Trump clears CIA to issue drone strikes

[Benton]

(03-16-2017, 04:00 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I just want to take a moment and point out the interesting sides that have formed on this argument.

The crux of my argument is that, as a pacifist, I want killing to remain personal because when killing remains personal we do more to try to avoid it. We kill only when necessary. Going back to bfine's example, we see the opportunity for surrender. The saving of human life. I know it can seem counter intuitive to hear (see) someone put out there that warfare needs to be brutal so that we can better avoid it, but it's the opinion I have on it. Our country is in a constant state of conflict around the world, and I want that to stop. Weaponized drones more easily allows that to continue.

We're not going to sway anyone on this, I don't think, so I'm just going to rest it there.

Agreed on that, and the difference was why I originally asked (and the bold was why I initially hesitated to respond, as I don't think there's much any of us are going to do to sway those opinions).

And, as a pacifist, I want to do whatever I can to remove the loss of life. If that means exposing fewer soldiers to harm, great. But it also has to do with the brutality you mention. I volunteered with Wounded Warriors for a number of years. Many of their scars aren't physical, and a lot of the depression/mental illness/PTSD/suicides springs from that exposure. One of the ones that's impacted me the most is an old friend in military intelligence. He still keeps a tab of every site he ordered attacked since making the move a decade ago, and the estimated death tolls. They weigh heavier than the combatants he had to kill in person.