(December 20, 2013 at 9:18 pm)Faith No More Wrote:(December 20, 2013 at 8:40 pm)Godschild Wrote: @ FaithnoMore, what about the innocent that died on 9/11, do we not owe them to try and eliminate these people who couldn't care less about innocence. War will always claim the innocent, such as the families of the soldiers that die to defend your home and freedom, the drones help to eliminate the death of some soldiers and keep the innocent family members here from becoming victims of terrorist. War is never ever nice and never will be sanitary, so you might as well accept this fact, innocent people get hurt in wars.
I do accept that innocent people get hurt in wars. What I reject is engaging in a campaign that drastically raises the risk of killing innocents, all in the name of bloodlust. Sure, drones eliminate the death of some soldiers, but you know what eliminate the death of all the soldiers? Dropping a nuclear bomb on the area. But we don't do that because of the injury it would cause to people that have absolutely no part in the conflict. Now, clearly the drones cause a lot less damage than a nuke, but my point was to illustrate that saving a life isn't justification to be wreckless in our efforts to defeat the enemy.
If we truly want to be the "good guys" and do what is right and just, we would not engage in any campaign that results in the absolute bare minimum amount of risk to innocent lives.
Well, I don't think that you're the good guys, but I certainly don't think that you're the bad guys either.
I don't think that the US is too keen to harm civillians, as I also think that America wishes things to go smoothly, and angering the locals would simply make things a lot of harder.
Accidents do happen though, human error.
Üze Tengri basmasar, asra Yir telinmeser, Türük bodun ilingin törüngin kim artatı udaçı erti?