to kill those who they suspect of terrorism, even if it means blowing other civilians and civilian infrastructure in the process?
Avatar image for Vundi
Vundi

12755

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#74 Vundi
Member since 2003 • 12755 Posts

Yes. They shouldn't be over utilized and that is a fine line but I think there is a place for them and always will be.

Avatar image for ad1x2
ad1x2

8430

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#75 ad1x2
Member since 2005 • 8430 Posts
[QUOTE="thebest31406"][QUOTE="ad1x2"][QUOTE="thebest31406"] Unless there's no justifiable cause to perpetuate a conflict, then the whole "better tech to reduce casualties" gimmick holds no water.

War is going to happen whether we like it or not. Better technology is part of the reason why we had 58,000 deaths in Vietnam, more than ten times the amount of deaths we have had in Afghanistan since 2001. People want to ban drones because they think they are so "scary" but what is the difference between a drone and a fighter jet besides one not having a pilot present? Or are you scared Black Ops 2's storyline where the bad guy hacked all of America's drones will come true?

I don't play war/military type games so I have no idea what you're talking about. Regarding your first point, some countries are going to commit aggression regardless of consent. That's obvious.. I just find it hilarious when folks attempt to sell people on the use of drones when they haven't even accomplished the sale of aggression towards a sovereign country that poses no threat and has done no harm - drones not withstanding.

If you didn't know what I was talking about you could have jumped on Wikipedia and read the plot for Black Ops 2, it isn't very long. In the game, which took place in 2025 drones expanded from the simple UAVs we have today and to other unmanned weapons. Sometime later the bad guy hacked into the US' drone system and used them to launch attacks against our allies and almost start another world war.

i don't expect you to read every single post I type but earlier in the thread I mentioned that part of the reason the US can get away with using drones is because neither Pakistan nor Afghanistan have stepped up enough to capture or kill the majority of Taliban insurgents. The ones Pakistan failed to capture or kill then cross into Afghanistan and attack NATO troops. Afghanistan's failures need no explanation.

We don't launch drone attacks in most other areas because for the most part those countries have their forces under control and they aren't attacking NATO troops. The failures of Afghanistan and Pakistan, on the other hand, are a problem for ISAF forces, which isn't just the US and has troops from the UK, Germany, Canada, and more.

But I'll ask you this: if we were to ban drone strikes today what would your suggestion be to make up for it? Obviously if you have a better idea I'm sure you can forward it to the Pentagon and the CIA. Before you say pull out of Afghanistan that is already in the works for next year and still doesn't solve the problem of terror cells and militants like the ones who target people like Malala Yousafzai.
Avatar image for ad1x2
ad1x2

8430

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#76 ad1x2
Member since 2005 • 8430 Posts
[QUOTE="ad1x2"][QUOTE="thebest31406"] No, the hypocrisy comes from the fact that forcing drones on State that doesn't want them, on a people that don't them, is perfectly fine - just as long as it isn't your state.thebest31406

Did you even read what I wrote? I have already adressed your moronic post now about hundred times

Okay, so you'd be fine with a foreign country imposing the use of their drones against Israel's wishes in order to kill those who they suspect of terrorism, even if it means blowing other civilians and civilian infrastructure in the process?

I don't know who you are quoting but I didn't type that.
Avatar image for thebest31406
thebest31406

3775

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#77 thebest31406
Member since 2004 • 3775 Posts
[QUOTE="thebest31406"][QUOTE="ad1x2"]

Did you even read what I wrote? I have already adressed your moronic post now about hundred times

ad1x2
Okay, so you'd be fine with a foreign country imposing the use of their drones against Israel's wishes in order to kill those who they suspect of terrorism, even if it means blowing other civilians and civilian infrastructure in the process?

I don't know who you are quoting but I didn't type that.

Wasn't you I was quoting. Another gamespot f-up
Avatar image for thebest31406
thebest31406

3775

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#78 thebest31406
Member since 2004 • 3775 Posts
[QUOTE="ad1x2"][QUOTE="thebest31406"][QUOTE="ad1x2"] War is going to happen whether we like it or not. Better technology is part of the reason why we had 58,000 deaths in Vietnam, more than ten times the amount of deaths we have had in Afghanistan since 2001. People want to ban drones because they think they are so "scary" but what is the difference between a drone and a fighter jet besides one not having a pilot present? Or are you scared Black Ops 2's storyline where the bad guy hacked all of America's drones will come true?

