Discussion for article #228292
Unfortunately. we don’t get the same kind of detailed gory reporting on our air strikes, drone strikes and double-taps at weddings.
See, when WE kill innocents, it’s …different. Not so many adjectives and blood are needed. “We killed some folks”, you might say.
BEIRUT (Reuters) - U.S.-led air strikes hit grain silos and other targets in Islamic State-controlled territory in northern and eastern Syria overnight, killing civilians and wounding militants, a group monitoring the war said on Monday.
I’m fairly certain that you’d have no gripes about fighter jets shooting down the hijacked airliners on 9/11, which would’ve killed all the passengers on board, but ultimately saved close to 4000 lives.
Re: drone strikes, they’ve been hitting most of their targets, and the ratio of enemies killed to civilians is wide, and they are the best option in a series of three bad options. The second option after drones is sending in troops, which I’m certain you’d be against 100%, and the last option is doing nothing, allowing these terrorists to kill even more innocent civilians.
Until you anti drone folks can come up with a practical viable alternative to drones, we’re going to continue to use them. My alternative is to put tasers on drones, to stun the bad guys, and then scoop them up into the drone and take them off to prison, but we don’t have that technology currently.