1. #2561
    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe View Post
    As @Thekri said, I discussed that... back in early January.
    Why is this forum Skroe's fucking blog?

  2. #2562
    Elemental Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Wales, UK
    Posts
    8,267
    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe View Post
    You talk as if we droned Charles de Gaulle Airport.
    There isn't technically that much difference really, you guys used an illegal drone strike to assassinate somebody at an international airport where there could have been countless civilian casualties. The country the airport happened to be in isn't really relevant to the action being wrong.

  3. #2563
    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe View Post
    The US government, rather conveniently, labeled Quuds Force (and also I think, the greater IRGC) as a Terrorist Organization. This is an official, legal designation within US law, and not some hand-wavy thing. It means the US military and US intelligence agencies are authorized to do certain things they couldn't otherwise do.
    Guess the Saudis should have just labelled Khashoggi a terrorist, then everything would have been fine! Who knew.

  4. #2564
    Scarab Lord Thekri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A highly disgruntled constituent of Lindsey Graham.
    Posts
    4,567
    Quote Originally Posted by Trifle View Post
    Guess the Saudis should have just labelled Khashoggi a terrorist, then everything would have been fine! Who knew.
    Legally, internally, yes. And that is exactly the problem that @Skroe is talking about. This is not a good thing, this is the result of Congress giving George Bush a blank check, and forgetting to write an expiration date on it. Nobody in this thread is defending the absurd legal framework that exists around counter-terrorism operations.

    As far as international relations go, it depends on who else considers the person a terrorist. Obvious a lot of nations didn't consider Sulemani a terrorist, and they objected strenuously to killing him. The Saudis did briefly try the "terrorist" angle with Khashoggi, but they quickly dropped it when the US reacted very angrily to that line of rationalizing.
    "Is it OK if I read some shameless flattery off the cuff?" - MyPillow Guy
    "Southern governors are not being very appreciative of the great job I am doing on this Civil War thing" - Abraham Lincoln

  5. #2565
    Quote Originally Posted by caervek View Post
    There isn't technically that much difference really, you guys used an illegal drone strike to assassinate somebody at an international airport where there could have been countless civilian casualties. The country the airport happened to be in isn't really relevant to the action being wrong.
    Do you think they weren't aware of the civilian risk and worked around that?

    He was killed in such a precise way as to ensure there wouldn't be civilians killed in the strike. It wasn't chance.

    As for "illegal drone strike". Illegal under what terms? Some vague notion of the so called international "law" that doesn't even exist? Iraqi law? American law?

    Nobody in this thread is defending the absurd legal framework that exists around counter-terrorism operations.
    It will continue because no political leader wants another Paris to happen on their hands, but similarly none of them want political debates to happen every time a country takes out a suspected or well known terrorist leader, because they raise rather difficult question that elected officials just don't want to deal with it.

    So the worst happens. Governments basically get a blank check from their legislative bodies to deal with this kind of stuff, and the executive branches try and figure out the best way for themselves.
    Last edited by CostinR; 2020-02-18 at 03:17 AM.
    "Life is one long series of problems to solve. The more you solve, the better a man you become.... Tribulations spawn in life and over and over again we must stand our ground and face them."

    Retired <Dreamstate> Gehennas

  6. #2566
    Scarab Lord Thekri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A highly disgruntled constituent of Lindsey Graham.
    Posts
    4,567
    Quote Originally Posted by caervek View Post
    There isn't technically that much difference really, you guys used an illegal drone strike to assassinate somebody at an international airport where there could have been countless civilian casualties. The country the airport happened to be in isn't really relevant to the action being wrong.
    I get that this doesn't make a lot of difference, but there wasn't going to be "Countless civilian casualties". They struck one car, and it wasn't in the middle of the public area of the airport. The military did its job professionally here, the real argument is about the civilian order to do so (From Trump specifically).

    As far as "illegal" that is what we have been talking about. There really are no laws that directly cover this sort of thing, however there are authorizations that exist that give carte blanche to strike members of declared Terrorist groups. Quds Force is designated as a terrorist group by the US government (You can disagree if it should be, but it was designated such), and as such the strike is almost certainly legal under US law. Is it legal under international law? Well that is probably something a team of law professors could argue about for a few months, but it isn't blatantly illegal at least.

