I posted a ton of questions because I wanted you to say more. It seems like you know a lot about drones and have a lot of thoughts to share on the subject, and I wanted to read them. I dont think I have anything major to contribute, besides more questions. To quickly answer a few of yours: Al Qaeda is a mess of different things, young men, freedom fighters. I realise they dont have a fixed command structure, but there are certainly people with higher strategic value. The Mongols arent the only major exception. Taiping rebellion started in 1850 and had a crazy civilian death toll. Chechen war is not a typical example because the chechens used the civilians as human shields and held them hostage, the russian army didnt allow civilians to evacuating and didnt give humanitarian agencies lee way to assist civilians, they used airstrikes and artillery first and foremost on populatd areas. To select it as an example when youre talking about civilian death rates seems very suspicious.

I dont think theres anything wrong with questioning you, and asking you to explain yourself. The selection of wars you made isnt random, there is no such thing as random data selection. Everyone has an objective and a slant on the information they share.

I dont believe in human rights, saying that people have the "right" not be killed by drones does nothing to help when noone enforces human rights, and they dont. I am well aware that I have far more in common with the people dying than the ones doing the killing. If my brother were killed by a rocket attack I wouldnt start harping on about human rights, nor would I think it any worse than him being starved to death in N korea or tortured to death in Africa or blown up by a car bomb. What is so special to you about drones?

You seem to be saying that drones are bad because they lead to civilian deaths? Thats absurd, drones have killed LESS THAN A THOUSAND CIVILIANS that is not a big number, it is a small number of human beings, dressing it up as a ratio does not fool anyone. I know you know this, why are you making civilian deaths the core of your argument against drones?

There is a holocaust going on in africa and in north korea, why do people fixate on fucking drones?

That was me, piggy, sorry eeyore.

Are you on drugs piggy?

Is that it?

i'm assuming dead piggy's interest in the subject is in understanding why people focus on complaining about drones in particular instead of human rights in general.

to answer that i would say it's because drones are relatively new technology which governments are exploiting it for war and surveillance instead of peaceful and humanitarian uses. humanitarians see the slipery slope in this, it's a step further towards dehumanizing warfare and bringing on the surveillance state, which, like myhand was saying, will only incite to more killings and probably bring on the thought police.

Yeah, thats right ps. It seems to be a republican and libetarian strategy to defame Obama. I also agree that the anti-drone argument seems to rely on a slipper slope fallacy.

I mean aren't drones better than sending in troops that could get into trouble; Such as going out on a shooting spree or raping a local girl.

i still think that remote controlled drones will lead to fewer civilian deaths because a soldier won't be scared of a civilian shooting him/her, so will only shoot when they should, rather than killing everyone they see on sight because 1/100 could be a military person in disguise =/

personaly, as far as remote warfare goes, i would suggest the top commanders play a game of warlight and get their quarels done with. as opposed to involving troops and civilians on their matters. but unfortunately that doesnt bring much money to the military industry.

I 'm against drones because they make killing easier, not just in the sense that you kill your opponent even before he sees you,(which makes killing easier psychologically and saver thus much easier to decide to kill.)
but also in the sense that it enables killing someone who doesn't even know you're after him yet, and they can be used in any country that doesn't have good surveillance/radar/douane to detect their use.
(we already know the USA have no problem going behind their allies' backs,
let alone the countries they have no special relation with)

Is this an appropriate arena for discussing American political stances?

You think Obama would take up an invite to the human rights court ?

I think the WL forums are the next best thing to the court of human rights.

I recently read an interesting survey describing the international attitude towards the United State's use of drone warfare. There is an overwhelming support of it by United State's citizens, while a strong majority of people in other countries dissapprove. I, personally, support its limited use.

Here is the webpage about the survey: http://www.military.com/daily-news/2012/06/13/survey-us-drone-program-unpopular-overseas.html

Personally i am a conservative republican with some more middle leaning views. I believe that the US government should not be spying on its people and it should not be as controlling as it is. I believe that America is heading for a turning point in its history, that wil mean either life or death for this narion. The peple need to wake up and realize that our rights are being slowy stripped, Obama may be the first but hes layer the groundwork for the next, more extreme poitician who will take more from us. By the time the people realize this it could be too late. Disagree if you want but all empires and nations have fallen once they lost there religion/ the morals that they teach. And that is the way western civilization is going. America is at its breaking point either we fight and succeed or fail and lose ourselves

It is not a republican/libertarian agenda to defame obama its just telling the truth as to what he did and this is a fine arena to talk about this the NSA is reading it so id like to say hello to you, whoever is reading this hope you have a good day breaking the law.

Now was that unwarranted self importance in coincidence with delusional thinking or merely a nice try?

If OBUMMER puts Hell bender in Guantanamo then he automatically becomes the greatest president in history.

There is an overwhelming support of it by United State's citizens, while a strong majority of people in other countries dissapprove.

And that's completly normal - it's easy to 'support human rights' and oppose drones when problem doesn't affect you directly. It's choice between risking life of American soldier and life of innocent Arab civilians. From (just example) French point of view killing civilians in war is bad. But why people in US should put those Arab civilians higher than their nationals?

Because people who sign up to join the army are aware of the occupational hazards, and women and children should be able to walk around outside without having to worry about being killed.