It just depends on whether we consider these people to be criminals or soldiers, basically. We weren't arresting people in the American civil war either.
which is exactly why maintenance of the meaning of terms like "imminent threat" and "enemy combatant" is a big fucking deal
Considering the white paper is constrained to Al Queda leaders and leaders of Al Queda affiliates, it doesn't leave me particularly concerned honestly. Slippery-sloping this into "any American the US Government doesn't like" is ridiculous. Pro-tip on staying alive - don't align with Al Queda.
http://www.historynet.com/civil-war-casualties
So what you're saying is that like in the civil war, we'd capture enemies when feasible and kill then when not?
If anyone else wants to read the white paper go for it.
http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/se...hite_Paper.pdf
-excerpt from Jeremy Scahill interviewJust a few days ago, there were three public executions of people that were convicted in the Ansar al-Sharia’s court system of providing intelligence to the Americans to be used in drone attacks, including one person who was executed in the very place where Anwar al-Awlaki’s 16-year-old son, who was a U.S. citizen, was killed in a U.S. drone strike. And they executed this man, alleging that he had provided intelligence to the Americans that had contributed to the death of Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, the 16-year-old son of Anwar al-Awlaki. You know, President Obama authorized strikes that resulted in three U.S. citizens being killed within less than a month in Yemen: Anwar al-Awlaki, who was born in New Mexico; Anwar al-Awlaki’s 16-year-old son; and then Samir Khan, who was another U.S. citizen from North Carolina and was the editor of Inspire magazine, the English-language publication of al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. All three of those U.S. citizens were killed within one month.
People die in war, that's why the focus should be on preventing war, not making it prettier once we're mired into the quagmire that is war.
Try not to be there, but once we're there? Shit, drone the hell out of everything; whatever gets it over with quicker so we can spend that money on something else.
Step 1)support dictators with money, guns, and manpower
Step 2)blow up villages aimlessly
Step 3)create an uprising of a crazy sharia lawlessness following that trumps Al Qaeda
Step 4)profit
This conversation is meaningless, might as well boil it down to core moral axioms.
Here, I'll do it for you.
Is it ethical to kill civilians in any military engagement?
They already got that covered chief. If you're an arab male adult, then you're automatically a terrorist on paper. Let the hippies and "journalists" cry about it, nobody will hear them.
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-47524768
US Army says humans will have the final decision whether robots will fire or not. Also, real life aim assist is in development.
The statement comes as plans emerge for gun platforms that can choose their own targets on the battlefield.
The defence department's plans seek to upgrade the current Advanced Targeting and Lethality Automated System (Atlas) used on ground combat vehicles to help human gunners aim.
The military is seeking commercial partners to help develop aiming systems to "acquire, identify, and engage targets at least three times faster than the current manual process".
It said it remained committed to the rules governing human-robot interaction, known as directive 3000.09, which require a human finger on every trigger.
The US Army also said it would issue a series of "talking points" around human-robot interaction to be debated on 12 March, when industry is invited to an open day to explore how Atlas can be updated.
https://twitter.com/verge/status/1448661683530977295
Edit: Remember, fuck Ted Faro.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/ukraine-f...165710636.html
The video notes that the remote-controlled gun turrets, the ShaBlya system which was developed by Ukrainian engineers and approved for use and mass production earlier this year, are one of the first "robots" on the front lines, designed to hold, target, and fire machine guns.
The gun turret also has a thermal imager and wide-field cameras for locating targets, and it can fire out to a distance of just over three miles, according to United24.
Footage of the turret being used in combat shows it being controlled by portable Steam Deck systems![]()
Ehhh, it's a wireless turret. More of an immobile drone vs Cyberdyne Systems prototype.
Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk