Comments by "Thor Jørgensen" (@Thor.Jorgensen) on "VICE on HBO Debrief: Children of the Drones" video.

  1. No matter what.. As a soldier you risk ending up suffering from PTSD, no matter if you are on the field or in an office, If you see it happen, it is going to effect you. At least drones are a better alternative than napalm and cluster bombs.
    4
  2. Corin Ranson The camera allows you to see exactly where the shot is going to land. Compared to bombers, where you just pass over the target, drop a load and hear it blow up as you fly away, not knowing what exactly you hit.. You could have hit the neighboring building, filled with innocent people, in which you will have to make another bombing run, to get your desired target.
    3
  3. Corin Ranson You should be more worried about: Heat rounds, white phosphorous, depleted uranium, cluster bombs etc. Drones are absolutely humane in comparison to those.
    2
  4. ***** Warfare is still warfare, no matter if you're sitting miles away or hiding behind a wall or in a tank. You seem more concerned about the unfair disadvantage.
    2
  5. ***** Welcome to the real world.. It isn't easy to keep an near invisible enemy from spreading the word everywhere. It was possible and Taliban & Al-Qaeda even thrived before western forces entered the middle east with military forces. What would your solution be?
    2
  6. ***** So we should instead send people, boots on the ground where their lives are in danger to tell them "HEY. WE'RE LIKE YOU NOW" as the death toll rise while those who are on the ground are a lot slower at finding the enemy, are at much greater risk and are a lot more trigger happy, exactly because their life is at risk. Is it worth it?
    2
  7. Justin ball Again.. What do we do? Go home so Taliban and Al-Qaeda can grow, tyrannize and abuse. For then later to spread to other neighboring countries. I ask for again for the alternative better solution.
    1
  8. Justin ball So, being a pacifist is your solution?  Let me remind you of America during WW2.. What happened then?
    1
  9. Justin ball I'm sorry simpleton, it seems you got your hands in a matter far too complicated for you. You didn't do it to scare the Russians, mastermind. You did it to save American soldiers lives and make the Japanese surrender. Instead of having to send more soldiers and waste money and lives. BUT this wasn't at all what I was getting at. This was just to correct you. During world war 2, Nazi Germany occupied nearly all of Europe, and when Britain and France called America for help; America did NOTHING.. They held a vote if they should go and help Britain and France, but the majority voted no. It was only AFTER America had been attacked themselves directly by Japan that America got off their butts and went to war.
    1
  10. Justin ball So you're saying you killed a bunch of innocent people all because you wanted to show off to Russia, not because it would help end a war. You're making your own country sound like the Soviet Union under Stalin.
    1
  11. ***** You might wanna take a look at when the cold war started though.
    1
  12. ***** You might wanna read some more history. The Soviets were losing territory up until America joined the war, since then Germany had to fight on two sides, starting with submarines and an attempt to push hard into Great Britain, which failed. Then the winter came and the side effects of blitzkrieg, having only summer uniforms, barely any rations and ammunition. By then Germany had reached Stalingrad and previously declared war with America for declaring war on their ally, Japan.
    1
  13. ***** I'm sorry to inform you that America did not supply Russia in the fight against Germany. They only supplied Russia on the far eastern front against Japan. Russians were lucky that Blitzkrieg has a gruesome side effect, which is the lack of supplies. Tanks and trucks can't drive without fuel. It did however help greatly when fighting on two fronts, as Germany couldn't organize their supplies properly as it would be in risk of being lost after losing ground.
    1
  14. ***** It was up for voting to enter world war 2 together with Russia, Britain and France, but the great majority did not want to join. I think only 28% of the voters (or less) were anti-isolationist aka interventionist. But after 1941 (and pearl harbor) the votes turned exactly the other way with 70% for. The majority of resources sent to Russia by UK, resources sent to UK by America, and resources sent to Russia by America was sunk by German and Japanese naval vessels. Japan even sunk an American trading vessel in Indonesia which killed hundreds of the american crewmen before the war, but America did not want war and decided to ignored it. Submarines in the Atlantic ocean was a big deal. No resources could go anywhere, and Germany had a lot of them.
    1
  15. GuardianAsim So it's better to be stupid? Oh alright.. Stop using guns in combat. Use your fists, because guns are totally cowardly.
    1
  16. GuardianAsim In the old days, sitting 200 meters away (or more) to fire a gun that can take out a person in one shot was cowardly. Before that, crossbows, bows, slings and rock throwing.
    1