Should the US compensate civilian casualties of drones?

[SaintB]

We need a better solution than level the whole area with hellfire missiles; that is honestly the best thing we can do for both ourselves and the civilian population of the nations we are using drone attacks in. Or we could stop violating the sovereignty of other nations but since when has America ever done that?

[British Prussia]

The US government not only needs to compensate casaulties of drones but they also need to send people like tony blair, george w bush, benjamin netenyahu and all the NATO commanders in the INVASION of iraq to the ICC for war crimes. But i know it will never happen because president Obama is a zionist twat.

They probably should've sent Truman on trial with the Nazis for the attack on at least Nagasaki, and American commanders for the accidental chemical bombing of Nari in Italy in 1943, but what ya gonna do.

Celebrate the allied victory of WWII?

[British Prussia]

We need a better solution than level the whole area with hellfire missiles; that is honestly the best thing we can do for both ourselves and the civilian population of the nations we are using drone attacks in. Or we could stop violating the sovereignty of other nations but since when has America ever done that?

It is within the interests of the most powerful nations in the world to violate sovereignty of other nations. That's how the became so powerful... If they didn't America could probably still be the thirteen colonies! There's nothing you can do about it. If you whittle America down to nothing another will take its place, and you have to decide whether it's better to have America as no.1 or China, or Russia.

I'd much prefer the Americans as the most powerful country in the world.

[Rabopari]

The US government not only needs to compensate casaulties of drones but they also need to send people like tony blair, george w bush, benjamin netenyahu and all the NATO commanders in the INVASION of iraq to the ICC for war crimes. But i know it will never happen because president Obama is a zionist twat.

They probably should've sent Truman on trial with the Nazis for the attack on at least Nagasaki, and American commanders for the accidental chemical bombing of Nari in Italy in 1943, but what ya gonna do.

i guess. The west gets away with every genocide, invasion of a sovergin state, invasion of foreign airspace, war it causes

[Imperializt Russia]

They probably should've sent Truman on trial with the Nazis for the attack on at least Nagasaki, and American commanders for the accidental chemical bombing of Nari in Italy in 1943, but what ya gonna do.

i guess. The west gets away with every genocide, invasion of a sovergin state, invasion of foreign airspace, war it causes

Oh please, America's just a really spoilt kid.

No-one cared about US IRBMs in Turkey until the Soviets became suitably pissed they decided to level the playing field by putting their own IRBMs in Cuba. But noep, apparently Russia was being the bad guy in that.

[Telsia]

Am I the only person who thinks compensation is ridiculous? It's just impossible. There wold be far too many to pay, and everyone would want a handout. It's bloody war, there will be casualties. Is it fair? No. The only way you can compensate the people is to ensure a prosperous stable government for the people.

Small operations where 1/2 people are injured or killed is much more isolated, you can pay compensation for that.

thats the whole point. to dry the usa dry

Well No it isnt, its to lessen the burden of death of the affected families involved, a country that spends $1 Trillion every 6 months, just to run everything, they arent going to run out of muney paying $15 million a year in compensation!

[British Prussia]

They probably should've sent Truman on trial with the Nazis for the attack on at least Nagasaki, and American commanders for the accidental chemical bombing of Nari in Italy in 1943, but what ya gonna do.

i guess. The west gets away with every genocide, invasion of a sovergin state, invasion of foreign airspace, war it causes

It's not just the west. Everyone had their moment in history.

[L Ron Cupboard]

Civilian casualties happen all the time war. The only thing you can do is ensure a prosperous peace after you win it.

And this isn't a part of securing a prosperous peace after the war? Otherwise it is not even thinking one move ahead.

[Luveria]

Civilian casualties happen all the time war. The only thing you can do is ensure a prosperous peace after you win it.

And this isn't a part of securing a prosperous peace after the war? Otherwise it is not even thinking one move ahead.

Unless, as someone already pointed out, the goal is to have a 1984 style war against an enemy not meant to be defeated. It's laughable if anyone seriously believes that, but it's easy to see the US is for some reason choosing to have short-sighted policies and no concern for the long-term effects of their operations.

[British Prussia]

Civilian casualties happen all the time war. The only thing you can do is ensure a prosperous peace after you win it.

And this isn't a part of securing a prosperous peace after the war? Otherwise it is not even thinking one move ahead.

They already get the money in aid from the American government. The Americans have paid a lot in the reconstruction of Afghanistan and Iraq and the bill includes civilian compensation it does not go directly to them as such, but it goes indirectly to the benefit of the nation as a whole. Not that it has come to much. There is no escaping corruption. But that's just something you have to put up with.

[Imperializt Russia]

And this isn't a part of securing a prosperous peace after the war? Otherwise it is not even thinking one move ahead.

Unless, as someone already pointed out, the goal is to have a 1984 style war against an enemy not meant to be defeated. It's laughable if anyone seriously believes that, but it's easy to see the US is for some reason choosing to have short-sighted policies and no concern for the long-term effects of their operations.

You're implying a terrorist force is one that can be defeated. It's not "not meant to" be defeated, it's bordering an impossible ask.

