How To Legalize Drones

An argument often used that isn’t completely wrong, but can easily be justified is the idea that we create more terrorists than we kill. This while holding some truth is easily disputed with the logic of “so what if we don’t kill them do we just let them attack and kill us” or “why don’t we just send troops in and risk their lives”, well using this logic we would be ignoring the better option we have that is more effective in killing terrorists and the fact that with this we do less collateral damage[Source

After the terror attack of September 11, the U.S. began using drones to help fight the war on “terrorist.” The use of drones has secured the safety of our country to a certain extent. People claim that drone strikes are useful weapons in war because it kills the enemy without putting soldiers in danger. According to the article “At Issue: Targeted Strikes” by Staff, P. states, “Proponents credit drone strikes with the killing of many of top commanders of the Taliban, Al Qaeda, and argue that they are a legal form of self defense. ” The benefit of this is that U.S. soldiers do not have to step foot in unfriendly locations, where they will be exposing themselves to danger. The United States favors drone because “One advantage of drones is that they can be deployed for long periods

Let’s examine drone strikes as a topic of discussion. Drone strikes are essentially controlled attacks made by unmanned aerial vehicles (often referred to as UAV’s), which provide an alternative where manned flight is considered too dangerous or too difficult. Does our military using drones to attack

It was the day February 4, 2002 in Afghanistan, the day of the first authorized drone strike by the U.S. A CIA Predator drone prowled the skies in search of prey. It was searching for a group that the CIA suspected to include Osama Bin Laden. After some time, the group was located, and the Predator drone fired on the group, killing all of the targets. After further insight, it was discovered that the targets, now all dead, were just civilians gathering scrap metal ("Should the United"). Should drones be used for military strikes on terrorism? This is an ongoing modern debate, which has very contrasting viewpoints. Drones are used in military operations, usually in sudden aerial strikes aimed to quickly

In a world filled with violence, peace and safety are two things Americans desperately hope for. Terrorist cells such as al Qaeda, the Taliban and the Islamic State, commonly known as ISIS, play a major role in the violence throughout the world today. Terrorist groups attack their own countries as well as America and other European nations. United States drones are one tool our country uses to counter terrorism around the world.

Strikes conducted by remotely piloted aircraft may undermine counterterrorism efforts or enhance them depending on the nature of the violence, the precision with which it is applied, or the intentionality attributed to it. (Kalyvas, 2006; Downes, 2007; Kocher et al., 2011) . Existing research has studied the effects of coercive airpower, (Pape, 1996; Horowitz and Reiter, 2001) , targeted killings (Jaeger, 2009; Jordan, 2009; Johnston, 2012; Price, 2012) and civilian victimization (Kalyvas, 2006; Lyall, 2009; Condra and Shapiro, 2012), but social scientists have conducted little empirical analysis of the effects of drone strikes.

The main cost of warfare is human life with few people hope to see their neighbors dying on the front lines of a grueling and brutal conflict. The death of a drone is much more acceptable

When the U.S. unexpectedly faced the infamous 9/11 terrorist attacks which left thousands dead and millions dealing with dread and anxiety, the nation’s capital and the Bush administration decided to begin using the comparatively new technology of UAVs more frequently to fight terrorism in Afghanistan. These unmanned aerial vehicles (also known as combat drones) are weapons of war that transport bombs and missiles for precision strikes (“Drones: What are they and how do they work?”). But it wasn’t until President Obama took office that the usage of these drones turned over-excessive; the Obama administration has killed more individuals with UAVs than those civilians who have died in the 9/11 terrorist attacks, an approximate and confirmed number of 3,674 including innocent civilians (Zenko). Even though some of the drone strikes that the U.S. has carried out have been successful in eliminating high-profile terrorist suspects, there still

However, one article claims that drones may be morally obligatory because they are much more precise in identifying and striking targets (Shane). Additionally, intelligence can be shared cross-platform and cross-service which enables the United States to strategically operate in a joint environment. UAVs are also more efficient. With the progression of aircraft systems, the human is fast becoming the weakest link in defense systems; UAVs help mitigate this reality (Singer 37). UAVs are also cost effective with a Predator costing a mere $4.5 million compared to an F-35 which is roughly 30 times a Predator (Singer 34). With all these advantages, it is easy to see why the UAV is quickly becoming the weapon of choice for striking insurgents and gathering intelligence.

Drones in warfare are used to target the suspect and take out the suspect without anybody knowing, but if these drones target the wrong person, then that ends up being inefficient. The drone strikes can target individuals why even may not be the suspect that they are looking for. On record, the drones kill large numbers of civilians and can traumatize the local population. According to a meta study, between 8 and 17% of all people killed in drone strikes are civilians.(source k) On another report, between 174 civilians and 1,047 civilians have been killed in pakistan, yemen, and somalia. According to 130 interviews with victims and witnesses of drone strikes by researchers from stanford and new york university, people who live in the affected areas experience harm beyond death and physical injury and report to hear drones 24/7 hours a day. (source k) According to clive stafford smith, director of human rights, says these people live in constant fear. The drones are flying 24/7, putting fear in the hearts of women and children, making people restless. Us americans have to put our feet into their shoes. If we were monitored by drones 24/7 and be scared if there would be a drone at anytime, we would call this an act of terrorism too. In the two sets of classified documents obtained by nbc news states that 114 drone strikes in

(SIP-B): This devastating drone strike has roots in reality. There have been several incidences in which towns were destroyed and people were killed as a result of a drone strike. (STEWE-1): In 2012, American forces were trying to hit an al-Qaeda militant, Abd al-Raouf al-Dahab, in a drone strike. However, the man was nowhere nearby and the drone strike “hit a passenger van and killed 12 people returning from the market,” (“Rights Groups Decry US”). When their family members arrived, they found their “charred bodies in pieces on the roadside, dusted in flour and sugar that they were bringing home to their families,” (“Rights Groups Decry US”). (STEWE-2): In addition, the deaths of two hostages, one American and one Italian, as a result of drone strikes verify the type of drone strike that destroys Najmah’s village. “The deaths of Warren Weinstein, an American development expert, and Giovanni Lo Porto, an Italian aid worker, were a disturbing reminder of the unintended consequences of an execution programme of questionable

There are many issues surrounding the use of drones, the main one is the scary amount of civilians deaths there are. Between 2009 and 2015 there were “...528 strikes that killed 4,189 persons, an estimated 474 of whom were civilians” (Foreign Policy).

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

In London, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism orchestrated one of the most thorough studies concerning drone strikes (Bureau of Investigative Journalism, 2014). The Bureau concluded that the American C.I.A. or Central Intelligence Agency operators are improving their overall performance (Bureau of Investigative Journalism, 2014 n.p.). The Bureau recorded a marginal decrease in the percentage of drone civilian casualties at the hands of the United States. This decrease was from the previous amount of 28 percent in 2008, to a mere sixteen percent in 2011 (Bureau of Investigative Journalism, 2011 n.p.). As of July 7th of this year, only three of the 152 persons killed in drone strikes were civilians (Josar, "Unmanned War," 2014, p.1). This evident improvement in performance is creating a stronger promise of precision killing by drones and backing the United States’ stance on the necessity of using

Drone strikes also leave fewer American soldiers at risk. This also reduces defense spending on long wars. The use of drones is ethical and should be the first form of taking out terrorists. Instead of leaving the fighting and killing up to soldiers on land where they can get killed, tortured, and left with serious conditions like PTSD drones eliminate that.