Posted: Jun 09, 2011 5:33 pm
laklak wrote:It's like any other technology, the morality is dependent on those who wield it. I think that so far it's justified, despite civilian casualties. I don't mean to sound callous, but if you allow militants to take over your village then you put yourself in harms way. I do not believe that in general these militants are an occupying army, forcing themselves on an unwilling civilian populace. The civilian population is complicit, they are supporting and protecting the militants and therefore a degree of collateral damage is acceptable.
That said we should not put too many eggs into the robotic basket. There is no substitute, even on today's high-tech battlefield, for boots on the ground. Skynet, anyone?
You don't know who those hard noses are who have taken up residence in the crowded allyways of town, but you do know that you don't like them, and further, those that have asked too many questions have come to grief. You are more concerned about scratching out a living for your six kids and wife in a brutal economy. You come home one day and find your shack is a burning ruin, kids dead. Collateral damage, the US is saying. How complicit are you?