[Charlotte Ryberg]

I don't doubt about compensation when they make silly mistakes like that. The sum is inevitably going to be huge so they're in theory at vain at trying to reach a lower sum.

Or it's more convenient for the US to keep silent about the collateral damage to causes.

Not easy to so in the age of the internet, I'm afraid.

[British Prussia]

And this isn't a part of securing a prosperous peace after the war? Otherwise it is not even thinking one move ahead.

Unless, as someone already pointed out, the goal is to have a 1984 style war against an enemy not meant to be defeated. It's laughable if anyone seriously believes that, but it's easy to see the US is for some reason choosing to have short-sighted policies and no concern for the long-term effects of their operations.

When you get invaded by the US, you get security and stability. It could go all to hell when they leave. If the Americans were really thinking of long-term effects, they should stay on much longer.

[Rabopari]

i guess. The west gets away with every genocide, invasion of a sovergin state, invasion of foreign airspace, war it causes

Oh please, America's just a really spoilt kid.

No-one cared about US IRBMs in Turkey until the Soviets became suitably pissed they decided to level the playing field by putting their own IRBMs in Cuba. But noep, apparently Russia was being the bad guy in that.

well said

[Rabopari]

i guess. The west gets away with every genocide, invasion of a sovergin state, invasion of foreign airspace, war it causes

It's not just the west. Everyone had their moment in history.

but the west gets away with all that

[Luveria]

Unless, as someone already pointed out, the goal is to have a 1984 style war against an enemy not meant to be defeated. It's laughable if anyone seriously believes that, but it's easy to see the US is for some reason choosing to have short-sighted policies and no concern for the long-term effects of their operations.

You're implying a terrorist force is one that can be defeated. It's not "not meant to" be defeated, it's bordering an impossible ask.

They'd have an easier time over the long-term if they weren't pissing off innocent people while dealing with a legitimate problem.

Or it's more convenient for the US to keep silent about the collateral damage to causes.

Not easy to so in the age of the internet, I'm afraid.

Old habits die hard.

[British Prussia]

It's not just the west. Everyone had their moment in history.

but the west gets away with all that

Whoever's in power will get away with it.

[Rabopari]

but the west gets away with all that

Whoever's in power will get away with it.

true

[Godforsaken Warmachine]

War is expensive enough already. You want to pay compensation to victims??

[Breadknife]

I've been thinking about this since I saw the thread created. I think it'd probably be bad for some beancounters to check the footage and say "I see two houses caught in the blast, three goats a motorcycle and... looks like 15 people killed, so we'll pay <so many> [PKR|AFN|IQD|etc], and call it even...".

I'm not saying don't pay compensation, but don't make it "Pay-per-bomb" (/missile/whatever). OTOH, to the emotional trauma of loss for the survivors and then you add the further trauma of having to get compensation... So, tricky.

[Luveria]

War is expensive enough already. You want to pay compensation to victims??

Yes. Since when has the US ever been unable to afford war?

[L Ron Cupboard]

And this isn't a part of securing a prosperous peace after the war? Otherwise it is not even thinking one move ahead.

They already get the money in aid from the American government. The Americans have paid a lot in the reconstruction of Afghanistan and Iraq and the bill includes civilian compensation it does not go directly to them as such, but it goes indirectly to the benefit of the nation as a whole. Not that it has come to much. There is no escaping corruption. But that's just something you have to put up with.

Aid is not the same thing as compensation, or if it is what are the US compensating all those countries they are not hitting with drones for?

[Imperializt Russia]

I've been thinking about this since I saw the thread created. I think it'd probably be bad for some beancounters to check the footage and say "I see two houses caught in the blast, three goats a motorcycle and... looks like 15 people killed, so we'll pay <so many> [PKR|AFN|IQD|etc], and call it even...".

I'm not saying don't pay compensation, but don't make it "Pay-per-bomb" (/missile/whatever). OTOH, to the emotional trauma of loss for the survivors and then you add the further trauma of having to get compensation... So, tricky.

The US already spent $2bn a day on missiles in the Gulf. In the 1990s. Plus other munitions. Plus fuel. Plus shipping that fuel and those munitions, and the fuel to do that shipping.
In 2011, US forces expended one billion rounds of ammunition in Afghanistan.

War is ludicrously fucking expensive. Suddenly adding an additional tangible financial cost on every munition used is just mad, mad on every level.

[Technopolis]

War is expensive enough already. You want to pay compensation to victims??

Yes. Since when has the US ever been unable to afford war?

For decades, but they still like sinking money into it for some reason.

[Godforsaken Warmachine]

War is expensive enough already. You want to pay compensation to victims??

Yes. Since when has the US ever been unable to afford war?

Revolutionary war.
Civil War.
World War II.
Afghanistan and Iraq wars.

All of these put considerable stress on the US economy (in the form of debt) and none involved civilian compensation. Each and every one would be ruinous if civilians had been compensated for deaths, injuries, lost livelihood and property destruction.

I think you liberals are trying to do to war what you did to Capital Punishment: make it too expensive, then use the expense as a reason not to make war. Like you don't have better reasons.