If spam can be "easily remedied with technology" then why hasn't it been eradicated already?
Because there still are quite a lot of people out there using less-than-well protected E-Mail services/software?
When you're playing competitively, the moment you have a significant skill imbalance the fun disappears.
Not necessarily. In fact, in many online games, I quite enjoy playing against "the pros" every once in a while. Sure, I may get blown to pieces, but by carefully watching how my enemy manages to outskill me, I learn, and that's easily one of the most important aspects of competitive gaming.
In any case, both cities are off limits to non-Muslims, so it's not like any innocent people would be killed.
I'm not exactly someone with a positive conception of Islam, but to say all Muslims are guilty of the acts committed by a few is as much as a fallacy as calling all Christians responsible for the acts of the Branch Davidians, the Lord's Resistance Army or various Irish terrorist groups.
A better solution, given that they did have ground assets in the area at the time (as evidenced by the arrival of a group of IFVs shortly after the engagement) would have been to let the ground forces intercept the van. They have the option of stopping it without killing the people inside.
Remember though, this incident occurred 3 years ago - back then, intercepting the van might not have been possible without seriously endangering the lives of allied troops or civilian. I generally agree with you, but if trying to deal with it peacefully places more lives at risk than those of the presumed insurgents, finishing the job might be a better idea.
And remote drone stuff is basically video games turned real - you are not in the shit so it doesn't affect you *nearly* as much.
On the other hand, UAVs also have their benefits. You know you won't die if your drone gets shot down, so you can take a risk and identify your targets instead of engaging everything that looks hostile just to make sure they won't engage you first.
And there was no excuse for blowing away the minivan trying to carry off the wounded survivor.
Yes, there was. "Better safe than sorry" - once recovered, the guy would likely have been fighting US troops once again. This isn't a regular war where professional soldiers are fighting each other; this is a group of terrorists and insurgents targeting lawful combatants as well as civilians with everything they've got, at every opportunity.
There are also maximum calibers on guns allowed to fire on human targets, above which the gun is classified supposed to be fired at vehicles and equipment.
The controversy over certain types of anti-materiel rounds occurs due to the fact that some of them contain explosive and incendiary components, which are outlawed under the St. Petersburg Declaration (which deals with explosive and incendiary ammunition - and which the US did not sign). It's perfectly legit to fire ammunition of any size at human targets.
A verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's written on. -- Samuel Goldwyn