DVH> BOB KLAHN wrote to DRACO VON HAGEN:   
      
    DVH>>> Lee Lofaso wrote to BOB KLAHN:   
      
    LL>>>> The use of armed drones inside this country should be very rare.   
    LL>>>> Only in cases of absolute national security.   
      
    DVH>>> Armed drones are patrolling the USA - Mexico border.   
    DVH>>> They're also deployed on the Canadian border.   
      
    BK>>  Do you have any evidence of that?   
      
    DVH> Texas: http://tinyurl.com/cf7ouk3   
      
    Ok, they are not armed drones. I doubted they were simply   
    because only the CIA and DOD have armed drones, and neither of   
    them can legally conduct actual operations inside the US, other   
    than the military to suppress an insurrection.   
      
    BK>>  I doubt they are patrolling the Canadian border, it's too porous   
    BK>> anyway to justify it.   
      
    DVH> Canada: http://tinyurl.com/7we8jhl   
      
    Again, not armed, though I am surprised they bother with any   
    drones due to the length of the border, how easy it is to cross,   
    and how few illegal crossings, comparatively. I suspect the   
    drones are more an ego thing for the border patrol people on the   
    Canadian side, as the cost of those drones, listed at $18 mill   
    each, is enough to run other systems a long time.   
      
    Actually, I have much the same objection to the Mexican border.   
    I don't believe they can't come up with a drone one hell of a   
    lot cheaper, and just as good. Hell, model airplane enthusiasts   
    could probably do it.   
      
    BK>> I doubt they are patrolling the Mexican border, simply because of   
    BK>>  politics.   
      
    DVH> Mexico: http://tinyurl.com/cf7ouk3   
      
    BK>>  Unarmed drones I can believe,   
      
    DVH> You contradict yourself...first you claim that drones   
    DVH> aren't patroling the borders, then you reverse that with   
    DVH> the above.   
      
    No, I didn't believe armed drones were patrolling. As in my next   
    line. I have no problem believing unarmed drones are patrolling,   
    though, again, on the Canadian border I wonder how useful they   
    are. OTOH, I am even more surprised now that I have read how   
    expensive they are.   
      
    BK>>  I doubt they are armed.   
      
    DVH> That they're unarmed or armed is not public information.   
    DVH> But you can doubt all you want.   
      
    The article you linked said they are not armed. Armed drones,   
    and they specified predators, are only used by the CIA and the   
    Military, and I recently read the CIA is turning theirs over to   
    the military.   
      
    BK>>>>> They do have justification for training.   
      
    LL>>>> Where will we drop the bombs?  We no longer use Hawai'i or Puerto   
    LL>>>> Rico as a testing site.  Too many natives objected.  And Alaska is   
    LL>>>> far too cold for any serious bombing.  Especially since those nasty   
    LL>>>> environmentalists would throw a fit.  Maybe the governor of Ohio   
    LL>>>> might lease out some land for that purpose.   
      
    DVH>>> The only place left to bomb is the state of   
    DVH>>> Louisiana...especially the Cajun infested swamp lands.   
      
    BK>>  Hmmm... let's contact somebody to suggest that. Wait a minute...   
    BK>>  how much Jazz will we lose that way? Lot's of Cajun Jazz I   
    BK>>  believe. Gotta conduct a study.   
      
    DVH> There's more to the picture than Cajun Jazz. Swamp land is   
    DVH> useless, unless you have a desire to hide from the   
    DVH> authorities...   
      
    Actually, that was humor. Though swamp land is a useful part of   
    the enviornment, but, more important, unexploded munitions can   
    lie around dangerous for decades. Bombs might not do long   
    lasting damage to the swamp, but some day there may be a use for   
    that swamp, like oil found beneath it, or almost anything. Which   
    leave people watching for unexploded munitions decades from now.   
      
    BF>>>>> However, I would add, if I was flying an armed drone, and   
    BF>>>>> spotted you sitting on a hill above a town, with a machine gun,   
    BF>>>>> firing at the people in the town, I would fire the missile at   
    BF>>>>> you.   
      
    DVH>>> He would then be in violation of Section 18 US Code and   
    DVH>>> would receive a sentence of death for the above action.   
      
    BK>>  The machine gunner? The drone is the death sentence.   
      
    DVH> Well, let's look at it from a military point of view. Did   
    DVH> the machine gunner have permission from on-high or did he   
    DVH> take it upon himself to shoot? I suspect that the latter   
    DVH> is true, since there is no standing order to shoot first   
    DVH> and ask questions later.   
      
    That is the point. Nor is there any "on high" that can issue   
    permission to shoot. I don't expect there is a town where the   
    whole town is made up of criminals who are committing acts   
    justifying lethal force in response.   
      
    LL>>>> It depends on what people.  If the people he was firing at were   
    LL>>>> al-Qaeda terrorists, it might be best to wipe out the town rather   
    LL>>>> than the person taking potshots at them with a rifle.   
      
    DVH>>> How do you know who is who? And where did the rifle enter   
    DVH>>> the picture?   
      
    BK>>  Exactly.   
      
    BK>>  BTW, Is Draco Von Hagen your name? Unusual for the US.   
      
    DVH> Do I  have to be a USAian to post here?   
      
    No, in fact, those who are outside the US are welcome for their   
    outside the US point of view. It's nice to get a variety of   
    views.   
      
      
      
   BOB KLAHN bob.klahn@sev.org   http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn   
      
   ... First man invented the wheel...Immediately after that he invented road kill   
   --- Via Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]   
    * Origin: Fidonet Since 1991 Join Us: www.DocsPlace.org (1:123/140)