Argumentative Essay On Dangerous Drones

The world isn’t perfect, nor will it ever be. Some acts require military intervention, which involves many sacrifices for the greater good. Drones are a controversial method of combating terrorism. Some argue that these targeted strikes are unethical, ineffective, and only increase terrorist violence, while others believe it is indeed an ethical and effective method of combatting terrorism. With the information gathered, it is easy to come to the conclusion that drones are a necessary asset to the United States to fight terrorism.

Eleven years ago, the United States Air Force launched a missile from a drone for the first time at a test range in the Nevada desert (Drone Test) . The use of armed drones has risen dramatically since 2009. Now drone strikes are almost a daily occurrence. In 2011 the use of drones continued to rise with strikes in (Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Libya, Somalia. Proponents of armed drones argue that their ability to watch and wait, with their highly accurate sensors and cameras gives increased control over when and where to strike its both increasing the chances of success and

Thousands of drones are used by wide variety of purposes by both the government and civilians every day. Although drones can be useful in some occasions they can also be harmful in our society. Drones should not be used by the government as weapons because it violates the fourth amendment it can be abused by anyone and it can create a new type of war.

Most Americans are in favor of drone strikes. A 2013 survey suggests 69% of Republicans, 60% of Independents and 59% of Democrats support the use of drone strikes in Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen (ProCon). The next president of the United States will have to decide if our country will keep using drones and improve the drone program. It has been said that drone strikes are used as a “recruitment tool” for terrorist organizations such as the Taliban and the Islamic State (Pilkington and MacAskill). Even though most civilians in the Middle East hate drone strikes; the United States collaborates with local governments in the Middle East who gives us jurisdiction to carry out these strikes. For example in Pakistan where most drone strikes occur; they have decreased violence in that region. The Pakistani President even admitted to asking the US to conduct more drone strikes in his country (ProCon). If drones were not effective foreign government officials would not ask for more drone

September 11 attacks marked an unprecedented development and advancement of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), commonly known as drones. Because of their technological capabilities and strategic advantages, drones have been used by the United States government as one of the main weapons in ‘war against terrorism.’ An unmanned aircraft was first used by Elmer Sperry, creator of the gyroscope, when sinking a German captured battleship, but its usage for military purposes began after 1985 (Shaw, 2012, p. 1490). As the United States initiated the use drones against Al-Qaeda and Taliban forces, vast criticism sparked throughout the world questioning its legality under the international law. In this paper, I will focus on the

The United States began air strikes there in 2010 to deal with terrorist groups. Now this may seem like a good thing, and good things can come of it, but with the loose policy of what a target may be is horrible. To the people of the attacks, the drones have taken hundreds of innocent lives. They now fear the skies for the next attack. Farea Al-Muslimi was a boy from Yemen whose entire village was destroyed by a drone strike. He says “The friendships and values I experienced and described to the villagers helped them understand the America that I know, and I love. Now however, when they think of America, they think of the terror they feel from the drones that hover over their heads, ready to fire missiles at any time.” Things that seems of good nature can be horrific to the other people. We eliminate terrorist threats because they are a danger to our

Drones are a better alternative to traditional methods of war because they kill less civilians, are legal under international law, and also that they do not create more terrorists than they kill. These facts will prove that older methods of war such as mortars, and bombs pale in comparison to the drone and the effect they have and will continue to have in the war on terror.

The United States reckons that drones allow the U.S. military workforces to be safer. UAV’s are launched from bases in allied countries and are controlled remotely by navigators stationed in the U.S., which reduces the threat of injury and death that would transpire if ground soldiers and airplane pilots were used during combat instead. Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups usually work in far away locations where it would be exceedingly hazardous for the United States to deploy special force teams to find and arrest terrorists. These searches may pose severe dangers to U.S. soldiers due to the threat of their being land mines, suicide bombers, unforgiving environments, involved in these confrontations. Drone raids remove all of the risks that are common with “boots on the ground” missions.

