Hacker News Reader

Comment by bloaf | Hacker News Reader

Show me a war in which no civilians died. It's easy to use weasel words like "indiscriminate," its hard to be responsible for people's lives.

"It is well that war is so terrible, otherwise we should grow too fond of it." Robert E. Lee

View on HN

>Show me a war in which no civilians died.

Show me a war in which these civilians died. As far as i remember there no war has been declared between USA and Pakistan. So these civilians were killed outside of war zone.

Exactly, also the more well known attack in Yemen. Also not a war zone.

Firing missiles on civilians, or "combatants" that aren't engaged in any conflict with you is a war crime.

Would you accept this, if the US fired a missile into a Canadian cafe because they thought a terrorist was in there and everyone around him must ALSO be a terrorist (and thus an enemy combatant)?

The various international laws and treaties covering the Law of Armed Conflict actually allow for a neutral country to permit military action against unlawful combatants that have taken refuge in their territory. There is no need for them to be camping out in a 'war zone' with a 'Please Bomb Me' sign hooked up to their building.

Otherwise, what legal basis would nations have for taking military action against pirates on the high seas (the other famous example of non-state actors at war with nations)?

Pakistan claims they don't permit the strikes, fwiw, although they seem to de facto go along with them, and may secretly consent. Not that that necessarily makes a difference either way.

There is the Abbottabad Commission Report the Pakistanis did on the Bin Laden raid that goes into depth of the politics involved[1]. There is a history of political infighting over US relations between the civilian government, military and intelligence community of Pakistan. This report was compiled by the Pakistani government. It is shortsighted to think they are any more transparent than the US. There are other reports, one by the UN, that estimate wildly the numbers[2]. The actual article[3] with the document looks like a photo caption in the Salon article. Totally glanced over it the first time. It is hard to have a discussion when the truth is obscured by time and distance, the government claims state secrets, and the only people raising concerns use terms like "indiscriminate civilian killings." We aren't fire bombing cities here. There is an immediate need for transparency and greater oversight and discretion with the drone program. I fear a future where warfare is cheap and with out risk.

[1]http://www.aljazeera.com/news/asia/2013/07/20137813412615531... [2]http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/15/world/asia/u-n-drone-objection... [3]http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2013/07/22/get-the-data...

EDIT:

There is also a more detailed article on the "leaked" report on the originating news site. It is a more thorough discussion than the salon article.

http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2013/07/22/exclusive-le...

Errr: I think I missed half the article...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com