Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The title framing is weird when the report says maybe 5% of the 1250 were civilians, and the same rights group also reports more than 1500 civilians [0] killed over the same period in the horrific and rampant gang violence the government is using this technology to fight against.

[0] https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2026/country-chapters/haiti

 help



Since when are drone strikes the legal way to handle criminals. I remember something with trials before you can kill people.

That's a luxury you get when your society has reached a certain level of stability.

Everything is that way.

Another example: Feminism? Only happened with women in the workforce. Women in the workforce? Only when the Industrial Revolution happened and the economy could support the roles. Industrial Revolution? Only happened when farming and trading got good enough that 90% of the population didn’t need to be farmers first. Very few moral enlightenments have ever actually happened absent economic preconditions, or would not be reversed if the conditions degraded.


People's rights are not luxuries, but the purpose of government: "... to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men ...".

They are a necessity to achieve freedom and stability.


[flagged]


No, not dozens of Innocents. About 1500, which is a lot more.

You should read the comment that you replied to again. You're railing against a fact, not an opinion.


People don't think anymore, they just react... Im pretty sure Im done engaging on this platform for that reason. Nearly every comment is met by some crass remark that clearly demonstrates the person didn't actually understand the comment, just reacted to the trigger words within it.

This is best exemplified by all the comments (on varying posts) saying: 'I misread the title, and interpreted as X, haha!'. HN has unfortunately slid in the direction of Reddit (despite the HN Guidelines' denial of this).

It always has been.

They mean the 5% of 1250 killed by drones

We know what he meant, and he's being obtuse. Thinks thousands of deaths due to rampant crime somehow aren't or shouldn't be part of the discussion when the collateral cost of law enforcement efforts are discussed. Very dumb.

This is apparently a RW projection zone. You won't get anywhere with these people.

Dozens of innocents (5% of 1250 = 63) killed "extrajudicially" (i.e., illegally) by the drones that are the subject of the article, and those deaths were dismissed by the rationalization in the comment they replied to.

If you can't handle additional context being brought to the conversation, maybe its best for you to duck out.

So much projection here from RWers, as usual. I will bow out of this, due to the massive levels of intellectual dishonesty and bad faith.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: