Iain Hall's SANDPIT

Home » World Events » Afghanistan » Waleed Aly and The Game of Drones

Waleed Aly and The Game of Drones

Like a lot of minions of the left Waleed Aly has a rather warped view of the morality of war and he is very clearly bemoaning the fact that in the age of the drone the Jihadists really have no where to hide. The sadly amusing part of his argument against drones is that that he whines about the prospect of non combatants being killed when Jihadists are taken out yet he does not say a single word about just why the strikes are both necessary and justified.  Like a lot of people who follow the religion of peace he seems incapable of enunciating any sort of criticism of the Jihadists and their “struggle” with modern secular society.  Without their ever present ideology of death to unbelievers and the establishment of a global caliphate not a single helfire missile would need to be fired from a drone.

Then in his conclusion Waleed gives us the “lack of honour ” argument about the use of drones:

click for source

click for source

Pardon me Waleed but your argument begs the question of the morality of the deliberate  targeting of civilians by the Jihadists that you are implicitly defending here.  They have killed many thousands of civilians in the name of your Prophet and your God  and yet you whine a bout the possibility of a “non combatant” being killed while in the company of a Jihadist? Call me mad if you like but when it comes to the relative virtue of each side in the war against the Jihadists the Americans come out orders of magnitude better. None the less war in all of its guises is a dirty and bloody business where nothing matters if you don’t win.  Its not a game where each side will  respect a set of rules invented by the arm chair moralists its always about that final move that will make your side prevail.

Waleed has obviously been reading too much King Arthur and not enough Game of Thrones if he thinks that you can defeat a dishonourable enemy like the Jihadists by treating war against them like a sporting competition. The currency of the Jihadists is that anything goes against the unbelievers and before the development of the killer drone the only way to destroy them required  many boots on foreign soil, now it doesn’t and I for one fully endorse the use of technology  that makes every big league Jihadist tremble with fear every time he steps out into the open, or drives from one spider hole to the next, The Jihadists started the “war on terror” so its only justice that now they should live in the terror of the unannounced death from above.

Cheers Comrades

sadly too true

Waleed needs to look at the Jihadists before he condemns the use of drones


  1. Tel says:

    The feudal lords discovered that the power of mounted knights could be blunted by placing caltrops to lame the horses, and offering yeomen small plots of private land to give them incentive to fight hard and defend their land, and further encouraging the use of cheap bill hooks and pole arms to drag the down heavily protected knights, then finishing the job with a “misery chord” which was a long steel spike with a blade on the tip, either driven into the eye of the prone knight, or into the arm pit, or the groin area to open a major artery. Massed archers assisted this effort. Imagine nobility coming to grief in such ignoble ways at the hands of what were essentially peasants.

    At the time, it was disguising, unchivalrous, and generally despicable, but it worked.

    Various rebel groups have discovered the power of explosives, stealth and the element of surprise. Not just Islamists by the way, it was pioneered by Irish Catholics fed up with English oppression and Basque separatists wanting to annoy their Spanish overlords. Of course the innocent die in such explosions, but the method is cheap and hard to fight back against. The Islamists went one better with their suicide bombers, and I’ll grant you that it must take conviction to blow yourself up for your cause… the jury is out on whether that really is effective, I guess it depends on how many kids you can produce. War is the terrorism of the rich and powerful, terrorism is the war of the weak and powerless.

    As ever, the use of explosives in warfare and the inevitable collateral damage is deplorable, but let’s face it, everyone does it now and then. The allies bombed dams in Germany, and ended up victorious.

    So now we have drone bombers, even cheaper, easier and more effective… and all the civilized folk tell you how terrible it is, while enjoying their civilized comforts. Waleed Aly says, “War is a kind of contract.” and that’s the most stupid and backwards thing I’ve heard in a long while. War it the absence of a contract, the opposite of a contract. War is what you do when you failed to reach an agreement. Contracts are what you have to avoid going to war. Man there’s a lot of bozos out there.

    I’m anti-war and also a pragmatist, and that’s difficult sometimes because the only way to avoid a war is to convince BOTH sides that it isn’t in their interests. I think it was a mistake for the West to go into Iraq, but having said that, no one is investigating Cheaney for his no-bid Haliburton contracts, and no one is investigating Tony Blair for his “dossier” bullshit, and no one ever seriously got to the bottom of who thought torture would be a good idea. Easy to see that in hindsight, but anyway we protect the guilty because we are powerless to do otherwise.

    Middle Eastern Imams are similarly untouchable in their own countries. The average Syrian probably has no reason to be at war but no one cares what he or she thinks. Herman Goering was right, you can start a war in any country, under any political system, just convince people they are under threat. Goering paid a personal price for his actions, but historically that’s unusual. Most of the war mongers get away with it. Maybe technology will change that, but I doubt it.

  2. GD says:

    Tel that’s an excellent retort to Waleed Aly’s pathetic attempt to redefine the history of war.

    Iain well said, I agree totally. Waleed is the MSM’s ‘go to muslim guy”.

    He gets fawning attention whenever he appears on ‘The Project’ or any number of ABC programs. He’s the Islamic lapdog of the left, reassuring everyone that there isn’t any real threat from Islam.

    His recent articles have included one about the Boston bombers. According to Waleed, we (western society) have now ‘finally matured’ and realised that terrorism is a ‘perpetual irritant’.

    Well thanks for that Waleed. We look forward to the next Islamic terrorist suicide bombing to test our maturity.

    This wacko is being paid by ‘our’ ABC to present these pro-Islamic views.

    Actually the ABC isn’t paying him, we are.

Comments are closed.

Welcome to the Sandpit

I love a good argument so please leave a comment

Please support the Sandpit

Please support the Sandpit

Do you feel lucky?

Do you feel lucky?

%d bloggers like this: