• Mawks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    When asked in an interview how drone operators would know if the people being blown to smithereens were actually carrying drugs, he replied: “Same way a police officer would know … Same way somebody operating in Iraq would know. You know, these people in Iraq at the time, they all looked the same. You didn’t know who had a bomb strapped to them. So those guys have to make judgments.”

    Holy F, as a mexican that crosses the border often for vacations… this is extreme and scary

    • BReel@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      As a white person from Wisconsin who never crosses the boarder… this is extreme and scary.

    • atticus88th@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      Next time you cross just carry an ir strobe and IFF NATO friendly panel on your hood. Should be good to go.

      • Silverseren@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        At the very least, that is certainly the case right now. All the polls of conservatives consistently show Trump smoking Desantis.

        • NaN@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          Unfortunately he’s only 44 years old. Hoping he slides into oblivion but I worry he’s going to be flirting around for decades.

          • Silverseren@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            I do wonder if Desantis’ insanity will ever meaningfully affect his electoral chances in Florida or if the boomers there are too far gone to care about the state around them (and their ongoing dwindling Social Security and Medicare thanks to Republicans).

            • DrWeevilJammer@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 years ago

              He’s using a pretty standard tactic for a right wing politician down in the polls: throw increasing amounts of crazy against the wall until something sticks and the polls improve.

              His consultants will call this “calibrating”, to find the right level of insane to match voter expectations and grab media attention for a few cycles along the way.

      • alnilam@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        Funnily enough, if you suggest to do the same to people who advocate this approach to let God decide if the approach is good, they’re a lot less enthusiastic

        • Bizarroland@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          It doesn’t make any sense. In heaven, all the good people will have everything they’ve ever wanted forever.

          But when I offer to send everyone to heaven all at the same time, they treat me like I’m a bad guy.

          It just doesn’t make any sense

    • Rom [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      It increases their approval rating with the military industrial complex lobbyists funding their campaigns, I’m sure.

      • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        Exactly. Wat is a very profitable business, and I’m sure Northrop and Raytheon would love some more revenue.

        • ares35@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          a fair chunk of the aid being sent to ukraine is already ending up in the pockets of defense contractors.

          • Kbin_space_program@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            They was a press release recently saying that almost all of the money is going to the MIC(military industrial complex) to replenish stocks for stuff given to Ukraine.

            Even the Canadian money is doing that. Like where Trudeau brokered a deal with South Korea to gift shells from the active stockpile to Ukraine, the money went to their MIC to make new shells for their stockpile.

    • Madison_rogue@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      No, it doesn’t always happen. Look to 2016 as an example. One of the talking points of Trump’s campaign was that Clinton would lead the U.S. to war with Russia.

      Anecdotally, after the election, I was talking with a Trump voter who mentioned that Trump prevented us from going to war with Russia. Which fucking surprised me, considering conservatives are so fucking hawkish, and I did not know that idea was tossed around in conservative circles as a talking point.

      So no, many elections in the U.S. have been won by candidates that back isolationist policies (primarily WWI and WWII as an example). It’s all inherently political and can take a very populist tone.

      • NaN@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        Before Trump they’d have loved war with Russia. It was them following the typical conservative “we all believe this now” rhetoric that changed that. Now Putin is a great example of an orthodox Christian and he’s doing great things for his country.

    • jabrd [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      Historically you have to campaign as being against the war but then promptly set about the business of creating a war once in office

        • silent_water [she/her]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          unfortunately he was just stating US policy there - Obama infamously drone bombed a wedding. one of the things that makes him appealing to his base is that he takes these facts (or presumed facts in other cases) and says them straight up without hiding it behind sophistry.

          • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 years ago

            Yeah, the way the US picks targets to murder is like algorithm moderated vibes. It’s really sick.

            Obama also liked double tapping ambulances. IE dropping a missile, waiting for first responders and neighbors to show up, then dropping another missile.

  • masquenox@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    The US has been waging unprovoked war on Latin America since before WW1.

    The only thing new about this is that this irredeemable piece of garbage is stating the quiet part out loud.

  • flossdaily@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    How about a new rule that if you vote for a war, you are automatically enlisted. And if you’re ineligible to enlist you must either abstain or vote no.

    • NaN@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      Unfortunately he was a Lieutenant commander in the Navy. Going back probably doesn’t concern him.

    • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      Smedley Butler solved this issue back in the 1920’s, change the vote from Congress to eligible draftees to solve us going to war for stupid reasons.

      Then during times of war, lock down every individual’s income and ability to earn money to that of the soldier. Keeping war profiteering from stretching wars on indefinitely.

      It’s radical, but would probably keep us from just “being at war” eternally. A reality we have had to live in since at least 9/11.

      • TheDubh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        The problem is the us hasn’t had a formal declaration of war since WW2. Basically we’ve just had military engagements. Some haven’t even been authorized by congress.

        Basically we’d need to fix that issue before worrying about the other suggestions. Else it’d just be military engagement not a war so don’t need to fallow them.

      • explodicle@local106.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        The problem these “add a meta policy” proposals all have in common is that they assume we have any control over the legislature… which we don’t have; they don’t work for us at all. At this point only organizing and other direct action will have any significant impact on actual policy.

        In this particular case, legislators would continue to receive bribe income that they refuse to acknowledge as bribery.

      • AlexisFR@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        Is the US even still involved in a war since 2021? At least through direct action.

        • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          The Global War on Terror is what it’s called, it’s just a neverending operation of military sorties across the world to support whatever and wherever.

    • admiralteal@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Congress members get as many votes for war as they have draft-age family members. For each vote they cast, they must enlist 1 family member. Starting with their own children.

      • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        Given the low regard for their children and grandchildren they show when it comes to climate change, I doubt that would be an adequate deterrent.

        • flossdaily@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          Senators are (with few exceptions) extraordinarily wealthy. When climate change is destroying crops and making some areas uninhabitable, these senators’ families will still be living very comfortably.

      • Jim@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        I see an obvious exploit with this: congress members enlisting family members who would rather vote ‘No’ just so they can get more votes for their own choice.

        You might think “nobody would enlist their child to fight a war that they’re against” but I promise you, there are people like that.

        • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          Some of em don’t care about their kids.

          As evidenced by their complete lack of concern regarding climate change.

      • bauhaus@lemmy.mlBanned
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        many have already gladly voted yes for both many times. I don’t think that will stop enough of them.

      • theneverfox@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        We basically had that a century ago, before the nobility moved behind the scenes and became the 1%

        Unqualified scions were sent to the battlefield to gain military merits, which was generally bad for everyone. I’m pretty sure it only really stopped after WWI, when the death toll from combat started getting ridiculous

      • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        Nah just ship the congressmen/women off with the infantry. Then they can see exactly what they’re voting for.

  • p1mrx@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    The Mexican government has also responded to these proposals with scalding outrage. As Zach Beauchamp points out at Vox, President Andrés Manuel López Obrador said at a press conference that “We won’t allow it. And not only are we not going to allow it, we’re denouncing it.” Even a single drone attack would seem highly likely to end up in a direct confrontation with the Mexican military.

    That’s the important part of the article. It may be worth discussing whether to use the US military against drug cartels, but doing it without the full consent of the Mexican government would be batshit crazy.

    • Neato@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      That’s how the US get Russia-levels of sanctions from every other nation. Russia would cream it’s pants if the US did something so boldly stupid.

    • arcrust@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      I’d still call bullshit. Done attacks will be useless. People desire drugs. They’ll find a way.

      The problem is supply and demand. If people want to use drugs, they’re going to either way. We need to make the drugs ourselves and create harm reduction centers. Attack the problem at home.

      For real, if I was buying FDA regulated MDMA at Walgreens, there would be a virtually 0 percent chance of me accidentally getting addicted to fentanyl.

  • RoundSparrow@lemmy.mlBanned
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    The real war is hate media memes and messages that trickle down to those obedient to voices from the clouds, electric voices these days. In the old days, books that said burning bushes gave out signals.

  • Lawliss
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    This cunt talks about Iraq like he did something there. He was a fucking lawyer 😂.

    • BarrelAgedBoredom@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Posing as a human rights lawyer and illegally aiding in the torture of POWs at Guantanamo is the best way of forming a valid opinion on Iraq!

      • AcidSmiley [she/her]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        Well, he did use his position to gain the trust of gunatanamo prisoners and when they told him what was particularly stressful to them, he passed that info on to make conditions worse for them. Like, a prisoner would tell him “we usually pick the vegetarian option because we think the meat here isn’t halal” and a week later, no more vegetarian food option. Things like that. There’s also a pretty harrowing account of how he oversaw hunger-striking prisoners being force-fed. People screaming and throwing up and shitting themselves in agony and he stood next to that and laughed. I honestly believe that if he didn’t join the navy to live out his murderous sadism, he’d be a serial killer with a collection of human body parts in his basement. Guy’s a complete fucking monster.