
Obama administration releases redacted version of drone policy - ourmandave
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/obama-administration-releases-redacted-version-of-drone-policy/ar-BBvkA2U
======
finid
When countries we don't like begin to carry out their own drone strikes,
expect to hear something like, "Civilized nations don't carry out justice like
that in the 21st century. This has to stop now."

~~~
dogma1138
What countries other than the US operate armed drones?

~~~
Artlav
Russia kinda does. However, they are more like cruise missiles.

~~~
dogma1138
Russia has loitering munitions, you can technically classify them as "drones"
but they aren't really the same thing, mostly since if those are drones then
any modern missile today is also a drone. China can has drones that can
potentially be armed, but China hasn't really engaged anyone kinda well ever.
Israel has operated drones for longer than the US has, and it's bigger drones
like the Hermes 900 and the Heron TP (and probably some of the smaller ones)
can be potentially be armed with munitions considerably bigger than the
Hellfire missile, but there has never been a single confirmation of this, the
IAF seems to be against it and the current legal framework in Israel doesn't
allow for armed drones to operate within Israel or the "territories", and they
are not allowed to be used for targeted assassinations either.

~~~
spltt342e23
> but China hasn't really engaged anyone kinda well ever

Yes, they have. Zhenbao Island, Korea, Sino-Indian War, Paracel Islands, Sino-
Vietnamese War, and more

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_Peo...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China)

~~~
finid
I think he was referring to engaging with armed drones.

------
justifier
this resource is the best i have seen on the actions relating to drones:

[https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/category/projects/dron...](https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/category/projects/drones/)

the site can be difficult to navigate, so here are some quick links the
cleanest lists:

pakistan:

[https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2016/01/11/obama-2016-...](https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2016/01/11/obama-2016-pakistan-
drone-strikes/)

yemen:

[https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2016/01/18/yemen-
repor...](https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2016/01/18/yemen-reported-us-
covert-actions-2016/)

somalia:

[https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2016/01/07/get-the-
dat...](https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2016/01/07/get-the-data-a-list-
of-us-air-and-drone-strikes-afghanistan-2016/)

afghanistan:

[https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2016/01/07/get-the-
dat...](https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2016/01/07/get-the-data-a-list-
of-us-air-and-drone-strikes-afghanistan-2016/)

and they also have the information in accessible datasets, here is pakistan's:

[https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1NAfjFonM-
Tn7fziqiv33...](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1NAfjFonM-
Tn7fziqiv33HlGt09wgLZDSCP-BQaux51w/edit?pref=2&pli=1#gid=1000652376)

------
sna1l
With all that is going on with the DNC and election, Obama has gotten a lot of
great press recently; his approval numbers are sky high.

I'm not saying that I don't think Obama is a good president, but people seem
to forget two big chunks of his lasting legacy -- drones and surveillance.

~~~
danieltillett
It is not hard too look like a giant when surrounded by midgets. I think the
American people are looking at what they have a choice of next and wishing
that the 22nd amendment had never been passed [1].

1\. [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-
second_Amendment_to_t...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-
second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution)

~~~
toolz
The American people have some decent choices. They just refuse to look past
the big two parties.

~~~
danieltillett
Well with the current voting system it is hard to make a change. A vote for
for one of the non-big two is unfortunately equivalent to not voting at all.

~~~
mikestew
_A vote for for one of the non-big two is unfortunately equivalent to not
voting at all._

That's not true at all. Want your non-Big-Two party at the presidential
debates? Vote, because last I looked the invites are sent based on how much of
the popular vote the party got _last_ time (15%, I think?). Maybe I'm wrong on
that, or the rules changed, but it still matters. You tell your neighbor
you're voting Libertarian and suddenly the Libs look like normal folk, not a
bunch of pot heads who don't like to pay taxes. You think pols didn't pay
attention when Perot garnered 19% even after he went all tin-foil hat and
withdrew from the race at one point?

No matter who you vote for, your vote makes a difference. It just probably
doesn't make as much difference as you'd like it to.

~~~
maxerickson
Debate participation is based on the national polls.

Federal election funds are scaled to the results of previous elections.

[http://www.fec.gov/pages/brochures/pubfund.shtml#General](http://www.fec.gov/pages/brochures/pubfund.shtml#General)