In President Obama’s speech on drone policy, given on May 23, 2013 in Washington D.C., he asserts, “dozens of highly skilled al Qaeda commanders, trainers, bomb makers and operatives have been taken off the battlefield... Simply put, those [drone} strikes have saved lives.” Many American’s support this view. According to a July 18, 2013 Pew Research survey, 61% of Americans supported drone strikes in Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia (Drake). However, this belief that drone strikes make the United States safer by decimating terrorist networks around the world is widely contested. An opposing viewpoint is that these strikes create more terrorist than they kill. There is a common misperception that drones are precise, killing only the target and entourage. According to a meta-study of drone strikes, between 8 to 17% of all people killed are civilians (Sing). People who see their loved ones injured or killed in drone

Drones are wartime weapons the United States government uses to fight the War on Terror. Officially known as unmanned aerial vehicles, this type of aircraft plays a vital role in protecting the United States, as well as many other countries around the world. Although there are multiple drones owned by the United States government, the MQ-9 Reaper and MQ-1B Predator drones are the most predominantly used drones; General Atomics Aeronautical Systems manufacture both aircrafts.

The 9/11 attacks killed 2,996 people and injured over 6,000. According to the U.S. State Department’s annual Country Report on Terrorism 2015, 28,328 people around the world were victims of terrorists in that year. By killing terrorists with targeted drone strikes, the U.S. military disrupts and slows down terrorist organizations. In the War on Terror, it is difficult to determine how successful drone strikes have been. However, if we did nothing to fight or stop the terrorists they would be able to recruit, grow, and attack without fear. Despite potential downsides, drone strikes need to continue. It is impossible to estimate how many terrorist attacks have been stopped or how many lives have been saved due to successful drone attacks, but imagine the devastation of unrestrained terrorist

The U.S government started using unarmed drones in 2000 to monitor Afghanistan when the country was at war. The drone program was expanded when the September 11 attacks happened as a way to counteract the terrorists. Drones were used a surveillance but this time most drones are armed with missiles to weaken and destroy terrorist groups power. The death toll from the expansion of the program, according to the human rights group Reprieve, found that in 2014 that US killed 1,147 people in Pakistan and Yemen in the course of targeting only 41 men. This has caused a debate on whether to continue to use drones or to destroy the programs. A large amount of

As a young child my brother joined the armed forces, searching for a sense of purpose in life. He went off with dignity, with great dreams of coming home covered in medals and scars. He used to carry a little diary, with a crimson cover and a cracked spine, and on the inside of the cover was a handwritten quote, of which it read “Whoever said the pen is mightier than the sword obviously never encountered automatic weapons.” After fourteen months of close encounters and hard fought battles in the withered, war ridden southern Pakistan, he returned, not only with new medals and scars, but a new quote in his little, crimson cracked book. Beneath the previous crossed out quote, was a new quote, of which

Jack Serle is a data journalist on The Bureau of Investigative Journalism’s Covert Drone War team who joined the Bureau in 2012 and was part of the team that won the Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism in 2013 for their work on drones and the US covert war on terror. Serle reports that the first known CIA drone strike took place September 19, 2002 in Yemen that turned out to be only the first in a long, rapid fire line of strikes to come in Middle Eastern countries with suspected al-Qaeda activity. Since 2004 in Pakistan alone, there have been 419 drone strikes in which approximately 2,463-3,977 people have been killed and of these thousands only 725 have been positively identified (“Naming the Dead”). Additionally, Serle finds that since 2002 in Yemen there have been as many as 121 confirmed strikes which killed approximately 467-695 people, since 2007 in Somalia there have been as many as 19 strikes which killed approximately 25-108 people, and in Afghanistan there have been 32 strikes which killed approximately 332-486 people (“Drone wars”). No matter how you look at it, these numbers are an astounding markup in these short years and it’s quite a wonder that these strikes and deaths don’t get more news time. It seems that when it comes to something as shady and gray area as CIA drone strikes the phrase “if it bleeds,

Drones are an effective counter insurgency tool deployed extensively throughout the world, especially by clandestine intelligence organizations often with the help of the country’s respective Air Force. Not only do they serve as an effective weapon, they minimize human