Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ucaetano 2783 days ago
> Because there are more courses of action other than "drone strike" and "carpet bombing".

Indeed, but those courses aren't always available, and war will happen in the way war happens.

If not, your argument isn't about drones, it is about pacifism. That's like saying "I'll magically lift everyone out of the way" in the trolley problem. Sure, it is a nice thought, but it is not an answer to the question.

I'll ask again: if the only two options were carpet bombing and smart bombs, which one would you choose?

Don't run away from the question.
2 comments
vladTheInhaler 2782 days ago
Taking issue with the problem statement isn't the same as running away from the question. You're presenting a false dichotomy.

In some imaginary world where you are somehow being compelled to chose between a button that says "Drone Strike" and one that says "Carpet Bombing", obviously "Drone Strike" is the correct option. But, equally obviously, that is a terrible model for reality. In reality, the decision maker always has the option to not kill anybody at that time. Yes, always. There might be other consequences for that choice, but admitting that it exists isn't pacifism, it's just common sense.

link
kazen44 2783 days ago
smart bombs is the obvious answer, but your question is has a false pretense.

Carpet bombing and a drone strike are not in the same "solution space", its like trying to tighten your shoelaces with your hands or with a 10 ton excevator.

link
ucaetano 2782 days ago
> Carpet bombing and a drone strike are not in the same "solution space", its like trying to tighten your shoelaces with your hands or with a 10 ton excevator.

Oh, but they are (particularly because I'm not just including drone strikes, but smart bombs).

Wanna destroy a factory, a power-plant, a bunker, a government office?

In WW2, you'd just carpet-bomb the surrounding area and hope some bombs hit the target.

Today, you deliver a payload to a specific part of it.

Compare the bombing of Belgrade in the Balkan wars to any WW2 bombing run.

There are two discussions in place:

- How we make weapons more precise and limit collateral damage - How we reduce the need for weapons in the first place

Both lead to a better situation than the status quo.

link