• Magnum, P.I.@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 days ago

    How is that better. You do realize this is very sophisticated bombing. Would you rather have a guy run into your house or the house of your family or some super sonic mach 3 drone? What kind of contest is that anyway.

    • Kairos@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      I’d rather have neither. I’m just saying some isolated metric doesn’t give the full picture.

      • Magnum, P.I.@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        That’s one isolated metric. This is probably better than sending an army.

        Sounds like you were saying getting drone striked is probably better, but English is not my native language so you are probably right

        • phutatorius@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          You’ll end up pink mist either way, but a drone strike can be targeted more precisely, so it’s likely to cause far fewer innocent casualties.

          • Magnum, P.I.@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 day ago

            A drone strike more precisely targeted than a guy going in? OK interesting. Probably the reason civilian casualties are so low

        • Kairos@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          If I had a gun to my head and was forced to choose whether a ground/army invasion is better than the drone strike, I would choose the latter.

          However, I’d prefer neither happen.