In the movie, Eye in the Sky, a team is set out on a mission to apprehend Al-Shabaab militants in Kenya. We are shows some of the moral difficulties or debates that come with drones being used in warfare and more specifically in this case the war on terror. This movie illustrates a more up-close and personal viewing of what collateral damage is. It also gives us, the viewer, a stronger sense of how each different position involved throughout the movie/mission has its own degree of burdens. To fire or not to fire that is the question and there are strong arguments that validate both sides. The main focus of the movie is on a little girl named Alia, who sells bread to help her family make ends meet in her poverty-stricken area. She goes a …show more content…
Another example of this from class was the group of people being trapped in a cave due to a bigger guy being stuck in the exit. The dilemma here is do they try to think of an alternative and wait it out but possibly die or do they kill the guy? The Utilitarian would no doubt kill the guy to save more people but taking the deontological approach you would do what is morally right and follow the rules which in this case is to not kill the man. In my opinion after taking your class I would never be on the one for many side. Who am I to say it is that one person’s time to die. I don’t know anything about his background or anyone else’s background who is involved. Going back to Colonel Powell I do try to keep in mind they have taken action to try to wait for the bread to be sold and also sent their undercover guy in to try and buy the bread from her. Towards the end sadly, the strike is launched even though if they would have waited just a bit longer Alia would have been out of harms way. As she is heading home the bomb hits and she is seen face down in the dirt. After a closer examination of the area it is confirmed that Alia is alive barely but also one of the suspects is alive and trying to get away. The order is given to send another drone strike to kill the man before he gets away. In the end you see her being rushed to the hospital with her parents and …show more content…
One of the biggest deal breakers for me is the thought of other countries developing their own drones to use against us. When I think about it like that it to where the ball is in my field it worries me for the future. It puts into perspective that people I love and who are innocent bystanders could easily fall victim to this unfair tragedy. It makes me stand by saying I believe the United States should do away with drone warfare altogether. Another widely known argument to people who disagree with drone warfare is do you also disagree with the use of snipers? This stumps me because I can see how the two are comparable. I agree with the use of snipers even though I don’t agree with drone usage. This being because you have one target and one bullet set for that one target. There is no real greater affect that would explode and catch others that are near. One could argue what if you miss and hit someone else that is innocent or what if someone walks in front of the target as you fire. I believe the people who are snipers are trained for things like this and check and double check the whole situation and don’t shoot if things are risky. I think it is easier to take a moment and readjust for a better shot. This is also morally better because you are on more of a personal level. It still will give the shooter some sort of sadness to have to do this
Those who oppose the use of drones in warfare claims it violates international law. They believe that the strikes have no justification therefore violating international law. (Moskowitz) They claim that the benefits of the usage of drones do not outweigh the cons of using drones. The opposition claim that civilian casualties make up 2-10% of total fatalities from drones firing on wrong targets or the civilians are collateral damage.(Globalresearch) The dissentient think it causes more unrest than peace in some regions due to the collateral damage caused to buildings and civilians and is another sign of American arrogance. (ABC News)Even though their points are valid, these reasons do not warrant the cease of drone activity.
Controversy has plagued America’s presence in the Middle East and America’s usage of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) contributes vastly to this controversy. Their usefulness and ability to keep allied troops out of harm’s reach is hardly disputed. However, their presence in countries that are not at war with America, such as Pakistan and Yemen, is something contested. People that see the implications of drone use are paying special attention to the civilian casualty count, world perspective, and the legality of drone operations in non-combative states. The use of drone technology in the countries of Yemen and Pakistan are having negative consequences. In a broad spectrum, unconsented drone strikes are illegal according to the laws of armed conflict, unethical, and are imposing a moral obligation upon those who use them. These issues are all of great importance and need to be addressed. Their legality is also something of great importance and begins with abiding to the Laws of Armed Conflict.
In addition, Byman argues that “drones have devastated al Qaeda and associated anti-American militant groups... and they have done so at little financial cost” (Byman 1). In the article, Byman compares the financia...
The basic plot is based around two Chicano girls and their childhood lives. The movie is split up into three episodes. Maribel “Mousie” and Mona “Sad Girl” were childhood best friends that become enemies over a boy, Ernesto. Sad Girl is the main narrator of the movie. This drug dealer first falls for Mousie, but then gets Sad Girl pregnant also. He spends most of his money on his two babies and his prize possession, Suavecito, his mini-truck. The two young mothers arrange a fight one-on-one for a bloody confrontation. Neither of them gets hurt, but Ernesto is shot by one of his Caucasian clients on the same night. With Ernesto out of both of their lives, they can move on and earn back each other’s friendship.
