Link to Original Source
Link to Original Source
I am a fan of Wyden, and voted for him, but this subject is nonsense. A bunch of ignorant plebes are getting all worked up about drones, but if you say all thr same things in the context of an F-18 doing it they have no problems.
"that no American should be killed by a drone on American soil without first being charged with a crime, without first being found to be guilty by a court." How is that different then: that no American should be killed by a police officer on American soil without first being charged with a crime, without first being found to be guilty by a court.
also: Paul also said that he was “alarmed” at the lack of definition over who can be targeted by drone strikes. why not: Paul also said that he was “alarmed” at the lack of definition over who can be targeted by Navy Ship strikes.
“Are you going to drop a Hellfire missile on Jane Fonda?” Paul asked. “Are you going to drop a bunkerbuster bomb on Jane Fonda?” Paul asked.
seriously? It's stupid.
This is about tax votes, avoiding responsibility for they sequestration, and not wanting Brennan. This has nothing to do with the military attack american on american soil.
But when police shoot people on American soil, they have to claim self-defense since they are not executioners. Armed drones ARE executioners and thus should not be used on American soil. Or am I missing something? Why in the world would we ever want to do this or not be willing to give a simple "no" answer to the question of whether we will?
I think a practical goal would be to find ways for the US government to shift its military-industrial-complex spending away from weapons and war machines and encourage those companies to develop and sell peacetime technologies that will allow them to keep their technological edge. For example, instead of making fighter planes Lockheed could make rockets and space shuttles. Kind of the opposite of car companies being re-purposed to build tanks in WW2.
I just think that the military industrial complex has too much lobbying power to let itself get cut off from government funding. Some might also argue that we need to maintain the capacity to build weapons in case we ever need them in the future. I think it would be great if we could fund companies that take the sharpest minds and put them to work solving challenging problems for the benefit of mankind. And if war does break out we can take the minds off those problems and put them back to work figuring out the highest-tech way to blow people up.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from noise. I remembered hearing this in school so I searched and found this paper.
As I understand SETI has always been searching for narrowband signals in the past. But our technology is moving toward spread spectrum signals for more efficient use of bandwidth, making our transmissions appear more like noise to anyone who doesn't know the encoding scheme. Aliens could be doing/have done the same. So good luck, scientists!