BartCop's most recent rants - brew-on-drones-again.htm

Subject: you are wrong about drones again

Share|

Hi Bart.

I hope you had a good time in Alaska. I am looking forward to reading the trip report.

Thanks for your very dignified and polite response to my email. You truly are a good friend,
and the fact that you argued with me without calling me names or mischaracterizing my argument proves it.

This was written before my snarky comments yesterday :)

That said, I still think you are wrong.

Does that mean you're going to answer the question?
President Brew is either going to allow the bomber to be taken out OR he's going to allow
the bomber to continue building bombs and, eventually, bring down some American planes.

We have yet to hear your decision.
When you say, "I reject Choice A," you're endorsing Choice B which looks like this:

You want to avoid both choices which isn't possible, Mr President.

Before I get into explaining why I still think you are wrong, allow me to clarify a few points.
First, in your original post you said:

"Do you understand that we're in a war with thousands (some day millions) of lives at stake?"

No, we aren't. Which you subsequently admitted when you backed down and said:

"Have you never heard of the shoe bomber?
Do you deny that radical Islamists are trying to blow up US airplanes?
In the real world, those people exist, but not on Brew's Planet?"

So you are now going to be reasonable about the threat we face.
A bomb on an airplane. That is progress.

Really?
I've been avoiding facing the fact that we're talking about bomb on airplanes?

I recognize that the shoe bomber exists, but the shoe bomber
was never going to kill thousands or millions of people.

You are nit-picking to avoid the main point, which is YOU can't make a decison.

At worst, a few hundred.

Gee, that makes it OK?
And when Khalid succeeds in bringing down a plane, you think he's going to stop?
When he takes down his fourth plane, will you write an e-mail that says, "Looks like you were right?"
A lot of good your late realization will do those grieving 1,000 families.

But this is beside the point, because our drone program is not targeting people attacking
civilians in the US, it is targeting people who are building IED's for use against our military
in Afghanistan. In other words, 911 was a fluke, (or perhaps an inside job) and the people
we are killing are not a very big threat to our homeland, but are being targeted because they
are a threat to our empire building in Afghanistan.

None of that has anything to do with the BIG question.
I realize you're stuck and trying to save face by winning "planes don't hold 1,000 people" sub-arguments,
but why are we messing with trivial issues when you keep dodging the BIG question?

That said, I am not against self defense or the use of force, either by us or by our military.
If there is a high value target in Pakistan that we would be willing to send in a Navy Seal team to kill,
I have no objection to using a drone to that person. In my view, a drone is no different than any other form of warfare.

None of that has anything to do with the BIG question.

The problem is that the use of drones as it is currently being practiced is not simply about self defense,
and even if it was, it is not particularly effective because it is creating more militants than it is killing.
If you want to give your readers a chance to listen to smart people explain why that is the case, give them this link:

http://www.livingunderdrones.org/

Watch the youtube video on the front page. Read the executive summary.
The bottom line is that the drone program is counterproductive and likely illegal.
It isn't saving US lives, either here in the states or on the battlefield. It is putting them in danger.

With Warmest Personal Regards,
Brew

This debate will never end so I'm getting tired of it.
I won't print any more of your drone e-mails unless you answer the BIG question in the first paragraph.

President Brew is either going to allow the bomber to be taken out OR he's going to allow
the bomber to continue building bombs and, eventually, bring down some American planes.

We have yet to hear your decision.
When you say, "I reject Choice A," you're endorsing Choice B which looks like this:

Does that look like a winning argument to anyone?

Thank you for not calling me Hitler or Cheney or Guiliani this time.

Send e-mail to Bart

Back to Bartcop.com