Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking. Login or Take a Tour!
The article's juxtaposition of the Talibikers and the drone strikes culminates in the question 'why aren't bikers being targeted?' However we see once again in the news these kind of questions and claims made without data. How many biker attacks are there? How often do they happen? How many are actually spotted by drones? Of those spotted, how many fit the picture of "one or two hundred dirtbikes speeding across the desert toward a truck on an Afghan highway"? None of the incidents cited in the article on Talibike attacks involve anywhere near this number of bikes at once... so is the article suggesting we should drone strike anyone riding a motorcycle in the desert? Isn't there a problem with that?
The other idea is that drone strikes are based on fuzzy images and are largely indiscriminate. How does that compare with other military strikes? Okay, someone killed a man because he was tall... does that kind of decision making not happen with soldiers on the ground? There is indeed cause to be careful with such technology, it is easy to see how it could more easily misused than soldiers on the ground. It is also to see how enemy combatants would hate this technology and cry 'no fair!', but reports need to be based on data not speculation posited as fact.