Ted Rall for October 08, 2012

Shocked, I tell you.

Radish: thanks for the link. I’m sure all the veterans with amputated limbs and chronic PTSD are very interested in this talk of giving medals to remote drone operators. That has got to be one of the stupidest articles I’ve read in some time.

Medals should be about heroism. They should be about risking one’s own self for the sake of others. They should be about unusual and extraordinary selflessness, and they should not be locked into warfare. Giving a medal to some drone-operating desk jockey insults everyone who fits into the above category. This idea is not only profoundly insulting to older war vets, but also really stupid. If they want to give brownie points to drone-operators, they should invent another way to do it, if they have any sense, which apparently they don’t. And I don’t even like the military or support any of these wars.

Cheers, Radish; interesting and illuminating. I’m curious to hear the defence of this mode of combat in Yemen, Afghanistan & Waziristan in Pakistan. I mentioned this study a couple of weeks ago while making quite clear my position about this on this forum and, surprisingly, I even had folks from the left actually defend this practice.How does that song’s lyrics go?: “Home of the brave…?”Must make you all proud, beat upon your chest and salute…something.

I’m pretty sure that 1 in 50 ratio is way better than the conviction rate for Gitmo detainees.

What counts as terror and what counts as a legitimate military action?

Dresden…Hiroshima

Armed drones should NEVER be used unless there are literally “boots on the ground” to confirm target identity. The CAN be useful as the “boots” don’t have to take the risk of firing the shot themselves, and revealing their location, which means they can “boogie” more safely and leave the area. It’s about intelligence, having it, and using it appropriately.

An eye for an eye.Lusitania, Stalingrad-Battle of the Bulge-others.Pearl Harbor, Bataan Death march-others.No movies-facts