    The US authorizations to strike terrorists are so ridiculously broad that if Trump could get someone to declare the New England Patriots a terrorist group he could probably legally drone strike Tom Brady. The thing that reigns in this power is basically people getting outraged when it gets misused. Right now, the GOP shields Trump from pretty much any consequences from anything, so there isn't much anyone can do about it (Short of declaring war on the US at least). All we can really do is vote that unstable asshole out of office in November, and hope he doesn't kill someone who doesn't have it coming in the meantime.
    "Is it OK if I read some shameless flattery off the cuff?" - MyPillow Guy
    "Southern governors are not being very appreciative of the great job I am doing on this Civil War thing" - Abraham Lincoln

  7. #2567
    The Insane Kellhound's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bank of the Columbia
    Posts
    19,358
    Quote Originally Posted by caervek View Post
    There isn't technically that much difference really, you guys used an illegal drone strike to assassinate somebody at an international airport where there could have been countless civilian casualties. The country the airport happened to be in isn't really relevant to the action being wrong.
    The use of kinetic warheads pretty much assured there would be little to no collateral damage, as did the location the cars were hit.
    Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
    “Whoever said the pen is mightier than the sword obviously never encountered automatic weapons.”
    "His knowledge on that topic is only power point deep..." "Power corrupts and PowerPoint corrupts absolutely."
    "Who's the more foolish? The fool, or the fool who follows him?"

  8. #2568
    Quote Originally Posted by Thekri View Post
    This is not a good thing, this is the result of Congress giving George Bush a blank check, and forgetting to write an expiration date on it. Nobody in this thread is defending the absurd legal framework that exists around counter-terrorism operations.
    I mean I don't disagree with that, the AUMFs are considerably broad. But actions justified under the AUMF can presumably still be illegal for other reasons (eg violating international treaties the US is partner to etc).

    But even ignoring that, there are reasonable arguments that they wouldn't cover the Soleimani assassination. The White House may have had legal advice that they did, but the White House lawyers have certainly been losing a lot of court cases and none of this has really been tested. But it's also unlikely to actually be tested either, so we have the status quo of everything being of dubious legality with disagreements as to whether it really is or not depending on who you ask.

    Edit:
    After reading your previous post I mostly agree with that. It's just quibbling about where exactly it falls on the scale of theoretical legality.
    Last edited by Trifle; 2020-02-18 at 04:46 AM.

  9. #2569
    Quote Originally Posted by caervek View Post
    There isn't technically that much difference really, you guys used an illegal drone strike to assassinate somebody at an international airport where there could have been countless civilian casualties. The country the airport happened to be in isn't really relevant to the action being wrong.
    To add to what @Kellhound said, this was the likely missile used. The R9X "flying Ginsu", a modified hellfire missile. It has no explosives. Instead a fraction of a second before impact, six 3 foot long blades extend from the body.



    This is how precise it is: it can destroy the inside of a car without destoying the care far away from the impact point:



    I want to put this into perspective: the front hood, lights and side panels of the car that was struck by a missiles in this picture, are in good enough shape to be sold as replacement parts.

    Here is another one:



    This has been the drone-based weapon of choice in settled areas since 2017.

  10. #2570
    That's a bit mis-leading:

    Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_B...strike#Attack:
    At 12:47 a.m., the Reaper drone launched several missiles, striking the convoy on an access road as it departed the airport, engulfing the two cars in flames and killing 10 people.
    Additionally, wiki sources this Forbes article: https://www.forbes.com/sites/sebasti.../#3234944b4bb6
    The photo shows print on the fragment that notes the missile weighs 52 kilograms (114.6 pounds) and requires two persons to lift.

    ...

    But there’s a problem: Hellfire variants have listed weights between 45 to 50 kilograms. And given that the targeted car was reduced to a blazing wreck, we can rule out the use of the blade-armed Hellfire.

    In fact, a weapon intended to replace the Hellfire, called the AGM-179 Joint-Air-to-Ground Missile (JAGM) does weigh 52 kilos (115 pounds), and is designed to be fired from the same helicopters and drones. It essentially plugs an advanced guidance-cone into the body of a standard AGM-114R missile (the motor, flight control system and its multi-purpose warhead).

