Support the troops?

[deep]

Obama blew it,

he missed his photo op.

 

[The_Pac_Mule]

No offense, but do you ever have anything relevant to say?

 

[Canadiens1131]

No offense, but do you ever have anything relevant to say?

Pot, kettle?

 

[A stor]

^Yup. I would rather see U.S. food aid rations being eaten at an Al Qaeda training camp than dead civilians from an errant US/UN attack.

But, what can we do? And I do mean this with respect.

 

[kramwest1]

But, what can we do? And I do mean this with respect.

I mean let's continue to use the military as an aid arm in Pakistan/Afghanistan even if it is feeding our enemies, and cut back or stop any armed activity.

There's no reason we shouldn't just scale back to an advisory role in both countries. And, I think we should seriously consider stopping arming the Afghans and Pakistanis with American weapons. Anything leading to death in those countries that has a U.S. affiliation will just continue Al Qaeda's propaganda and recruitment campaign.

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

And, I think we should seriously consider stopping arming the Afghans and Pakistanis with American weapons. Anything leading to death in those countries that has a U.S. affiliation will just continue Al Qaeda's propaganda and recruitment campaign.

YES. Fully agree with this.

It's always struck me funny how we freak out if those countries produce their own weapons, 'cause we fear they'll possibly "fall into the wrong hands"-well, isn't the same danger apparent if we provide them with the weapons? If we don't trust them to build their own weapons, why are we giving them some of ours? It doesn't make sense.

Angela

 

[kramwest1]

YES. Fully agree with this.

It's always struck me funny how we freak out if those countries produce their own weapons, 'cause we fear they'll possibly "fall into the wrong hands"-well, isn't the same danger apparent if we provide them with the weapons? If we don't trust them to build their own weapons, why are we giving them some of ours? It doesn't make sense.

Angela

I think the unmanned drone technology is brilliant and has and will continue to serve our military very well. But, any drone use in the Middle East or South Asia right now just screams UNITED STATES, even if several other countries are building/using drone technology.

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

I think the unmanned drone technology is brilliant and has and will continue to serve our military very well.

I'm sorta torn on the concept, myself. On the one hand, I can see the benefits-less danger for actual human soldiers, technology can perhaps have a better target range, all that sort of thing.

But technology does fail, and I dunno, it seems weird for people to sign up for the military saying they'll "put their lives on the line to protect the country", only to turn some of the work over to the drones. And leaving the drones unmanned seems odd, too. Don't mean it to sound like I'm saying "the robots will take over!", 'cause I'm not, but shouldn't there be some control of them?

But, any drone use in the Middle East or South Asia right now just screams UNITED STATES, even if several other countries are building/using drone technology.

Mmhm. We've definitely overstayed our welcome in that area of the world.

Angela

 

[kramwest1]

But technology does fail, and I dunno, it seems weird for people to sign up for the military saying they'll "put their lives on the line to protect the country", only to turn some of the work over to the drones. And leaving the drones unmanned seems odd, too. Don't mean it to sound like I'm saying "the robots will take over!", 'cause I'm not, but shouldn't there be some control of them?

I've read a few discussions from people in the military talking about the ethics of allowing drones' AI (Artificial Intelligence) to make the decision to kill. The technology is there. It's fascinating. It seems that almost all of the military is against it and that they will always keep a human brain in the decision loop, but that could change in a decade or two. And, then we are in "Terminator" territory where machines become self-aware and begin killing humans.

Actually there was a test in I believe South Africa a few years ago where an automated defense weapon (I believe it was an air defense gun) turned against the people that were observing it. I can't remember if anyone died. I'll have to find that article.

 

[A stor]

I mean let's continue to use the military as an aid arm in Pakistan/Afghanistan even if it is feeding our enemies, and cut back or stop any armed activity.

There's no reason we shouldn't just scale back to an advisory role in both countries. And, I think we should seriously consider stopping arming the Afghans and Pakistanis with American weapons. Anything leading to death in those countries that has a U.S. affiliation will just continue Al Qaeda's propaganda and recruitment campaign.

Thank you for your reply. I agree with you. And you able word it much better than I could.

 

[A stor]

I've read a few discussions from people in the military talking about the ethics of allowing drones' AI (Artificial Intelligence) to make the decision to kill. The technology is there. It's fascinating. It seems that almost all of the military is against it and that they will always keep a human brain in the decision loop, but that could change in a decade or two. And, then we are in "Terminator" territory where machines become self-aware and begin killing humans.

Actually there was a test in I believe South Africa a few years ago where an automated defense weapon (I believe it was an air defense gun) turned against the people that were observing it. I can't remember if anyone died. I'll have to find that article.

That's interesting. I believe it could happen. Machines do not have the ability to decide what is a true threat and what isn't.

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

I've read a few discussions from people in the military talking about the ethics of allowing drones' AI (Artificial Intelligence) to make the decision to kill. The technology is there. It's fascinating. It seems that almost all of the military is against it and that they will always keep a human brain in the decision loop, but that could change in a decade or two. And, then we are in "Terminator" territory where machines become self-aware and begin killing humans.

Exactly. This is my concern, and I find it quite interesting that many in the military are against such technologies. If that's the case, why do they have it, then?

It's funny to talk about machines becoming "self-aware", though, the idea of giving them human qualities still sounds kinda crackpot in some ways. But how many times have people ranted about various technologies "having a mind of their own"?

Actually there was a test in I believe South Africa a few years ago where an automated defense weapon (I believe it was an air defense gun) turned against the people that were observing it. I can't remember if anyone died. I'll have to find that article.

Yikes. Yeah, if you can find that, I'd be very interested to read that.

Angela

 

[A stor]

This is just my guess Angela. Soldiers have reasoning ability. Say for an example. They would not see a baby as a threat. But, a machine is programed to carry out certain functions. It can not determine when it is better to not to act.

I can understand why the soldiers don't want to use them. If they go into a village and there is no threat. Then, the soldiers will act accordingly. Maned drones strike a target. These targets have sometimes been innocent civilians.

 

[coolian2]

Anddddd explosives found in a plane from Yemen. Awesome.

i can't reconcile the discussion in the thread with this post. can you elaborate?

 

[A stor]

I think Pac mule meant that explosives would be easier to send on a cargo plane. Since there is less security than with passenger planes. This would threaten Homeland Security for the U.S. and other nations as well. I don't have to explain what a bomb going off at an airport would do. We already know.

 

[A stor]

I think the unmanned drone technology is brilliant and has and will continue to serve our military very well. But, any drone use in the Middle East or South Asia right now just screams UNITED STATES, even if several other countries are building/using drone technology.

I think you said it perfectly. I couldn't agree more. And as you stated before, it is recruiting for Al Queda. Something we don't want at this point.

 

[kramwest1]

Yikes. Yeah, if you can find that, I'd be very interested to read that.

Angela

Robot Cannon Kills 9, Wounds 14 | Danger Room | Wired.com

^Not as alarmist as the first article I read about the incident. Originally, when I read about it, there was the implication that the gun actually targeted the people. Still, you have a robotic gun, firing automatically that no one seemed able to stop---9 dead, 14 wounded.


Here is another interesting one about Israel:

Israel Eyes Thinking Machines to Fight ‘Doomsday’ Missile Strikes (Updated) | Danger Room | Wired.com

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

Thanks, Mark, for the articles.

Once in a while, though, these machines start firing mysteriously on their own. The South African National Defence Force "is probing whether a software glitch led to an antiaircraft cannon malfunction that killed nine soldiers and seriously injured 14 others during a shooting exercise on Friday."

*Shudders* And the bit about the female soldier who tried valiantly to stop things.... No matter what exactly happened, that's just horrible. And insane.

And the thought of Iran and Israel having "doomsday-esque" weapons, gee, that's...comforting. Potential WW3, anyone?

This is just my guess Angela. Soldiers have reasoning ability. Say for an example. They would not see a baby as a threat. But, a machine is programed to carry out certain functions. It can not determine when it is better to not to act.

I can understand why the soldiers don't want to use them. If they go into a village and there is no threat. Then, the soldiers will act accordingly. Maned drones strike a target. These targets have sometimes been innocent civilians.

Oh, yeah, I definitely don't doubt that's why they're against it. I just find it odd that if they don't like it, they still have it. But then again, just because most of the military feels that way doesn't mean everyone there does, so...

