12 Children killed in a NATO issued airstrike in Afghanistan

[Bakis]

Ah, I see. Than I shall reference the same link that you provided:

"However, civilian deaths are sometimes unavoidable. The term collateral damage refers to destruction unavoidably incurred in the act of destroying a target deemed to be of military significance."

As for the second one, that is a mission statement, not a law. The way that they accomplish this is described below.

Considering we have all the reports of weedings being bombed, children gathering firewood which looked to be planting IED's or the famous helicopter gunship killing journalists you will have to excuse me for not having much confidence in the decisions being made to avoid collateral damage.
The death toll of civilians is simply too big.

The big question as always is how great the military significance is compared to the risk of killing civilians and at what number. My opinion is that it is not of that high priority, simply watching the increase in the usage of drones tells me that NATO/US lives are far more precious than the civilian population.
Drones are de facto a more likely weapon platform to cause civilian deaths due to the disconnect of being actually present. There are limited sensors, no eyes on the ground and mainly based on intel not to mention the 15+s flying time in which the "ops, a child came running" wont equal a stopped attack.

[Deleted]

3 innocents murdered in Boston: nearly every newspaper, tv and media open with it.

12 innocent murdered in Afghanistan: collateral damage. Live with it.

Hypocrisy. A lovely word.

[Jaundiced]

They weren't used as shields I don't know where you came up with this "fact" but I'd like to see the source.

I could probably provide you with video footage of the incident and you'd still find a way to spin it.

[Åmbulance]

I would be out for vengeance if my child was killed too, wouldn't you?.

Not sure if the point i made elduded you, or just chose to ignore it.

[N-7]

I would like to ask, though... would you find this as contentious if it were a live pilot that they had called in?

My response would be the same, in both cases a person pulled the trigger and in both cases someone ordered it to be.

[Aeluron Lightsong]

3 innocents murdered in Boston: nearly every newspaper, tv and media open with it.

12 innocent murdered in Afghanistan: collateral damage. Live with it.

Hypocrisy. A lovely word.

Did you have something to say other then to chime in and bash people?

[Deleted]

I don't really see how drones are the fault. I mean, we've had incidents where manned helicopters/jets launched rockets and killed civilians... this is not the drone's problem, this is the problem of those who targeted wrong, those who got the intel wrong and those that gave the order. They should be trialed for this. But they won't, because Afghanistan is a country considered "enemy" so they're just casualties of war for the government.

[Mouri Kogorou]

i dont know why people always stick to one side of the tabel, what if i told you that both sides are wrong ?

[Kasierith]

Drones are de facto a more likely weapon platform to cause civilian deaths due to the disconnect of being actually present. There are limited sensors, no eyes on the ground and mainly based on intel.

I believe that Rukentuts has already addressed your argument - http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...5#post20926905

As for all those reports, I'm sorry... but war has been around for a very long time, and the travesties and pains associated with war far precede the use of drones.

[N-7]

I could probably provide you with video footage of the incident and you'd still find a way to spin it.

Provide said footage and then make your claim. I've provided a list of sources from both sides of the argument and no one mentioned anything about using the children as human shields.

I cannot argue with you if all you can do is claim something and then refuse to provide a source for it when challenged.

[Urti]

It doesn't make any of this less sad.

No it doesn't. Children died and that is terrible. But to pretend like this one event is somehow more significant or meaningful to mankind than the thousands of children killed in africa each year by inaction, or the hundreds killed by the Taliban for ridiculous religious offenses, or the millions starving to death or dying form preventable diseases every year is just a thinly veiled attempt to run some dead kids up a political statement flagpole and wave it around the interwebs. "Look at all the dead kids! Isn't that HORRIBLE!" Using dead kids to make some poorly hidden political statement, or worse yet some slacktivist plain-as-day non-observation like "War is bad", is a horrible thing to do, and those responsible should be ashamed. And they WOULD be ashamed if they had even remotely as much concern for those dead kids as they think they do.

[Charge me Doctor]

They weren't used as shields I don't know where you came up with this "fact" but I'd like to see the source.

It is a common practice to use civilians as meat shields or to force soldiers to stop shooting. They are often hide in civilian houses (not abandoned) and shoot patrols from there.

[N-7]

i dont know why people always stick to one side of the tabel, what if i told you that both sides are wrong ?

Both are wrong, I am not sticking for either said.

[Kasierith]

My response would be the same, in both cases a person pulled the trigger and in both cases someone ordered it to be.

So than, why focus on the drones? In fact, why focus on the air support at all? The exact same argument can be made concerning ground troops.

[Aeluron Lightsong]

No it doesn't. Children died and that is terrible. But to pretend like this one event is somehow more significant or meaningful to mankind than the thousands of children killed in africa each year by inaction, or the hundreds killed by the Taliban for ridiculous religious offenses, or the millions starving to death or dying form preventable diseases every year is just a thinly veiled attempt to run some dead kids up political statement flagpole and wave it around the interwebs. "Look at all the dead kids! Isn't that HORRIBLE!" Using dead kids to make some poorly hidden political statement, or worse yet some slacktivist plain-as-day non-observation like "War is bad", is a horrible thing to do, and those responsible should be ashamed. And they WOULD be ashamed if they had even remotely as much concern for those dead kids as they think they do.

You are implying everyone here doesn't care about children. I do care, just because I don't know about it doesn't mean I don't care.

[N-7]

It is a common practice to use civilians as meat shields or to force soldiers to stop shooting. They are often hide in civilian houses (not abandoned) and shoot patrols from there.

But it wasn't the case in this instance.

[Åmbulance]

But it wasn't the case in this instance.

I was unaware that you were there, and had first hand knowledge. My bad sir, continue spewing facts of the situation.

[Bakis]

I believe that Rukentuts has already addressed your argument - http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...5#post20926905

As for all those reports, I'm sorry... but war has been around for a very long time, and the travesties and pains associated with war far precede the use of drones.

And I already addressed a reply to that as well if you read it. (edit: was to his cnn post i replied, same stuff tho)
200 dead children confirmed by independant sources tells me drones arent that good of a system to avoid civilian deaths.

[N-7]

So than, why focus on the drones? In fact, why focus on the air support at all? The exact same argument can be made concerning ground troops.

I argued that the place and timing of the raid could have been better, I haven't singled the air support (after my discussion with Rukentuts that is). They could have handled the situation better but they didn't.

---------- Post added 2013-04-24 at 08:29 PM ----------

I was unaware that you were there, and had first hand knowledge. My bad sir, continue spewing facts of the situation.

I wasn't there but I have provided a list of sources in the OP, you're welcome to read it or continue arguing about imaginary scenarios with your friends.

[Urti]

You are implying everyone here doesn't care about children. I do care, just because I don't know about it doesn't mean I don't care.

I'm only implying that SOME people use tragedies like this to promote political statements or as fuel to stoke arguments. If your statement was free of political subtext then please move along, my statement wasn't directed towards you. I simply used your statement as a launching post, contrasting you against those types I was criticizing.