Covert Drone Program And Targeting Killings

Comprehending the underlying authority for the President of the United States to authorize the international use of military operations in order to respond to an attack or as a counter-terrorism strategy, may be difficult to fathom for those who are not familiar with practices and philosophies associated in this realm. Conducting military operations against the Taliban government in Afghanistan, detaining suspected terrorists, both indefinitely domestically and abroad, and the use of unmanned drones to disrupt and destroy suspected terrorists and those aiding them in areas such as Pakistan fall under the umbrella of what the US has been able to accomplish in our last 12 years during the Global War on Terror.

GPS, drones, spying, and nuclear war are all capabilities of the everyday items around us. These “normal” devices such as an iPhone or computer are all part of an enormous web infrastructure called the internet of things (IOT). The internet of things is a link between the online world and the physical world through connected devices which can achieve physical accomplishments such as taking a pulse. The Internet of things was said to have been discovered in 1999 during a presentation at Procter and Gamble. When Business moguls were trying to find a way to make the internet profitable, they manufactured the term internet of things. Ironically, IOT tracked its usage of term online through “Google Trends”. According to Google, since 2004 IOT was

Technology is changing the way humans complete certain tasks. Whether it be communicating with others, or using navigation tools for directions, technology affects everyone in some way or another. In fact, technology is changing the way our government fights wars with other countries and terrorist groups. Drones have become one of the most sought after pieces of military equipment in the last decade. They have become one of the many important tools our government uses for counterterrorism policies in the United States. Recently, these defense mechanisms have received a great deal of public attention, which has stirred up much controversy. Many people, including government officials and politicians, question the necessity and ethics of drones

Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. You hear a drone hovering in your backyard, invading your privacy, what do you do? Many choose the illegal path and decide to shoot or swat it down. With the rise in drone sales, more and more Americans are losing their privacy, and for this reason, the federal government needs to take action and regulate the purchase and flight of drones.

This is exactly what happened to a 22 year old in Pakistan when a missile shot

After 9/11, the U.S started to implement policies intended to combat terrorism in hopes of preventing further attacks and bring those who were involved to justice. One such policy that the U.S started was to implement the heavy use of drones- unmanned aircraft capable of bombing specific targets. These drones would be controlled by a pilot remotely from the U.S, thousands of miles from where the strikes were taking place. The U.S used these drones to assassinate suspects who were believed to have been linked to terrorism as well as various targets that were deemed to be associated with terrorism, such as weapons factories. Currently, however, there is a debate on the legality, morality, and effectiveness of drones. One side sees the drones as effective at destroying targets while at the same time, minimizing civilian casualties. On the other hand, the other side believes that drones are reliable for

In our country we see aircrafts in the sky every day and rarely fear an attack from above, however, for people in Middle Eastern countries this is not the case. In countries such as Somalia and Yemen they live in constant fear of dying from a bomb being dropped from above. Usually, Americans see themselves as heroes and view Middle Eastern groups as terrorists for these Middle Eastern people though, Americans are the terrorists. This essay will research the United States use of drone strikes in Middle Eastern countries, using scholarly articles to portray what a drone is, the types of drones the US uses, a history of their use, the legality of strikes on foreign soil, and their overall use in the war on terror in order to persuade readers that

As discussed in the next section, some critics of these types of responses to transnational terrorism argue that a law enforcement operations model should be applied rather than the law of armed conflict because of the nature of the operations that are involved. For instance, Kels notes that human rights advocates “insist upon a legal geography of war, whereby states must apply a law enforcement (rather than armed conflict) model to any hostilities conducted outside of universally recognized hot battlefields like Afghanistan” (B3). This approach, however, ignores the realities of military operations on the ground and consequences of using a law enforcement operations model rather than the law of armed conflict to control these efforts (Kels B3). As Kels points out, “Holding a drone operator, fighter pilot or sailor directing ordnance at an overseas terrorist hideout to the same detain-first, shoot-last standards as a Metro police officer would negate the very purpose of the weapons system, which is precisely the goal of some activists” (B3). Indeed, rather than improving America’s opportunities to apply FSW to eliminate threats emanating from other countries that are unable or unwilling to stop them, these arguments only add further fuel to the anti-drone rhetoric in ways that may even encourage additional terrorist incursions from abroad.