Angela

 

[The_Pac_Mule]

It's always struck me funny how we freak out if those countries produce their own weapons, 'cause we fear they'll possibly "fall into the wrong hands"-well, isn't the same danger apparent if we provide them with the weapons? If we don't trust them to build their own weapons, why are we giving them some of ours? It doesn't make sense.

They buy assault rifles and RPG's and such from other countries mostly, it's cheaper that way. Were not that worried about "them falling into the wrong hands," because either way they're going to get their hands on an AK-47. It doesn't really matter where it comes from. What we don't want is the ability for them to get their hands on more dangerous weapons, like anti-tank missiles or predator drones for example. We don't really sell those kinds of weapons to countries outside of NATO.

i can't reconcile the discussion in the thread with this post. can you elaborate?

It seemed as good a place as any to post it.

 

[kramwest1]

What we don't want is the ability for them to get their hands on more dangerous weapons, like anti-tank missiles or predator drones for example. We don't really sell those kinds of weapons to countries outside of NATO.

It is mildly funny that Iran has F-14s. They can't service them, but someone thought it was a good idea to sell them one of our best fighters at some point in the late '70s/early '80s.

 

[coolian2]

It seemed as good a place as any to post it.

a muslim fellow trying to blow up a synagogue almost isn't news.

It is mildly funny that Iran has F-14s. They can't service them, but someone thought it was a good idea to sell them one of our best fighters at some point in the late '70s/early '80s.

the enemy of my enemy, as it turns out, is a probably poor idiom to live by.

 

[kramwest1]

the enemy of my enemy, as it turns out, is a probably poor idiom to live by.

I'll take the quote:

Choose your enemies carefully, 'cause they will define you
Make them interesting, 'cause in some ways they will mind you
They're not there in the beginning, but when your story ends
Gonna last with you longer than your friends

^I think that was Plato.

 

[financeguy]

I'll take the quote:

Choose your enemies carefully, 'cause they will define you
Make them interesting, 'cause in some ways they will mind you
They're not there in the beginning, but when your story ends
Gonna last with you longer than your friends

^I think that was Plato.

"We are so privileged to be gathered in places like this when so much of the world is plunged in darkness and chaos...

So..ring the bells that still can ring
.....
I can't run no more
with that lawless crowd
while the killers in high places
say their prayers out loud.
But they've summoned, they've summoned up
a thundercloud
and they're going to hear from me. "

- Leonard Cohen

YouTube - Anthem - Leonard Cohen

 

[A stor]

Thanks, Mark, for the articles.



*Shudders* And the bit about the female soldier who tried valiantly to stop things.... No matter what exactly happened, that's just horrible. And insane.

And the thought of Iran and Israel having "doomsday-esque" weapons, gee, that's...comforting. Potential WW3, anyone?



Oh, yeah, I definitely don't doubt that's why they're against it. I just find it odd that if they don't like it, they still have it. But then again, just because most of the military feels that way doesn't mean everyone there does, so...

Angela

I agree Thanks Mark for taking your time and looking up the articles for us. It has certainly given me more knowledge.

 

[A stor]

a muslim fellow trying to blow up a synagogue almost isn't news.



the enemy of my enemy, as it turns out, is a probably poor idiom to live by.

But, why synagogues in Chicago? Their congregation isn't flying in from Israel for a Friday nignt service. Then back to the West Bank and building more settlements. Soft target to create fear?

 

[A stor]

Perhaps nothing that is shipped from Yemen should be allowed to come to the States or Europe.

 

[The_Pac_Mule]

a muslim fellow trying to blow up a synagogue almost isn't news.

The fact that they almost suceeded is, however. Especially in England. They missed the bomb the first time around, and only searched again because we told them to.

 

[A stor]

Thanks Pac mule. I was only able to hear bits and pieces. Being at work most of the weekend.

 

[coolian2]

as if a rabbi isn't going to look at the shipment details when it arrives at the synagogue.

oh look, toner sent from yemen that nobody ordered! yeah, that's not going to arouse their suspicion.

 

[A stor]

Good point. I work part time as a church secretary. Any suspicious package, I would call the police. We don't order anything from outside the U.S. Since what we need for our office and church is available here.