Comment by Jacob Dickinson on December 17, 2009 at 1:42pm

Another way to look at is, how many people would have died if those same missions were carried out by manned aircraft/troops? Perhaps more (though I don't have figures, so I don't know).

I sort of agree on the "dehumanizing" aspect though. War is messy, and I feel like the more physically remote we become from the people who are killed, the less incentive we have to end war quickly. Granted, I would never want to put U.S. soldiers as individuals in more harm's way than necessary; but the wounds and scars are part of what remind us that was is so terrible.

More on topic though...we definitely need to find ways to show other types of drones in a more positive light =)

3D Robotics Comment by Jordi Muñoz on December 17, 2009 at 2:08pm

This is far beyond from what we are doing.. Mainly in this site we are playing with foam planes, learning, getting fun and meeting people with the same interest's. Predator is not a DIY drone, this is not a DIY "Warcraft" site, otherwise i wouldn't be here. Our logo is just a NASA's Ikhana UAV used for research purposes. ;-)

Comment by TopperS on December 17, 2009 at 2:10pm

I totally agree with Jori

Comment by Aaron Buckner on December 17, 2009 at 2:17pm

There are tons of non-war uses for UAVs look at cropcam to name one! I have zero interest in military use, its interesting to see what they develop but only because the world military's are the ones pumping billions into these programs, "Future Farmers or America" can't afford millions much less billions to fund UAV developement

Moderator Comment by Jack Crossfire on December 17, 2009 at 2:34pm

You need to showcase the positive side before the Geneva convention gets in on the action. If we're already paying $10 billion in new taxes for "global warming financing" how far could outlawing weapons without a human behind the trigger be? If it wasn't for the drones, a lot of soccer moms like Cindy Sheehan would be dying in the Afghan skies or, heaven forbid, joining the military.

Comment by Morli on December 17, 2009 at 3:34pm

Jack, With all the due respect , this would be quagmire which we don't want to get into. IMHO Cindy or who ever it is might/makes a living out of controversy and drawing people to say what they would not have in normal circumstances. We have lot more to do than talk back to people like that. There are few things we can say but there are lot more things we can do with our time which would be more productive. Look at guillotine who made his name in some thing which no one today remembers , but today it is part of almost every man and woman's life. We are about knowledge and search for better understanding of it/science. Just my 2 cent worth

Moderator Comment by Thomas J Coyle III on December 17, 2009 at 3:38pm

I wonder what Cindy Sheehan's stance is on two things:

1) Land mines cleared by unwary civilians.

2) Car bombs used by terrorists and the resultant collateral damage done to civilians.

Just a thought.

Regards,
TCIII

Comment by Patrick Egan on December 17, 2009 at 4:00pm

Might want to change out the pic and slap NASA on the side of it, the one in the logo is an RQ-1

Comment by mook on December 17, 2009 at 4:42pm

@TC3
Are you seriously using terrorism as a justification to high civilian casualties?
that's a slippery slope that leads to authoritarianism and disregard for human rights.

Moderator Comment by Chris Anderson on December 17, 2009 at 4:55pm

Moderator warning: please refrain from talking about politics, morality of war, or US policy in this thread. It will only lead to tempers getting raised and the community fraying and I will have to close the thread.

Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page