CIA drone program using REALLY loose targeting guidelines

[Shroom Man 777]

Oh yea of little faith. Where they failed, America will win.

America always wins.

[Sephirius]

I can't fault the CIA's logic on this one actually. It definitely makes sense given the situation, and the realpolitik environment they operate in.

[Count Chocula]

Anyway, in regards to jesters post and the guiding theory of the CIA's operations, it seems to me that the CIA isnt really autonomous in this regard, they merely are the ones with jurisdiction over drones operating over foreign soil. It would be interesting to know what the stance of the Military is to the whole thing, and if the military has been offered drone control before, but turned it down, or more likely, if it was merely a jurisdictional division.

IIRC, the US Military was resisting armed drones because that would threaten the "pilot culture," but they have relented and are using armed drones over Afghanistan and Iraq...but only to support armed forces in war zones. The CIA gets the Predators for dirty tricks and political operations. A USAF drone striking in Pakistan may be beyond the armed forces' mandate, but right up the CIA's alley. Too bad the CIA has inadequate HUMINT and is busily creating more AQ with every strike that kills noncombatants.

[Stark]

I can't fault the CIA's logic on this one actually. It definitely makes sense given the situation, and the realpolitik environment they operate in.

Do you understand what 'realpolitik' even means? PS, it doesn't mean 'create way more future problems than necessary to solve current problems'. It doesn't mean 'do what you want regardless of how much it will fuck you up', it means 'do what's best for you'. Assuming America is after security (not not making tiny-dicked internet commentators feel macho), this doesn't seem very 'realpolitik' at all.

[Todeswind]

I can't fault the CIA's logic on this one actually. It definitely makes sense given the situation, and the realpolitik environment they operate in.

Do you understand what 'realpolitik' even means? PS, it doesn't mean 'create way more future problems than necessary to solve current problems'. It doesn't mean 'do what you want regardless of how much it will fuck you up', it means 'do what's best for you'. Assuming America is after security (not not making tiny-dicked internet commentators feel macho), this doesn't seem very 'realpolitik' at all.

It does if you assume that the CIA would be working to its own benefit rather than to the greater benefit of America as a whole. The realpolitik of the CIA and the realpolitik of the USA aren't necessarily the same.

[Thanas]

Ah, you are one of the idiots stark was talking about, those guys who think that realpolitik means "If I have a possible gain, I should not hesitate to screw others over for it".