Trump clears CIA to issue drone strikes

[*bfine32*]

(03-16-2017, 03:03 PM)Dill Wrote: That is a good answer, Bfine. I don't have some trick "endgame" I am working on you.

The question was designed to produce a response to clarify this statement: "life is sacred and that is why if it is to be taken in conflict it should be done in person."

Seems to me a drone strike would avoid a friendly casualty for sure. So you are not really doing all you can to avoid that by involving US troops in a direct fire engagement. 

My response would not be dictated by what the Taliban prefer; in all sincerity, I am sure they would prefer I give them my arms and then let them shoot me.

There is no local villager in the original scenario, but in your direct engagement version, I think he is still dead.

If you actually looked at what I said and not what you want me to have said you will see my goal is to avoid friendly casualty, WHILE engaged in direct fire combat.

You don't care about the enemy combatant because you most likely cannot empathize with him or her

So you could tell from your drone that no one was being forced to guide the patrol?

You could tell from your drone that no one was forced to guide the party?