Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by jzwinck | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

jzwinck

Have you seen this? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-15121879

Two weeks later: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/anwar-...

Both of the above were US citizens killed by drones abroad. One of them was not even an adult yet, by US law.

View on HN

And, for the record, it was not the news story of the decade.

Your definition of execution would not be recognised by any sensible person or institution.

Are you going to provide the definition used by all sensible people and institutions?

No response and a single down vote. Real mystery where that came from.

"Real mystery where that came from."

I hope you're not saying I'm one of them/a spook/lizardman. Because I really like this website and it depresses me that it's slowly being infected with the conspiracy mindset.

Sorry, what in the world are you talking about? You are acting strange and paranoid and refuse to answer a simple question.

It's not up to the person arguing the status quo to prove the status quo. It's up to person with the extraordinary theory to provide the extraordinary evidence.

Combat is not execution.

Dropping a bomb on teenagers with a robotic airplane from a shipping container in Nevada is not combat.

It fits the definition of "combat" used by almost everyone. And basically no-one would define it as "execution". So there's your problem there.

>It fits the definition of "combat" used by almost everyone.

[Citation Needed]

>basically no-one would define it as "execution".

I would.

>It fits the definition of "combat" used by almost everyone. And basically no-one would define it as "execution". So there's your problem there.

A simple search would show you that your assertion is mere bravado and puffery, attempting to paint things in a black and white light. "Almost everyone" and "basically no-one" are weasel words. The issue is nuanced.

Published news articles calling it execution:

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a14627/obama-lethal-pre...

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/feb/05/obama-k...

http://socialistworker.org/2013/02/12/execution-by-drone

Some cross-aisle input: http://www.glennbeck.com/2013/02/06/drone-strikes-murder-mob...

Academic journals debating the implications of drone warfare:

http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPag...

http://se.asee.org/proceedings/ASEE2013/Papers2013/157.PDF

http://www.e-ir.info/2013/07/18/just-war-theory-and-the-ethi...

A book on the topic:

Drone Warfare: Killing by Remote Control: http://goo.gl/cghukG

Though, frankly, I picture you more like the cross-section mentioned in this excerpt (pg. 210, bottom of the page):

https://books.google.com/books?id=RcGZ_x96exgC&lpg=PA210&ots...

If the only people agreeing with you are Glenn Greenwald, Socialist Worker and Esquire, then maybe your argument has a problem.

I am not arguing in favor or against calling it execution, just pointing out that your tactics are underhanded and trollish. The issue isn't as black and white as you want it to be and no amount of your cynicism or finger-pointing will change that.

The academic articles that you've glossed over explicitly point out that further attention needs to be given to the frameworks within which we look at drone tactics:

From the second academic journal link: "In targeted attacks, with surgical precision, key targets are picked off discriminately. This is far too reminiscent of murder, and does not give the target a proper right to defend themselves against the accusations or discrimination. This issue needs to be considered in further detail."

Note that this comes from an engineering journal, likely targeted at a similar audience as the crowd that makes up HN. It doesn't take any sort of farfetched opining to agree that the issue is more than just "Execution? T/F?".

I understand the social justice thrust of your argument, and I understand the political narrative that wishes to categorize this as "execution". Unfortunately no-one really agrees apart from your fellow-travellers on the extreme-left.

If the only people agreeing with you are Dick Cheney, Haaretz and Fox News then maybe your argument has a problem.

This is your argument? If I think Greenwald/Socialist Worker are absurd extremes of opinion, then I must be a neocon?

That is the black/white logic of a toddler or Disney movie.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com