  11. #2571
    The Insane Kellhound's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bank of the Columbia
    Posts
    19,358
    Having spent time doing BDA on confirmed pictures of the strike, I am walking back my statement about kinetic warheads. The US only used location to curtail collateral damage.
    Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
    “Whoever said the pen is mightier than the sword obviously never encountered automatic weapons.”
    "His knowledge on that topic is only power point deep..." "Power corrupts and PowerPoint corrupts absolutely."
    "Who's the more foolish? The fool, or the fool who follows him?"

  12. #2572
    Isn't that some kind of fletcherer weapon? Aren't they mostly banned?

  13. #2573
    Quote Originally Posted by Ihavewaffles View Post
    Isn't that some kind of fletcherer weapon? Aren't they mostly banned?
    Maybe if it were a giant firing the missile and other giants.

    What you're thinking of are needle/dart guns.

  14. #2574
    The Insane Kellhound's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bank of the Columbia
    Posts
    19,358
    Quote Originally Posted by Ihavewaffles View Post
    Isn't that some kind of fletcherer weapon? Aren't they mostly banned?
    Flechette. And no, they are not banned.
    Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
    “Whoever said the pen is mightier than the sword obviously never encountered automatic weapons.”
    "His knowledge on that topic is only power point deep..." "Power corrupts and PowerPoint corrupts absolutely."
    "Who's the more foolish? The fool, or the fool who follows him?"

  15. #2575
    Old God I Push Buttons's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    10,943
    Completely unrelated, but kind of tangentially related in that this happened in the same broader conflict; not really worthy of a new thread...

    https://twitter.com/ibrashino/status...18147938082818

    I had no idea US forces and Russian forces were operating in such close proximity in Syria that they are literally running each other off the road. Hopefully they don't start shooting at each other.

  16. #2576
    Quote Originally Posted by I Push Buttons View Post
    Completely unrelated, but kind of tangentially related in that this happened in the same broader conflict; not really worthy of a new thread...

    https://twitter.com/ibrashino/status...18147938082818

    I had no idea US forces and Russian forces were operating in such close proximity in Syria that they are literally running each other off the road. Hopefully they don't start shooting at each other.
    I see two morons driving, just with different flags. Like, one is trying to speed and overtake, the other is trying to block him doing that. Guys, you are in a warzone, where nerves are being tested all the time - do you REALLY have to do that?

  17. #2577
    Quote Originally Posted by Easo View Post
    I see two morons driving, just with different flags. Like, one is trying to speed and overtake, the other is trying to block him doing that. Guys, you are in a warzone, where nerves are being tested all the time - do you REALLY have to do that?
    Unfortunately the answer to that is yes, they do because whoever fires first looses.

  18. #2578
    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe View Post
    Correct. We are allowed to do them and you are not.

    Wars have consequences. Russia lost the Cold War, and this its privileged international position. It can try and change reality as to what the US can and cannot do, but it won’t find it very successful.

    A friendly reminder, as I like to say, that this is our planet and you just live here.
    [Infraction]
    This is this kind of shit that will lead your country to fall, in the end. Keep thinking that way, but dont ask why you are so hated. Dictators, ruling by force, flexing muscle and act like bullies never end well. This is already making you look like the bad ones.... those who will end you Will be considered the good ones.

  19. #2579
    Immortal Stormspark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Columbus OH
    Posts
    7,434
    Quote Originally Posted by Beuargh View Post
    This is this kind of shit that will lead your country to fall, in the end. Keep thinking that way, but dont ask why you are so hated. Dictators, ruling by force, flexing muscle and act like bullies never end well. This is already making you look like the bad ones.... those who will end you Will be considered the good ones.
    I agree with you. I live in the US and I can't stand it when people say stuff like that. The US is not special in any way. It's basically a failed state at this point.

  20. #2580
    The Insane Kellhound's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bank of the Columbia
    Posts
    19,358
    Quote Originally Posted by Stormspark View Post
    I agree with you. I live in the US and I can't stand it when people say stuff like that. The US is not special in any way. It's basically a failed state at this point.
    The US isnt special, it just has the most powerful economy and most powerful military in the world....
    Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
    “Whoever said the pen is mightier than the sword obviously never encountered automatic weapons.”
    "His knowledge on that topic is only power point deep..." "Power corrupts and PowerPoint corrupts absolutely."
    "Who's the more foolish? The fool, or the fool who follows him?"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •