In the case of Al Qaeda, that might actually have been true? I don't think you can really compare Hamas to Al Qaeda; almost everything meaningful is different.
That doesn't mention Al Qaeda? It just talks about drone strikes against ISIS, which is yet again quite a different organisation than Al Qaeda and Hamas.
What is your point even? All I said is that you can't compare Al Qaeda and Hamas, and how they operate, and how to combat them. I never said that US drone strikes were/are 100% perfect, or even that I liked the entire programme.
My point is "if they're near a target they're a target" is an insane standard to use for these sorts of strikes, and the article this entire HN discussion is about makes it pretty clear such a standard is in use in Gaza right now.
> This was despite knowing that the system makes what are regarded as “errors” in approximately 10 percent of cases, and is known to occasionally mark individuals who have merely a loose connection to militant groups, or no connection at all.
> Moreover, the Israeli army systematically attacked the targeted individuals while they were in their homes — usually at night while their whole families were present — rather than during the course of military activity.
> “We were not interested in killing [Hamas] operatives only when they were in a military building or engaged in a military activity,” A., an intelligence officer, told +972 and Local Call. “On the contrary, the IDF bombed them in homes without hesitation, as a first option. It’s much easier to bomb a family’s home. The system is built to look for them in these situations.”