Historian John Olsen notes that “military commanders have come to look to air power as a quick and cheap solution to otherwise complex international problems.” Airpower has provided the US with a flexible, relatively low-cost, low-commitment tool that makes dabbling outside of international norms and rules less costly and therefore more attractive. Unfortunately, there is a potentially unseen cost, US prestige.

Fourteen years ago on February 2nd, 2002, the CIA first used an unmanned Predator drone in a targeted killing. The attack was performed in Paktia province, Afghanistan, intended to kill Osama Bin Laden or at least someone who worked for the CIA had thought so, they ended up firing the drone against a “tall man”, someone who was 6 inches shorter (at 5 feet 11)than Bin Laden whom had long hair and was wearing robes. Even though this height is taller than average, it goes to say nearly anybody within this range who is a “tall man”, wearing traditional clothes and with lengthy hair (which is a very vague description for the CIA to go by), could have been mistakened for Laden himself. Drone warfare does not only target those who are not a threat,

Unlike drone attacks, using ground troops can result in less unnecessary casualties. When a bomb is dropped it kills not only the target but the people around them. Lives of innocent people can be saved if we had a more accurate point of view. Within 5 months, “nearly 90 percent of the people killed in airstrikes were not the intended targets.”(Cite #1) Sending soldiers can significantly lower the percentage of innocents killed. When “a drone strike kills more than one person, there is no guarantee that those persons deserved their fate. … So it’s a phenomenal gamble.”(Cite #1) Right now, American soldiers are safe flying drones from thousands of miles away. Sending troops risks American blood but fewer accidental deaths that leave families

One hot summer evening in 2009, in a small village in the remote Pakistani tribal agency of south Waziristan, a pair of hellfire missiles fired from an unmanned predator drone slammed in a house, killing the chief of the Pakistani Taliban. Now imagine looking up into the bright blue sky all around the world realizing what only a few people do; drones are up there and are keeping a watchful eye on Americas interests. Governments are using unmanned drones as a way to successfully carry out dangerous missions without having boots on the ground in harm’s way. The impact of drones on the world have grown exponentially over the course of a few years, with the future in sight more and more information must be known about

According to Jeffrey H. Smith and John B. Bellinger III for politico.com magazine “Throughout the 20 the century the United States, more than any other country, championed the development of the international law of armed conflict. But in this century many nations accuse the United States of abandoning that leadership by using drones to conduct hundreds of targeted killings of terror suspects in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, and elsewhere, in what they see as a violation of international law. And now, with the world watching, President Obama may decide to expand the use of drones to Iraq to counter the advances of the militant group Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL)” (SMITH, BELLINGER , "Mr. President, We Need Rules for Drones - POLITICO Magazine"). With this growing operation it also comes with it criticism where individuals and nations argues that the United States Government has given itself the power and

Sun Tzu said in his book “The Art of War”, “The Supreme art of war is to subdue an enemy without fighting” (Brainy Quote).This quote is taking about the drone dilemma, and how he thinks you fight without getting your soldiers in trouble In conflict people can instantly point out the faults done, like for example: the raiding and pillaging nations do in the name of liberty, or the innocent people that get killed by drone strikes. The drone is a morally acceptable machine because it saves soldiers’ lives by taking them out of harm's way. It also gives a nation who is fighting a war a tool to win the war, and liberate the nation their fighting in, and they even the odds with the terrorists. Soldiers often get into harm’s

(Living Under Drones) This is just a glimpse into the lives of those who are greatly suffering in Pakistan due to the use of UAVs. Not only are they killing and permanently disabling many people, but the collateral damage from the drone strikes cause severe damage to buildings and homes, completely destroying families houses and lives. Not only is it harming the people of Pakistan and other Middle Eastern countries, but it is very mentally damaging to the “pilots” who control the drones from across the world. Many suffer from PTSD knowing how many innocent lives they have ruined and what they had to witness. It is extremely hard for them to go on with their lives knowing hundreds have died by their hands while they sit safely in a military base nowhere near danger. For other “pilots” the use of drones has dehumanized the enemy for them. What they see is a blurry infrared image of some enemy they are taught to kill, and not an actual human being. They are no longer killing people, just hitting targets. These “pilots” become trigger happy now. The military has basically created monsters to slaughter people by the dozens, and get rewarded the more they kill. They think that they are saving lives, when really all they’re doing is slaughtering men, women, and children like pigs. These crimes against human rights have not gone completely unnoticed. There have been many protests in the United States and European countries against the use of