These terrorists surround themselves with civilians as human shields. So, no matter what method you choose to attack them with, there will be unwanted casualties.

I'm not getting this aversion to using drones, the reasons for not using them don't hold water I'm afraid. The same technology is used in drones as would be used on a manned flight. Are you saying we should forgo any form of missile attack and engage them in hand to hand combat? If so I would have to laugh I'm afraid.

The Method of Sniper
means you kill the terrorist
and they can be a near a mile away.

So you are not correct
about "no matter what method"

'collateral damage' that's all civilians there are? we call the murder of innocents here terrorism.

I thought we were talking about agreeing or not agreeing on using drone attacks from the UK?

I said, 'If we' kill 10 out of the 24 terrorists we were targeting, along with 500 innocents; that, in my eyes isn't a successful mission." and you want evidence of that 'if'?

I don't understand your question or are you just trying to be pedantic?

That would require us having to put our forces on the ground. Thats certainly not going to happen any time soon, and it would also result in us taking many more casualties. Something else that is not going to happen.

If we want to combat the isis threat any time soon, the most effective method is drone attack

i was agreeing with livia

jesus this forum is so pathetic these days

There aren't any resident experts on anything, all anyone has is what's reported.

Never Mind

Its great you post

Yes

Sounds about right.