Read on Twitter
🧵I came across an article today in The Washington Post that discusses the counter-offensive. I usually refrain from criticizing leaks, recognizing the importance of journalistic work. Nevertheless, in light of the statement in the article, I want to provide some counterpoints: 
2/ It is challenging to ascertain the credibility of the official giving the commentary. It remains unclear whether the statement accurately reflects Pentagon's stance, if it was a journalist's interpretation of an official's words, or it was an actual statement
3/ Should we accept this statement at face value, it is arguably one of the worst statements I have encountered recently. The statement raises doubts regarding the authenticity of the statement itself. Drones play a pivotal role in minimizing the risk to servicememebers lives
4/ The majority of frontlines are heavily mined and under constant surveillance by drones, maximizing the risk of reconnaissance missions. Opting to jeopardize human lives over the loss of a drone not only lacks compassion but is also imprudent and devoid of logical rationale.
5/ Whether it's just an inaccurate reporting or an unreliable source, I hope that this statement is a misrepresentation of someone's remarks, rather than an actual viewpoint originating from within the Pentagon. This argument just doesn't hold water
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
