nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159 Posted October 29, 2012 far from me to coax all the countries to the table who have a vested interest in breaching other countries sovereign borders with drones, either for surveillance or to seek out and kill people, not always the right one''s though.British courts are being asked as to the legality of these weapon systems, unregulated and as yet without any rules and so are others, Glen Greenwald has written a column in the Guardian and Kurt Volker, US ambassador to NATO has called for a long term negotiated approach to the problems associated with drones.http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/we-need-a-rule-book-for-drones/2012/10/26/957312ae-1f8d-11e2-9cd5-b55c38388962_story.html Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Joanna Grey 0 Posted October 29, 2012 But now that your beloved Iran has got sophisticated drones capable of carrying weapons* will you be so critical of them if they manage to do some damage to Israel?* - Obviously we have to take what that country says with a pinch of salt. The drones will probably be RC aircraft with a paintball gun strapped to the underside. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159 Posted October 30, 2012 [quote user="Joanna Grey"]But now that your beloved Iran has got sophisticated drones capable of carrying weapons* will you be so critical of them if they manage to do some damage to Israel?* - Obviously we have to take what that country says with a pinch of salt. The drones will probably be RC aircraft with a paintball gun strapped to the underside.[/quote]What is there to be said apart from they just don''t like to hear that their new toys are indiscriminate and merely creating HATE, orphans and young victims who will be used by the Taliban for their ends, because we destroyed their life''s and took their families away. Ever thought of that, JG ?And what of those who want to make their feelings and experiences clear, why are they being harassed?http://www.emptywheel.net/2012/10/27/administration-continues-apparent-policy-of-harassing-pakistani-drone-critics/ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Joanna Grey 0 Posted October 30, 2012 At the end of the day it will be them or us (and I include you in the ''us''). Even if we stopped the drone attacks, pulled out of their countries and showered them with (even more) Aid it will not change their mindset.Oil and water do not mix. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159 Posted October 31, 2012 [quote user="Joanna Grey"]At the end of the day it will be them or us (and I include you in the ''us''). Even if we stopped the drone attacks, pulled out of their countries and showered them with (even more) Aid it will not change their mindset.Oil and water do not mix.[/quote]Well, who is trying to mix it then? why are we still In Afghanistan, why Is Obama enthralled by the military hawks who want nothing less than to perpetuate war?Do we really want to see Tibetan protesters against Chinese rule being pulverised by drones, what if Russia uses drones in the Caucasus, against the Chechen''s and other separatists? what if Syria would decide to ''inspect'' its occupied territories on the Golan using drones. Greece using drones for surveillance of Turkish occupied Cyprus?inshallah, water and oil does not mix, lets try again.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159 Posted October 31, 2012 Three cheers to Elliott Abrams for his persistent demonstrations at the gates of those brave hell hound operators, who from the the comforts of their chairs can zapp innocent civilians as they like.Hang on a mo, could we have killed future terrorist, best ask the matrix, the secret list of would be/wannabe/ should be terrorist drawn up by Obama''s team of militarists.http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/plan-for-hunting-terrorists-signals-us-intends-to-keep-adding-names-to-kill-lists/2012/10/23/4789b2ae-18b3-11e2-a55c-39408fbe6a4b_story.html Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Joanna Grey 0 Posted October 31, 2012 Innocent civilians? The apple never falls far from the tree with those sorts. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159 Posted October 31, 2012 [quote user="Joanna Grey"]Innocent civilians? The apple never falls far from the tree with those sorts.[/quote]My raising of this possibility was wholly sarcastic, your tone seems real.What you are saying is that the 176 children killed in Pakistan since 2004, mind that''s only the official figure, the real one is probably higher, were killed legitimately, because they will become terrorists in future?What of those kids killed by Anders Breivig? Did they deserve to die for marching for a free and peaceful Palestine? tell us JG, would you not say that you logic is somewhat skewed? So you agree with Obama''s matrix for the slaughter of the innocent to continue for another ten years, who knows, we might be dead before it stops. And you would not mind having this sort of illegal practises determining the future of your children in a globalised world, would you? cause they are not making friends or dispensing ice cream.Spreading mouse shit in Trafalgar Square, Loudly proclaiming that it deters Elephants, does not proof that the mouse shit worked well and has done the job in the past, otherwise the Square would be teaming with elephants. Some sort of screw-logic that is. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
walkern canary 0 Posted October 31, 2012 Drones ,politicians like these because they are cheap ,you don''t have to train a pilot at a huge cost to fly them unlike fast jets ,also the operators are thousands of miles away and therefore desensitised to what is happening on the ground,unlike a a pilot who will know what is going on because he will be taliking to the forward air controller who will be observing the target ,aircraft have been flying surveillance missions for years ,remember Gary powers ? he of U2 fame who got shot down by the soviets ? there is nothing new under the sun during the cold war warsaw pact and NATO forces used to regulary overfly each others countries ,still do , the drone is just another tool and like any tool can be misused ,they are not imune though https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U49n1JuWAmc Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159 Posted November 1, 2012 Thanks for that walkern. Its known that their speed is slow and with a good 50cal, if it is not too high, you could shoot it out of the shy, surface to air hand held, fly by wire orany other ground based weapon will shoot them out of the sky.Thing is thery are hard to detect, small and quiet, their radar profile is very small and you are almost better to go by the doppler recieve from the motor, than for the shape and radar signal.UN states have to start a new multilateral round of new armament talks that includes all robot weapons, as there are new developments in almost every category, from remote controlled attack boats, unmanned submarines and other robotic killing ideas I dare not mention here, it will take a whole new round of talks, and the resolutions have top be binding to all. Countries that do not participate should be sanctioned from the start, because these weapons are steered and cleared by generals and commanders who know what the term ''sovereignty'' means.I remember the Powers incident well and the Czechoslovakia weeks of instability, when the Russian walked in tanks blazing, because we were at that time on orange alert, pushing a 20 minute status for at least two weeks, a hairy time.What do you reckon would happen, walkern, if China comes to an agreement with Mexico on a military base in lets say Acapulco, Mazatlan or Tihuana, flying surveillance drones along the border with the US, occaisionally breaching US airspace and sovereign territory? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
walkern canary 0 Posted November 4, 2012 [quote user="nevermind"]What do you reckon would happen, walkern, if China comes to an agreement with Mexico on a military base in lets say Acapulco, Mazatlan or Tihuana, flying surveillance drones along the border with the US, occaisionally breaching US airspace and sovereign territory?[/quote]I wouldn''t be surprised if China are doing it already ,but on a small scale ,they are certianally well known for their cyber attacks ,the Chinese already have a large presence in south America ,they are currently explioting the Brazilian rain forest ,and have bulit a huge habour ,and an extensive road network for the purposes of exporting charcoal and other timber products ,and who knows waht they may do with this infrastructure in the future ,they are in the process of buying large parts of Africa and western Australia for the mineral rights ,if it had been western powers doing this there would be condemnation all round ,but everyone turns a blind eye,because we want those cheap consumables .The Chinese were always insular ,like the Japanese were ,but it looks like things are changing Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159 Posted November 4, 2012 [quote user="walkern canary"][quote user="nevermind"]What do you reckon would happen, walkern, if China comes to an agreement with Mexico on a military base in lets say Acapulco, Mazatlan or Tihuana, flying surveillance drones along the border with the US, occaisionally breaching US airspace and sovereign territory?[/quote]I wouldn''t be surprised if China are doing it already ,but on a small scale ,they are certianally well known for their cyber attacks ,the Chinese already have a large presence in south America ,they are currently explioting the Brazilian rain forest ,and have bulit a huge habour ,and an extensive road network for the purposes of exporting charcoal and other timber products ,and who knows waht they may do with this infrastructure in the future ,they are in the process of buying large parts of Africa and western Australia for the mineral rights ,if it had been western powers doing this there would be condemnation all round ,but everyone turns a blind eye,because we want those cheap consumables .The Chinese were always insular ,like the Japanese were ,but it looks like things are changing [/quote]Would you not say that the Chinese approach to colonialism is just that more refined, than ours. We want to exploit without putting anything back, whilst China gets involved, they are showing some social responsibility, by building housing, railways and massive infrastructure products, not just taking the raw materials that they need.My point was a military one, not one of global competition and the capitalist principles underlining China''s resolve. Should we not do the same, I ask you, become more involved, give not just take?We are currently engaged to wrestle the ME of their control over oil; our air force is being engaged in the Gulf, without parliament having debated any war or actions to support war, that''s our way of usurping what others own, the Chinese approach is far more subtle and successful, I can''t fault them for using our own principles against us.So, what would happen in the scenario I painted? within hours there would be repercussions directed at Mexico and China. China''s and Mexico''s interests would be attacked, a UN war of words would fly and military actions threatened for daring to breach US sovereign territory, all in a sudden sovereignty would become important. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
walkern canary 0 Posted November 7, 2012 [quote user="nevermind"][quote user="walkern canary"][quote user="nevermind"]What do you reckon would happen, walkern, if China comes to an agreement with Mexico on a military base in lets say Acapulco, Mazatlan or Tihuana, flying surveillance drones along the border with the US, occaisionally breaching US airspace and sovereign territory?[/quote]I wouldn''t be surprised if China are doing it already ,but on a small scale ,they are certianally well known for their cyber attacks ,the Chinese already have a large presence in south America ,they are currently explioting the Brazilian rain forest ,and have bulit a huge habour ,and an extensive road network for the purposes of exporting charcoal and other timber products ,and who knows waht they may do with this infrastructure in the future ,they are in the process of buying large parts of Africa and western Australia for the mineral rights ,if it had been western powers doing this there would be condemnation all round ,but everyone turns a blind eye,because we want those cheap consumables .The Chinese were always insular ,like the Japanese were ,but it looks like things are changing [/quote]Would you not say that the Chinese approach to colonialism is just that more refined, than ours. We want to exploit without putting anything back, whilst China gets involved, they are showing some social responsibility, by building housing, railways and massive infrastructure products, not just taking the raw materials that they need.So, what would happen in the scenario I painted? within hours there would be repercussions directed at Mexico and China. China''s and Mexico''s interests would be attacked, a UN war of words would fly and military actions threatened for daring to breach US sovereign territory, all in a sudden sovereignty would become important.[/quote]Is chines colonialism more refined than ours ? it is probably about the same as Great Britain was at the height of empire ,if you look at the infrastructure the British put in place (the railways in India for example ) also the ecological damage is probably about the same too .Anyway the scenario you painted I imagine the US military which is natoriously paranoid wouldn''t take too kindly to another super power flying spying missions on its door step ,and would shoot any drones down that wandered into US airspace ,I dare say they would even pay mercenaries to take out any drone sites in Mexico Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159 Posted November 15, 2012 What use are drones in west Africa?http://share.banoosh.com/2012/11/13/us-to-increase-its-use-of-assassination-drones-in-west-africa-report/and why does the US want to build a massive radar in Australia to monitor and have advanced notice of Chinese missile launches?could that have something to do with world hegemony? US ueber alles? Now where did I hear that slogan before... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Joanna Grey 0 Posted November 16, 2012 Just to show that it''s not a monopoly (as some would have you think);http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/nov/13/drones-pakistanWhy would the NATO member state of Turkey be excited about the prospect of Pakistan developing armed drones? Nothing to do with ''brotherly love'' is it? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159 Posted November 16, 2012 [quote user="Joanna Grey"]Just to show that it''s not a monopoly (as some would have you think);http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/nov/13/drones-pakistanWhy would the NATO member state of Turkey be excited about the prospect of Pakistan developing armed drones? Nothing to do with ''brotherly love'' is it?[/quote]well done Joanna, you have made a perfectly good point for international controls and regulations for this kind of sovereignty busting, indiscriminate toy, now that you realised that anybody can build them.I''m sure our the past defence attaché and current director of CSOK CZ can provide a few cardanic movements to Pakistan via his Czech conduit company, he''s got plenty of time now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Joanna Grey 0 Posted November 17, 2012 You just have to face facts, automated and remotely controlled weapon systems are the future. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159 Posted November 17, 2012 reports from this morning you will not get from the BBC. Should you not like the bias expressed please write to fran.unsworth@bbc.co.uk head of news.Nov 17, 11:03 GMT: Tunisian Foreign Minister Rafik Abdessalem during his visit to Gaza tells Israel to halt aggression as it is unacceptable.Nov 17, 10:39 GMT: Chief of Staff Benny Gantz has ordered the IDF to increase the pace of strikes on Gaza, following an assessment meeting in Tel Aviv’s headquarters, YNet reported.Nov 17, 10:13 GMT: Unconfirmed reports that the IDF has begun artillery strikes on Gaza from tanks positioned on the border.http://rt.com/news/gaza-israel-hamas-attack-687/ Under Fran Unsworth, the BBC recently forgot to mention quiet a few important news items such as:October 29: The BBC reports that ''Militants in Gaza have fired 26 rockets into Israel, officials say, amid a flare-up in fighting which shattered a brief ceasefire between the two sides. No injuries were reported from the barrage, in the south of the country.'' The BBC said that, ''It came hours after Israeli aircraft hit targets in Gaza, after militants fired rockets following the killing by Israel of a Gazan who Israel said fired mortars at its troops.''November 4: an innocent, apparently mentally unfit, 20-year old man, Ahmad al-Nabaheen, is shot when he wanders close to the border with Israel. Medics have to wait for six hours to be permitted to pick him up and they suspect that he may have died because of that delay.November 8: Israeli soldiers invade Gaza, shooting and killing a 13-year old Gazan boy, Ahmad Abu Daqqa, who was playing football.November 10: Palestinian resistance fighters attack an Israeli army jeep near the boundary with Gaza, injuring 4 Israeli occupation soldiers. An Israeli shell kills two children in Gaza. An Israeli tank later attacks a funeral service killing two more civilians, wounding more than 20 others.November 11: Palestinian resistance fighters reportedly agree a ceasefire.November 13: Reuters reports that truce between Palestinians and Israel appears to be holding.November 14: Israel breaks ceasefire by killing Ahmed al-Jabari and launching intense attacks on Gaza. According to investigative journalist Gareth Porter: ''Israeli assassination of Jabari destroyed possibility of mediated Israeli-Hamas truce.''Ahmed A Jabbari, hamas top echelon negotiator, who was killed by the IDF in a precision strike killing not just him and his son but innocent bystanders, was man who has just