The movie begins with John, Sarah, and their daughters Christy and Ariel cross over the border from Canada into the United States with the mission of finding a better life and jobs. There first trouble is finding an apartment, but they eventually find one in New York City in a poor neighborhood in Hell’s Kitchen. Next, John and Sarah struggle to find jobs. John is an actor and is constantly practicing, but has no success in finding an acting job. The family faces many problems due to their poverty and John feels like it is his job to provide for them and make them feel comfortable. For example, he does all he can to find an air conditioner for them because of the extreme heat in their apartment.
"Ethical utilitarianism can most generally be described as the principle that states that the rightness or wrongness of action is determined by the goodness and badness of their consequences." (Utilitarianism EOP 9: 603.) Following this guide line the morally right decision to make is to rescue the group with five ...
The film, Under the Same Moon, is a great piece of work that portrays the extreme difficulties faced by illegal immigrants. It was saddening to see all of the everyday struggle and to know that this is going on in the world to this day. I found that this film really goes with the what we learned in module 2 about immigrants in Guatemala and the movement in Chiapas, Mexico. After learning about immigration and knowing more about Mexico, I feel as though this film does an excellent job on showing a realistic example of an illegal immigrant doing all they can to make money for their loved ones. I would definitely recommend the movie to really anyone. It is educational, emotional, and has a great plot showing a whole different culture.
Murphy, Dan. "Aerial Drones Serve as Weapons of War." Weapons of War. Ed. Diane Andrews Henningfeld. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2012. At Issue. Rpt. from "Briefing: Aerial Drones as Weapons of War." Christian Science Monitor (22 May 2009). Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 25 Feb. 2014.
The children in the film were from various ethnic and religious backgrounds, and were from predominately low-income families. In the film, the children and some parents expressed their opinions and concerns
“The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but because he loves what is behind him” (G.K. Chesterton). A soldier is a soldier no matter what. If they fight behind a screen, on the front line, or from a controller as long as they’re protecting this country, the people in it, and the people fighting for it they are honorable. Some think that because one does their fighting from a remote control drone means that they have no understanding of war, and in some ways that is true, but they are still taking someone’s life when they choose to press that button just like the solders on the front line takes someone’s life when they pull the trigger. Both people are fighting the same fight: they love the country they are defending the people in it they just do it from different standpoints. Drones
This case is a very difficult one because it’s not just involving you but it is involving the people you love dearest. You are basically being given only two choices and that is to save your family or to watch them die. This essay will discuss the different take utilitarian’s have on the decision and the outlook deontologists have
One of the latest and most controversial topics that has risen over the past five to ten years is whether or not drones should be used as a means of war, surveillance, and delivery systems. Common misconceptions usually lead to people’s opposition to the use of drones; which is the reason it is important for people to know the facts about how and why they are used. Wartime capabilities will provide for less casualties and more effective strikes. New delivery and surveillance systems in Africa, the United Air Emirates and the United States will cut costs and increase efficiency across the board. Rules and regulations on drones may be difficult to enforce, but will not be impossible to achieve. The use of drones as weapons of war and delivery and surveillance systems should not be dismissed because many people do not realize the real capabilities of drones and how they can be used to better the world through efficient air strikes, faster delivery times, and useful surveillance.
...only imagine how hazardous this world we live in become. Amongst countries this can become an international competition to make drones to be used as a factor. When other nations see this particular country is using some type of technology to improve their military system then they would want part of it as well. The drone practice can cause to escalate if other countries adopt to this new technology for their own reason of protection. There will be no turning back because the government of that country would take advantage of these drones to use it towards the citizens instead of using for “terrorist”. The use of these drones is definitely immoral and unethical but some may argue that the of drones as protection against “terrorist” even though as we can see it kills innocent people, creates more terrorists, causes psychological disorders, and violates privacy. (Cole)
Living in the digital age where we enjoy the various fruits of latest technological tools and advancements, then at the same time we cannot escape from their hidden or apparent harms. Also, it is a fact that some gadgets supported by these technological advancements are much capable to bring destruction and disaster then construction and convenience. The same goes for the Drone Technology which since past 200 years is being used to create turbulence at the global level. It has proved to be a powerful investigator and bomber at the same time. Drones are specifically associated with military actions and the countries having used them for surveillance purposes include UK, USA, Italy, Japan, Austria, Australia etc. The list of victim counties or nations is much bigger in contrast. Some prominent victims of Drone Air Strikes include Congo, Venice, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. However, it is also an undeniable fact that the massive production and usage of Drones got multiplied in the 21st century.
Every day the world is evolving, different types of technology are being made for different kinds of uses. Some people in the army want to use drones to carry out different types of missions, in other places in the world. Using will help soldiers carry out missions, quicker, easier, and much more efficient. 60% of Americans agree on the usage of drones for army purposes. Many people say that the army should not use drones because drones will increase the number of terrorists, drones can kill and injure innocent civilians, and that drones will “...allow the United States to become emotionally disconnected from the horrors of war” (ℙ8, Drones). There are many advantages with having drones aid military bases, because