I don't play war/military type games so I have no idea what you're talking about. Regarding your first point, some countries are going to commit aggression regardless of consent. That's obvious.. I just find it hilarious when folks attempt to sell people on the use of drones when they haven't even accomplished the sale of aggression towards a sovereign country that poses no threat and has done no harm - drones not withstanding.

If you didn't know what I was talking about you could have jumped on Wikipedia and read the plot for Black Ops 2, it isn't very long. In the game, which took place in 2025 drones expanded from the simple UAVs we have today and to other unmanned weapons. Sometime later the bad guy hacked into the US' drone system and used them to launch attacks against our allies and almost start another world war.

i don't expect you to read every single post I type but earlier in the thread I mentioned that part of the reason the US can get away with using drones is because neither Pakistan nor Afghanistan have stepped up enough to capture or kill the majority of Taliban insurgents. The ones Pakistan failed to capture or kill then cross into Afghanistan and attack NATO troops. Afghanistan's failures need no explanation.

We don't launch drone attacks in most other areas because for the most part those countries have their forces under control and they aren't attacking NATO troops. The failures of Afghanistan and Pakistan, on the other hand, are a problem for ISAF forces, which isn't just the US and has troops from the UK, Germany, Canada, and more.

But I'll ask you this: if we were to ban drone strikes today what would your suggestion be to make up for it? Obviously if you have a better idea I'm sure you can forward it to the Pentagon and the CIA. Before you say pull out of Afghanistan that is already in the works for next year and still doesn't solve the problem of terror cells and militants like the ones who target people like Malala Yousafzai.

Simply get the F out and let the Pakistan and Afghanistan deal with the Pakistani/Afghani terrorists.
Avatar image for Rattlesnake_8
Rattlesnake_8

18452

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 31

User Lists: 0

#79 Rattlesnake_8
Member since 2004 • 18452 Posts
According to the government, yes. Collataral damage is what they call it and they don't have a problem with it.
Avatar image for Floridaman46
Floridaman46

259

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#80 Floridaman46
Member since 2012 • 259 Posts

YESSS. I am 100% for Drone Strikes. No ground War over Drone Strikes again..

Avatar image for dude_brahmski
dude_brahmski

472

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#81 dude_brahmski
Member since 2013 • 472 Posts

Simply get the F out and let the Pakistan and Afghanistan deal with the Pakistani/Afghani terrorists.thebest31406

There are, for the time being, stability concerns.

Avatar image for ad1x2
ad1x2

8430

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#82 ad1x2
Member since 2005 • 8430 Posts
[QUOTE="thebest31406"] Simply get the F out and let the Pakistan and Afghanistan deal with the Pakistani/Afghani terrorists.

That is in the works right now, a pullout isn't something you do in 24 hours. Until the pullout is complete commanders are expected to do what they legally can to protect the people they are in charge of.
Avatar image for PWSteal_Ldpinch
PWSteal_Ldpinch

1172

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#83 PWSteal_Ldpinch
Member since 2011 • 1172 Posts

[QUOTE="thebest31406"]Simply get the F out and let the Pakistan and Afghanistan deal with the Pakistani/Afghani terrorists.dude_brahmski

There are, for the time being, stability concerns.

You should watch this documentary called "This is what winning looks like". Afghanistan is not Germany and Japan after WW2. Afghanistan has deeply ingrained social problems that American intervention can't fix.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ja5Q75hf6QI

Avatar image for FastEddie2121
FastEddie2121

3081

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#84 FastEddie2121
Member since 2009 • 3081 Posts
Killing people with drones is "a-okay." Just don't interrogate them since that is cruel. Makes perfect sense.
Avatar image for thebest31406
thebest31406

3775

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#85 thebest31406
Member since 2004 • 3775 Posts
[QUOTE="ad1x2"][QUOTE="thebest31406"] Simply get the F out and let the Pakistan and Afghanistan deal with the Pakistani/Afghani terrorists.

That is in the works right now, a pullout isn't something you do in 24 hours. Until the pullout is complete commanders are expected to do what they legally can to protect the people they are in charge of.

The people are turning against the US thanks to the drones. There doing the exact opposite of what you say they're doing.