With Its Deadly Drones, the US is Fighting a Coward's War

[xchrom]

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/01/31-1

The ancient Greeks, unlike the Jews or the Christians, invested their gods with human failings. Divine judgment, they believed, was neither flawless nor dispassionate; it was warped by lust, vengeance and self-interest. In the hands of Zeus, the thunderbolt was both an instrument of justice and a weapon of jealousy and revenge.

Those now dispensing judgment from on high are not gods, though they must feel like it. The people striking mortals down with drones are doubtless as capable as anyone else of self-deception, denial and cognitive illusions. More so, perhaps, as the eminent fictions of the Bush years and the growing delusions of the current president suggest.

Barack Obama began last week's state of the union address by claiming that the troops who had fought the Iraq war had "made the United States safer and more respected around the world". Like Bush, like the gods, he has begun to create the world he wants to inhabit.

These power-damaged people have been granted the chance to fulfill one of humankind's abiding fantasies: to vaporize their enemies, as if with a curse or a prayer, effortlessly and from a safe distance. That these powers are already being abused is suggested by the mendacity of those who are deploying them. The CIA, which is running the undeclared and unacknowledged drone war in Pakistan, insists that there have been no recent civilian casualties. So does Obama's chief counter-terrorism adviser, John Brennan. It is a blatant whitewash.

[rustydog]

1. When you can kill innocent civilians in the middle east while

remotely operating a missile-firing plane from an office near the Pentagon, yes, you are fighting a coward's war.
You are trying to remove the human element of killing human beings. For profit I may add.

[surfdog]

2. So war itself isn't the issue

It's how were fighting the war that is the issue ?

[xchrom]

3. i think the whole development -- and useage of the drones presents issues

besides what ever war they might be used in.

that's what i took away.

[Life Long Dem]

13. Yeah, too effortlessly.

[Sheepshank]

20. Yup why not go back to civil war maneuvers...no need to change anything, use the old ways!

Line up the warriors/soldiers, one row kneeling, one row standing. They should wait until the enemy is close enough to see the whites of their eyes, and just shoot..... without taking any namby pamby cover. Let 'em all fall like flies. That's how non-cowards wage a war. Better still lets forget about firearms and projectiles...the real men would use swords,clubs, spears and maces and engage in hand to hand combat. Of course human casualty would be immense, and the need to conscript boys would come into effect...but there would be no cowards tolerated (do I need the sarcasm smilie?)

[msongs]

4. Nuremburg: following orders is not a defense against war crimes like murder by drone nt

[Swede]

5. So invade already,it's much more braver.

nt

[Zebedeo]

6. The premise of this piece is illogical

The idea that one must be a "coward" to use remote controlled drones is nonsensical. Would it be acceptable to the author if the drone operators at Langley played Russian roulette after every mission? That way, they would be putting their lives at risk, which seems to be what the author wants.

Why would the U.S. want to put the lives of its people at risk? Why risk a fighter pilot being shot down and captured and held on display and tortured before having his head sawed off by the enemy?

I say build more and better drones, and gradually have them replace manned aircraft to the maximum extent possible.

[Johnny Rico]

11. Drones are the future of air warfare.

The F-35 is most likely the last manned fighter the US will ever build. Given probable future technology, there's simply no reason to risk our pilots.

[Enrique]

16. that word is in the headline, but it's not the premise of the article

the word "coward" only appears way down in the article, in passing.

[Capitalocracy]

7. It's equally cowardly to send our troops to fight a war for profit

while you sit in an office with bulletproof windows guarded by the Secret Service.

They don't do it because they're any more or less cowards, they do it because it's "clean". A dead soldier has a family who might not appreciate their son or daughter being killed or at least might want to know it was for a good cause. Drones largely pass under the radar, both in the air and in the minds of the people.

[gratuitous]

8. Uh oh

Saying that the troops fighting the Iraq War had made the United States safer and more respected isn't exactly what the President said! You're just asking for a lot of obfuscatory trouble from certain quarters, even though there's no difference in the distinction.

And yeah, the drone missile strikes is just making the U.S. less safe and less respected around the world. Those blanket reprisals and non-specific attacks that don't give a rip about safeguarding civilians are against our own laws, and perhaps more than that, a sin. There will be a price paid, despite the efficiency.

[99Forever]

9. I don't think I would use ..

.. that particular term, but there is indeed something unsettling about waging war without actually having any "skin in the game," especially when so many innocents are being killed in the process. I also wonder what we as a people would bethinking and saying if another nation was staging unmanned drone attacks, killing many civilians and destroying hundreds of millions in private property within the USA.

[Snake Alchemist]

10. I wish we'd go back to swords.

How cool would that be?

[Lurks Often]

12. What crap

Using a drone is no different then a pilot dropping a laser guided bomb from 10,000 feet, artillery sending rockets or artillery shells from 15 miles away or launching a cruise missile from 1000 miles away.

[Spike89]

19. Agreed, and it's been a long while since "they" were at any risk

The notion that there must be "skin in the game" is beyond absurd. It hasn't been true that the leaders (both political and milatary) were directly at risk for hundreds of years. The guys calling the shots generally aren't even in the country where the fighting is, much less the battlefield, or anywhere near the actual fighting. Geez, it is even pretty rare for the leaders to have family at risk.

[hack89]

14. Wars are not like a grade school playground. Playing "fair" is not expected. nt

[raouldukelives]

15. It's been a cowards "war" from the start

We had to call it a war otherwise it would have just been a global police action of finding the people responsible and bringing them to justice which wouldn't look as favorably upon indiscriminate killing of civilians.
The essence of the war was never justice it was profit. But we all knew that already. Secure the resources, use up the old weapons, justify a bloated military budget for the profit of military contractors and shareholders etc. Can't do all that and worry about a few poor children losing limbs & families.

[Enrique]

17. rec, thanks for posting

the article raises issues that are NEVER discussed in the mainstream here. How many debates have we had, have our drone wars ever come up?

[xchrom]

18. +1

[Motown_Johnny]

21. this same argument dates back to the long bow

every time one side develops a longer range than the other the ones with the disadvantage fall back to the same old thing



get over it


having American pilots risk their lives to do the same thing isn't going to help

[unionworks]

22. Better a live coward

...than a dead hero.