• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

Deleted member 8561

user requested account closure
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
11,284
The post is very educational but I can't help but feel extralegal international murders are... equivalent to an act of war. I just don't get the distinction here. If China started assassinating people in the US and we could trace the murders back to China, regardless of assassination methods, is it not warfare? Does a certain amount of people need to die before it "counts" as a war?

Because China doesn't need to kill people in the US?

Drones exist because of organized terrorist cells/groups operating in countries with either a government that is sympathetic and partly cooperative, a government that is unable to exert military force and influence on regions they no longer control, or countries that are effectively failed states.

Yemen has been a major operation center of Al-Qaeda, which culminated in the Yemen government declaring open war back in the late 2000's/early 2010's.

And obviously that's the entire "thing" with the War on Terror, the ability to argue that a country is able to ignore sovereignty of another nation that is harboring major terrorist organizations that are an active threat.

There are clear arguments and debates to be had, but when you're dealing with an organization that has taken enough territory from a state to where there is an open declaration of war, and that group has been organizing attacks and threats against you and allies the idea that using drones to target the terrorist organization is akin to declaring war on the host state kinda falls apart.

So to answer your question, unless America had a chunk of it's nation break off into an independent militant state that the Federal government is unable to control or exert force on, and that uncontrolled territory is suddenly coordinating attacks on Chinese bases, civilian populations and so forth, there wouldn't be any reason for China to start lobbing drones.
 

JealousKenny

Banned
Jul 17, 2018
1,231
....You do realize that people appear homeless because their body is unkempt....because they are homeless and are forced to live outside 24/7 without facilities to clean and care for themselves.

I didn't realize that wanting to look presentable in public was a controversial topic.

No I don't want to be out in public wearing old beat up shirts that may have baby food and spittle stains about them, or a beater that has been stretched out around the neck, wrinkled up basketball shorts, and discolored slides that have all the look of being 10 years old.

I don't care if it's just pumping gas, I was raised to always look presentable in pubic because you never know who you are going to see and as an African American male you need to carry yourself in a certain manner regardless. Hell, I met a woman who became a girlfriend and is now my best friend when I just left the house to get gas and a burger one day. That chance encounter would have turned out a lot different if her first impression of me included old beat up clothing.

It doesn't take long to put on a pair of jeans/shorts and a clean shirt.
 
Oct 28, 2017
5,210
I didn't realize that wanting to look presentable in public was a controversial topic.

No I don't want to be out in public wearing old beat up shirts that may have baby food and spittle stains about them, or a beater that has been stretched out around the neck, wrinkled up basketball shorts, and discolored slides that have all the look of being 10 years old.

I don't care if it's just pumping gas, I was raised to always look presentable in pubic because you never know who you are going to see and as an African American male you need to carry yourself in a certain manner regardless.

It doesn't take long to put on a pair of jeans/shorts and a clean shirt.
All I did was point out that flip flops, basketball shorts and a white t shirt doesn't make you "look homeless".

Worry about how well you're dressed while you pump gas as much as you want.
 

JealousKenny

Banned
Jul 17, 2018
1,231
All I did was point out that flip flops, basketball shorts and a white t shirt doesn't make you "look homeless".

Worry about how well you're dressed while you pump gas as much as you want.

I've seen homeless people dressed better than how I dress about the house some days. Your characterization of a homeless person as someone who lives under a bridge 365 days is woefully misguided.
 
Oct 28, 2017
5,210
I've seen homeless people dressed better than how I dress about the house some days. Your characterization of a homeless person as someone who lives under a bridge 365 days is woefully misguided.
Never said they're living under a bridge. Even if they're living in a car, it's going to be tough to avoid being unkempt.

But sure, keep going with the idea that flip flops, basketball shorts and a white t-shirt = looking homeless if you want.
 

JealousKenny

Banned
Jul 17, 2018
1,231
Never said they're living under a bridge. Even if they're living in a car, it's going to be tough to avoid being unkempt.

But sure, keep going with the idea that flip flops, basketball shorts and a white t-shirt = looking homeless if you want.

Lol having an untidy appearance is literally the definition of unkempt. Tattered, worn, discolored, dirty clothing is untidy.
 

Mr. Pointy

Member
Oct 28, 2017
5,141
That's a goddamn Nikita Missile. Kojima was ahead of the game again!

But this shit is getting ridiculous. 21st century warfare is going to move into some frightening areas that science fiction can only dream of.
The Nikita missile is wire-guided which is WWII technology. A drone with an AT missile is way more advanced, since the operator can choose where they want to launch the missile from.
 

Jexhius

Community Resetter
Member
Oct 25, 2017
968
The Saudi's had it coming for everything they've done to Yemen. Hilarious to see them brought low (and not for the first time) by the Houthi forces who are so much weaker (on paper) than the Saudi's.

It's worth noting that drones are incredibly cheap compared to conventional weaponry, thus allowing far weaker and poorer groups to trade blows with large nation states. This has been the case for a while now, but this example demonstrates the unprecedented change warfare is undergoing. Saudi Arabia is particularly vulnerable because it's packed to the brim with incredibly soft targets like oil refineries and water desalination plants.
 

Muad'dib

Banned
Jun 7, 2018
1,253
Good shit, keep the pain coming Haj Qassem, tho no amount of damage against Aramco compensates for the amount of blood the Saudi royals have spilled.
 

vastag

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,244
People were always laughing at what Iran could do in a conflict with the US.

There isn't even a formal war and a bunch of Iran backed rebels with drones just knocked out half of Saudi Arabias oil production. Iran is very capable of launching a massive asymmetric war on it's enemies with it's backed rebels, sleeper cells and general major disruption of the entire region.

I have not read anything about the models used, but keep in mind that they probably were iranian loitering munitions, like those used in other attacks. They are not a couple of cheap drones with strapped grenades. Although to be fair they are neither super high-tech UAVs.
 

Shopolic

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
6,935
Just imagine a world that terrorists can use a group of hundreds of tiny drones to bomb cities... It's more scary than big missiles in my opinion.
 
Oct 27, 2017
39,148
giphy.gif
 

Muad'dib

Banned
Jun 7, 2018
1,253
People arguing about what to wear to get gas lol, I go in my boxers and flip flops to a bakery filled with suits to get breakfast at 7 AM.
 
Oct 26, 2017
8,686
Saudi Arabia invaded Yemen and basically created a humanitarian disaster with the help of US long range fueling support.

The group that the Saudis were fighting weren't really connected to Iran... that is until they decided to start bombing the ever living shit out of every population zone.

Iran sends funding, arms and such to the rebels Saudi Arabia are fighting and you now have two regional powers duking it out, with Saudi Arabias fears coming true from their own stupidity of creating an Iranian proxy state on their doorstep.

So, Iran is doing what any nation would do against an enemy. They saw a great opening to exert influence right on the doorstep on Saudi Arabia and have made a geopolitical nightmare situation for Saudi Arabia.



That's a very simplistic view on a situation Saudi Arabia created
Thank you for the detailed reply!
 

Heshinsi

Member
Oct 25, 2017
16,108
I'm not really sure how to feel about this. It feels weird cheering for a war but lmao fuck SA.

Rule of thumb, the guys in the process of turning a whole country into a parking lot can always go to hell. Besides their genocidal fuckery, the fact that they are also responsible for what the UN and others are calling the worst humanitarian crises on the planet, makes Saudi Arabia one of the most vile states on earth.

Saudi Arabia is out here killing Muslims at a scale not seen since the second Chechen War, and most of the rest of the Muslim world are just like, "you do you boss."
 
Aug 16, 2019
844
UK
Maybe this war will finally receive worldwide extensive coverage?

I don't think Saudis and USa can cover it for longer after the prices spikes people are finally going to talk about it.
 

Magni

Member
you're saying trump won't go to war with iran because he's anti-interventionist, which is clearly wrong just going by the number of american military strikes going up drastically since obama left office. it doesn't matter to the dead whether the bomb that hit them came from a conventional bomber or a drone piloted by some asshole outside las vegas, and that distinction wouldn't keep iran from blowing up half the arabian peninsula with ballistic missiles if we started droning them.

You're missing the point. It's not whether Trump is anti-interventionist or not—it's whether his base thinks he is or not. And drone strikes are a lot easier to slip by the masses than a full-blown war.

We're not talking about whether it makes a difference to the victims, we're talking about the know-nothings back home.
 

Deleted member 15440

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
4,191
You're missing the point. It's not whether Trump is anti-interventionist or not—it's whether his base thinks he is or not. And drone strikes are a lot easier to slip by the masses than a full-blown war.

We're not talking about whether it makes a difference to the victims, we're talking about the know-nothings back home.
1. discussion of iran, possible US military action against them
2. claim that trump won't attack iran because he is anti-interventionist
3. refutation of this claim on the basis that he's drastically increased drone strikes
4. claim that drone strikes don't count because reasons

drone striking iran would immediately lead to full blown war because iran would see it as military action. the only reason we haven't been counter attacked by any of the countries we drone is because we only drone nations that are fully under our thumb.

trump is not anti-interventionist full stop. the only hope we have when it comes to further imperialist military adventures is that he's too lazy and stupid to want to commit to something of that scale. the "know-nothings" do not enter into this equation at all.
 

DrewFu

Attempted to circumvent ban with an alt-account
Banned
Apr 19, 2018
10,360
I have to laugh a bit when people are freaking out over maybe a temporary 20-30 cents a gallon extra, when most of the country is sitting at like $2.30 a gallon. Even with a noticeable bump, most of yall will still be $1/gal less than we're paying in CA. lol
 

Veliladon

Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,561
You're missing the point. It's not whether Trump is anti-interventionist or not—it's whether his base thinks he is or not. And drone strikes are a lot easier to slip by the masses than a full-blown war.

We're not talking about whether it makes a difference to the victims, we're talking about the know-nothings back home.
Trump's base follows Dear Leader's calls. If Trump came out for war with Iran, Fox would be crying for Ayatollah blood within 5 minutes and so would the base.
 

Duxxy3

Member
Oct 27, 2017
21,920
USA
95890dc5a02fa973db4e7919cb047431.gif


US/Saudi = shirtless guy
Yemen = sneaky slapper
Iran = guy on the floor

That's what it seems like we're leading up to.
 

Magni

Member
1. discussion of iran, possible US military action against them
2. claim that trump won't attack iran because he is anti-interventionist
3. refutation of this claim on the basis that he's drastically increased drone strikes
4. claim that drone strikes don't count because reasons

drone striking iran would immediately lead to full blown war because iran would see it as military action. the only reason we haven't been counter attacked by any of the countries we drone is because we only drone nations that are fully under our thumb.

trump is not anti-interventionist full stop. the only hope we have when it comes to further imperialist military adventures is that he's too lazy and stupid to want to commit to something of that scale. the "know-nothings" do not enter into this equation at all.

Don't put words in my mouth. I agree with you that Trump is not non-interventionist. I don't think he'll do a drone strike against Iran because that would lead to war and would ruin his non-interventionist image—which he does have with his base (unfortunately, you might have noticed we're in the post-truth era). I don't count on him to reach that confusion by itself, but I expect that a good chunk of the brass is against it and will nudge him in that direction. Bolton being gone helps immensely.


Trump's base follows Dear Leader's calls. If Trump came out for war with Iran, Fox would be crying for Ayatollah blood within 5 minutes and so would the base.

I'm sure some will, but not all. He's already underwater, losing even 10% of his base drowns him.
 

Squarehard

Member
Oct 27, 2017
26,085
I have to laugh a bit when people are freaking out over maybe a temporary 20-30 cents a gallon extra, when most of the country is sitting at like $2.30 a gallon. Even with a noticeable bump, most of yall will still be $1/gal less than we're paying in CA. lol
Yeah, we haven't hit $2.30 a gallon here for like 13 years, lol.
 

Kin5290

Member
Oct 26, 2017
3,390
Saudis and UAE Royals are sponsors of terrorism.

Hopefully both regimes will be replaced someday soon by elected Presidents
Everybody in the region is a sponsor of terrorism, because in this context "terrorists means "militia who happens to be Muslim and not care about civilian casualties" and these Islamist militias are useful proxy actors in the various wars and insurgencies in the region. Iran supports Shia terrorist groups, Pakistan harbors the Taliban, a suspiciously high number of wealthy Saudis funnel cash to Al Qaeda. But excusing Iran's sponsoring of terrorism because of some black vs white bullshit does no one any good.
 

lazygecko

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,628
Somehow I'm feeling doubtful it's that easy to sabotage such a huge chunk of oil production using only drones unless there was some serious negligence in defense and security.