Military Drones: Are They Good Or Bad?

When the topic of drones is brought up, some may think they are not among us and are objects of the future, while others may have one that they’ve built themselves and put to use already. Drones are being talked about more and more but not necessarily all for good reasons. The reading titled “From the Eyes of a Drone” by Tomas van Houtryve touches upon how drones affect surveillance, photography, and use for weapons. In a BBC article, “Drones: What Are They and How Do They Work?” the author goes into specific detail on how the United States is planning to use drones for the military. If regular drone use becomes a normality in society, it is true that amazing photography will be a positive outcome but what about privacy? Drones can aid the military as well, but if they are released for the general public to use on the daily things may get out of control. While drones can impact several aspects of life positively, they can create even more harm than one may think.

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

There are several debates and arguments going on during this time in the government and in people's conversations. One of them is whether drones should be used in the military or not. Furthermore, everyone is looking for a solution that would benefit all and make the world a safer place to live without fear. Moreover, what is the correct answer, it isn't an easy test that you can study and know the correct answer, this is a serious question with no correct answer. How would it affect the people surrounding the target, their family, and would this be the solution that we have all been looking for for so long?

How do you feel about the military using drones? Does it make you uncomfortable? Or does it make you feel safe? Drone use isn’t the best. Why you may ask. Because drone usage causes additional terrorists than killing. If a drone was utilized in a strike attack against a group of terrorist. I believe and it has been shown that this act makes them enraged and to strike back at the United States. I do not need our military to use drones, I feel sheltered that they don’t. When the military uses drones not only does it make the terrorists mad, but also kills innocent people who had nothing to do with it. According to a meta - study about drones “eight to seventeen percent of all people are killed in drone strikes are civilians” (Singh 5). Plus,

Drones are a safe way of eliminating casualties by using their extreme precision and accuracy to effectively neutralize the target. It has been estimated that less that 1,100 people have been killed since the US started using drones to attack foreign countries since the terrorist attack in September 2001, which is approximately 12% of all civilian deaths (Singh). However, in WWII, the percentages of civilian deaths as a result of total war we between 40% and 60 % (Saletan).

Drones are the future for U.S. warfare whether you like it or not. As terrifying as this sounds, this is not necessarily a bad thing. The topic of drones being used in war has been fueled for quite some time now and is only raising more arguments with advancing technology. It is understandable why people are frightened by visualization of an army of drones flying overhead to go to war, but this should not be the case. Drones are the way for future military use and there should not be an argument against drones specifically.

“Government’s targeted killing of three U.S. citizens in two drone strikes, both in Yemen, far from any armed conflict zone.” (“Targeted Killings”). Drones or unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) is the technology that has taken war and fighting to a brand new level. The technology is believed to lower the use of troops and life loss in the wars that are happening today. Can that same technology be considered dangerous? Or are the side effects something that can simply be considered a small cost for something better? Drones demonstrate a growth in technological advances , and also the world. Although as brilliant this technology might be, it brings a threat to the people.

With the development of technological drone warfare, the United States people have been barely kept in the loop of what their country is doing. This being said, it is impossible to deny that drones have protected the United States troops. Because of this, there will always be an argument for the use of drones. However, there has been even more evidence of heavy costs; such as pilot mental health, casualties, military funds, and the transparency of the government. To begin, the government (especially President Barack Obama) has had to compromise their integrity to keep the drone program running. For example, it is believed that the “Lethal Presidency” has been hidden through proxy leaders – people who announce the news of the drones in order to keep civilians distracted from the President’s calls. Ultimately, the drone program started with somewhat good intentions but has been proving to be a deadly investment.

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.

Drones have been used in an incorrect way and have caused several innocent civilians death. When the military is attempting to kill someone that is dangerous, like terrorists, they often times kill uninvolved civilians for something they did not even do. This problem is stated, “...drone operators are not always certain of who they are killing…” (Source K). The death of innocents is not okay even if it is argued that they are indeed killing the terrorists. This type of destruction is basically murdering people. The destruction of villages and towns along with the upset families, enrages people because

Drones are easily misused as toys and less of as dangerous, inhumane killing machines. Drone “create more terrorists than they kill. they contend that drone strikes kill large numbers of civilians, violate international law, lack sufficient congressional oversight, violate the sovereignty of other nations and make horrors of war appear as innocuous as a video games.” as stated by a writer at drones.procon.org. In other words the use of drones destroys trust between nations

Technological advances play a more substantial role in the twenty-first century than any other century. New innovations are being implemented in a variety of subjects and fields, a few of which include athletics, medicine, and, more recently, military. Operators of militaristic drones fly the device at high altitudes and can control their view by turning the drone and zooming in on the landscape below. One feature that spikes controversy is the ability to lock onto a target and strike the suspected perpetrator, who could possibly end up being an innocent civilian from elevated levels. When observing the negative outcomes of these mechanisms, it is realized that stricter regulations on the use of drone attacks by the United States military need

Drones can be dangerous but only if they are not used properly and in the right areas. Drones can be harmless if they are used in the right places, don't fly drones around public buildings, don't fly drones where there is a big crowd of people. The government can make no fly zones but they should not make drones illegal. There have been many cases of drones killing people, Because of people flying them in places that should not be flown in. this way of thinking is understandable because drones should not be able to kill people. The government could make a law saying that drugs cannot be bigger than a certain size, that would be a way to solve the problem besides taking drones away

In Conclusion, I believe that drones were used in the right way they would not be that bad. Many Soldiers are in favor for drones and because it puts them out of harm's way and death and heartbreak from soldier’s families from their

First of all, in order to understand why drones are harmful to the US, we need to understand the application of military drones and why they are useful in warfare. One of the usages for drones is to investigate the battlefield from the sky to provide real-time data to the commanders in the field to deploy ground troop; with the help of cameras on board of the drones like the MQ-I predator and MQ-9 reaper(Mayer). After technological advancement was made, drones started to carry weapons like missiles and a