Drones And Unmanned Aerial Vehicles

Drones already carry a negative, political connotation. The breaches in sovereignty are a major political issue for involved countries. Yemen, Afghanistan, and Pakistan are examples of the United States’ willingness to conduct military strikes without the consent of the governing body within the country. Furthermore, targeted killings are essentially a means for assassinations, which were prohibited under the Reagan administration. However, this fact is abated, as the killing of Anwar Al-Awlaki (US Citizen) demonstrated. Given all this information, would the usage of US drones in Iraq only perpetuate more violence, or bring stability to the region? This report will seek to answer this question. Utilizing an interview with an Associate Professor of Homeland Security at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University (ERAU), Professor Bonner, as a primary source of research, along with secondary sources from accredited cites, this report will explore the dynamics of the drone program as it pertains to the current situation in Iraq.

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

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

Drone Warfare; Summary and Overview This essay consists of a thorough analysis and overview on the book titled Drone Warfare by John Kaag and Sarah Kreps. Drone Warfare covers the political, juridical, and ethical aspects of remotely piloted aircrafts known as drones. The book touches on the political ramifications that the United States’ drone program causes and the general public’s opinion on drones. Drone Warfare also talks about the relationship between the drone program and international laws.

To develop the Department of Defense’s (DoD) position on the reevaluation of the operation and regulations regarding drone warfare. This paper addresses the importance of understanding the risks involved with drone strikes, to include the important violations of international law, the consequential casualties incurred during the strikes and the overall moral issues at hand.

The war on terror is a never-ending battle. The United States has been in many wars since the day our country was founded. There has been an estimated 651,008 deaths in war battle, 1.2 million deaths during war. An estimated 42 million service men and women have joined the armed forces in protecting our country (Science Line). Every day our state and policy makers are finding new ways to protect the 42 million service men and women. In the early 1990s’ the U.S created the Predator Program (Woods). This program allows air force men and women to fly unoccupied aircrafts in remote locations for intelligence gathering as well as executing high profile terrorist networks. This program protects thousands of service

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

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

While the debate over the use of drones for counterterrorism efforts has intensified, the arguments, both for and against their usage, although informed by plausible logics, are supported primarily by anecdotal evidence and not by systematic empirical investigation. This lack of attention is unfortunate: unmanned aerial vehicles, and

Over the 35 years that unmanned drones have seen an increase in the military there have been various differing arguments on how to improve the tactic of using these deleterious weapons. “Between January 2012 and February 2013, leaked documents showing that the United States special operations airstrikes killed more than 200 people. Of those, only 35 being the intended targets.”(Marina Fang) These methods of combatting terrorists haven’t been fully proven efficient yet, but with President Donald Trump’s new statement about drones, saying that “the U.S. needs to use all means necessary to combat terrorism” there is bound to be some drastic changes to how the United States proceeds in fighting the war against terror. Because of how drones are

The U.S. government has received a lot of condemnation from individuals, local and international community on its use of drone strikes as a mode of fighting terrorism. A lot of questions have cropped up on the effectiveness of the drone strikes, and the fact they’re going against the international human rights and laws-of-war. Despite the advantages associated with the use of the program, investigations from different studies have revealed the demerits outweigh the merits of the use of the program.

He then makes a concluding argument that although the benefit of the Use of Drones is stated by the US officials, it is clear that the Use of drone is a bleach of international laws and creates a bad precedent of the United States, violating and ignoring state sovereignty of those states in question. He question the notion that the United States are a global police, asking, who decided what state should be a global police and the US justification of drone attacks on non-war zones. Himes, further questions the type of precedence the US sets for other states who are faced with the same challenge of terrorism (Himes, K. R. (2016, Drones and the ethics of targeted killings, Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. 212

Warfare is an ever evolving aspect to human nature. Throughout human history, man has always invented new ways to kill one another. With the new current war on terrorism this idea still holds true. With recent advances in robotics, mankind has developed a new type of warfare. This new type of asymmetric warfare is fought against individuals that do not wear a uniform or have a sponsored country. This condition has made for a new type of weapon system to fight this type of warfare. These new weapons to fight the current war are called drones. “These drones provide a real time solution for the new faster paced warfare” (Rienhart). There is a lot of debate on the current use of drones in warfare and if they should be used to kill. Some of the debated topics include: success rate, civilian casualties, legality, cost and the lack of human boots on the ground. The drone has provided an answer to the new high tempo of the current war and is having “great success on disabling the terrorist networks around the Globe” (Rienhart). This is why our country must continue to use and develop our drone program to stay ahead of our enemies and take advantage of this new weapon.

Opponents argue that by removing one of the key restraints to warfare – the risk to one’s own forces – unmanned systems make undertaking armed attacks too easy and will make war more likely. Evidence is beginning to emerge that it is the persistent presence of UAVs sitting over remote villages and towns simply looking for ‘targets of opportunity’ that may be leading to civilian casualties. The CIA oversees drone strikes as part of counterterrorism operations, but US officials refuse to discuss the program publicly. According to a tally by the nonpartisan New America Foundation, since 2004 there have been more than 260 US drone strikes in Pakistan, which the foundation estimates killed between 1,600 and 2,500 people. Not everyone feels comfortable with all this. Critics say that the legal and

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), more commonly known as drones, are remote controlled aircraft with numerous applications. Smaller drones are used today for surveillance while larger ones can carry large missiles and bombs. When the “War on Terror” first started this technology was still in its infancy while today there are over 7,000 drones ready to deploy. (Murphy) With the extreme jump in the use of this ever growing technology it has garnered a great deal of controversy over its use by the military. The main arguments between the two sides are exactly how effective are they at killing the enemy while keeping civilians safe and are drones a better alternative to just “boots on the ground.” The U.S. should continue to use drones in the Middle East but we need to alter exactly how we use them. These being that we need sufficient information on the target area to avoid unnecessary civilian casualties and sufficient measures in place to continue safe operation.