signed a peace treaty with Israel.He was removed because he was promoting a peaceful future which would make it impossible for Israel''s maniac Netayahu to steal more land, so he was killed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159 Posted November 25, 2012 Lest get back to Drones. This from a friend of a friend, for what we use and want to use drones.http://www.acq.osd.mil/psa/docs/UMSIntegratedRoadmap2009.pdf Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159 Posted December 17, 2012 Brandon Bryant had enough of shooting ''two legged dogs''.http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/pain-continues-after-war-for-american-drone-pilot-a-872726.html#spRedirectedFrom=www Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159 Posted December 18, 2012 The Obama administartion " in effect counts all military aged males ( killed) in a strike zone as combatantshttp://livingunderdrones.org/Indeed it operates a secret kill list that is updated weekly and that allows strikes at children and family members travelling with the ''target''. Hence the vast numbers of civilians that have died without a tear being shed by Obama or anybody else. Once there is no scrutiny and accountability for who is killed by this insidious method, the chances of getting it wrong are high. Without the scrutiny of some very brave people who try and find out, our general public would be kept dumb struck by the MSM.http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/world/obamas-leadership-in-war-on-al-qaeda.html?_r=0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Joanna Grey 0 Posted December 18, 2012 If the target would actually show some consideration to his family instead of using them as human shields perhaps they would not get killed as well? Your problem nevermind is that you assume these terrorists to hold the same values as us, that''s not the case as their culture is vastly different. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159 Posted December 20, 2012 The same lame excuses without any backing up have been made by the IDF, JG. Human shields have been used by many including the IDF in Hebron and Nablus. To say that families living together in the mountains somewhere, are used as human shields is nothing but an excuse to kill children.Now you always make out that I solely concern myself with the human rights breaches of one side and not the other.Well, this is Iraq and its handling of Palestinian prisoners, torturing in this bastion of western freedom and democracy is going swimmingly. Whilst we have much pressure points we could use in Baghdad, we decline to even recognise torture and we do indulge in it ourselves, via others off course.http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/12/13/iraq-protect-palestinians-iraqi-prisons Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MymanObama 0 Posted December 20, 2012 [quote user="Joanna Grey"]You just have to face facts, automated and remotely controlled weapon systems are the future.[/quote] Future? What kind of future would that be? A future where killing is done at a distance? Killing via drones as a cost savings method? Killing without regard to international borders? Christ on a bike mate, I fear a world were the sky is filled with "Big Brother" policing our every move. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159 Posted December 30, 2012 [quote user="Joanna Grey"]You just have to face facts, automated and remotely controlled weapon systems are the future.[/quote]If these weapon systems are the future, should we stop them? because these so called discriminatory weapon systems are getting it wrong too many times, creating more hatred and disillusionment as they strike, again and again.Another shopping trip blasted to kingdom come.http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article33462.htm Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159 Posted January 14, 2013 Obama has ''no moral centre'' according to Chomsky reporting on a group of Afro Americans visiting the Whitehouse, who met with the ''drone emperor'' who favours not to have any treaty controls over this weapon system.Maybe it will take civilian drone attacks on US schools to get him to wake up.http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/01/13/noam-chomsky-blasts-obama-he-has-no-moral-center/ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shaun Tilly Lace 0 Posted January 18, 2013 They work perfectly on my bagpipes. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159 Posted February 10, 2013 And to just put this into a wider context, this incredibly interesting, long, but riveting talk and Q&A at the CCC Hamburg, with Jeslynn Radack, Thomas Drake and William Binney makes it firmly clear that we are conducting an experiment, not honouring anything especially not a special relationship. Since 2001 the US has been diverted, its Constitutions violated and used against its own people.Drone strikes and torture of its own citizens is being done because they think they can, sovereign rights and borders violated, because they think its clever, international laws ignored to advance a new eras of neo colonialism of the worst kind. Enjoy, its very informative.http://media.ccc.de/browse/congress/2012/29c3-5338-en-enemies_of_the_state_h264.htmlSome good tips on what OS to run and why TOR and encryption is the way forward Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Joanna Grey 0 Posted February 11, 2013 That presentation is over 2 hours long can you tell us the timestamp for the section that covers Drones?That''s what this thread is about isn''t it? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159 Posted February 11, 2013 [quote user="Joanna Grey"]That presentation is over 2 hours long can you tell us the timestamp for the section that covers Drones?That''s what this thread is about isn''t it?[/quote]I said its long, but its also riveting, suit yourself. here is something a little shorter, from RT, an interview with Thomas Drake.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjCnsCGtBi8 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
