Nick Kammerer
Ms. Krasson
ELA 12, Hour 1
21 February 2016
Today all people ever hear about are the successful executions that drone strikes perform on unsuspecting high ranked terrorist. But rarely does the American population hear about the bad in drone strikes. Drone strikes, are a use of technology to take out high ranked terrorist, the use of drone strikes also creates more enemies than they kill, terrifies the Middle East population and kills many civilians. The true solution to this problem would be for the United Nations to outlaw the use of drone strikes to avoid putting humanity at risk.
Not only are drone strikes harmful but they are also against international law the death of innocents reports that after many separate reports
…show more content…
released in 2013 Human Rights groups suspect that dozens of civilians have been killed due to the United States and their failure to obey to international law. The united states is one of the leaders in the worldwide alliance called the United Nations and we do not even obey the laws we make. And this is nothing new, also according to the death of innocents Reports from Pakistani sources say that ever since 2004 drone strikes have escalated to 3374 strikes. The US has been breaking laws against humanity for years and no one will stand up against it. The US Government insist that drone strikes are very precise and an effective alternative to killing terrorist but, “In one case, in October 2012, a 68-year-old grandmother was gathering vegetables in a field, her grandchildren nearby, when she was ''blasted into pieces'' by a drone strike that appeared aimed directly at her.
Three months earlier, 18 male laborers, including a 14-year-old boy, were killed in a series of drone strikes on the remote village of Zowi Sidgi. The first one struck a tent where the men had gathered for an evening meal; others struck those who came to rescue the injured.” (“The Death of Innocents” 26) This incident shows one of many times where drone strikes have failed to do their job and the outcome was devastating. Drone strikes are inhumane and leave civilians wondering if death is around the …show more content…
corner. President Obama proposed guidelines to the use of drone attacks but never made the guidelines public so there is no way to judge or to tell how well they are being carried out. This issue is the reason why so many deadly accidents occur according to The Death of Innocents. With no way of truly knowing if drone strikes are successful many of the comments the government makes about drone strikes may be complete lies that are used to get the American people to back drone strikes. This is just another common tactic that political parties use in order to get funding and the popular vote. “Mr. Obama has demonstrated that he can be thoughtful and farsighted, but, like all occupants of the Oval Office, he is a politician, subject to the pressures of re-election. No one in that position should be able to unilaterally order the killing of American citizens or foreigners located far from a battlefield -- depriving Americans of their due-process rights -- without the consent of someone outside his political inner circle.” (“Too Much Power for a President” 28) With one phone call the president is able to take one or many people’s lives which is terrifying for the ones who live with drones hovering above all day long. The world will never know whether the targets chosen by President Obama are truly dangerous or just people caught in the wrong situation. Imagine one day holding the door open for the wrong person and the next being blown to pieces for suspicion of terrorism there are truly no rules that the president must obey before signing your death sentence. Recently in 2012 the president ordered a drone strike on a compound in Pakistan which then backfired “The White House says the actual target was an al-Qaeda compound. U.S. intelligence officials were as certain as they could be that al-Qaeda militants were inside. They were right. What they didn't know was that 73-year-old Warren Weinstein and Giovanni Lo Porto, an Italian aid worker, were there, too.” (“Morning Edition”). This incident further shows that drone strikes have no rules that could force the government to further looking into the situation before blowing a place into pieces. Not only was it a terrible accident but if the US relied more on troops on the ground then most likely Warren Weinstein would still be here today. The Morning Edition wrote that after Weinstein was captured, in a video released by Al-Qaeda Weinstein addressed President Obama saying he had felt that he had been abandoned in a time of need after going to the Middle East on behalf of the Government. If the US is willing to send a man to rebuild Pakistan they should be willing to give him true protection and not a drone flying high in the sky that in this case actually killed Weinstein. Of course drone strikes have made some progress in the world According to an article by The Times of London England since drone attacks have increased sharply in 2009 death causalities have lowered in urban areas in Pakistan. Yes, in a small period of time the data shows that drone strikes have been able to reduce “causalities” but in a few year when more and more accidents occur killing innocent civilian’s, civil wars will break out and we will have an even bigger problem on our hands. Even if drone strikes were able to perform perfect executions without harming civilians, bombing a country will never end the terrorism that occurs there.
It’s simply not enough to end such a devastating event and also according to The Times of London England As long as Pakistan provides a safe haven for multiple terrorist groups… revealed by Al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden. Drone strikes will not be able to win the war alone and they need Iraqi militant groups to step in. Even Osama Bin Laden who exclaimed his fear for drone strikes by noting that “The US have become so experienced with drones that they were able to track two people meeting with neither knowing they had been tracked.” (Pam Benson CNN) knows that drone strikes alone will never stop the terrorist in Pakistan.
Drone strikes have forced many Pakistani natives to live their lives in hiding for fear of drone strikes many people in the city of Pakistan never left their homes unless for medical emergency because any odd behavior may cause them to be targeted by the drones said by Pam Benson at
CNN. According the Death of Innocents the true reason drones were put to use in 2001 were to show the United States ultimate power and to have others fear the country. Any country should never use fear in order to feel safe. The United States should be focused on coming to a safe alternative to dealing with terrorist rather than putting everyone in the Middle East at risk. If the only way to solve the problem is to kill civilians while killing terrorist then the true solution to the problem it to back out of the war against terrorist. Drones have benefited the United States in a few ways but spell disaster if the use of drone strikes continues to escalate, an example of what is occurring is said in the article (“The Death of Innocents”) “Drones do reach extremists in lawless areas and avoid putting troops in harm’s way. But at the same time more and more enemies are being created for the US from killing civilians. This shows the unending process of war that the US will go through if drone strikes do not come to an end.” Even though the use of drone strikes will not be able to solve the many problems in the Middle East there is one way to solve the issues. Working with the Pakistani Government may be seen as weak but it would be the least worse option due to the fact that it would end large air assaults and ground incursions. Simply working with the strong Pakistani Government will end issues in the Middle East in a few years and the vicious cycle will be over.
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...
NB: I would like to state a couple of points about the CIA’s drone operations. The CIA is not limited by war zones and is sanctioned to conduct covert operations in any area that is considered significant. Moreover, the executive branch does not blatantly sanction CIA operations without pondering over the information presented to it. Also, there is a congressional oversight committee that sets parameters in which the organization can operate within; these are usually agreed behind closed doors or during classified sessions. This does not mean that all participants concerned do not make bad judgment calls.
Richard Matheson’s famed short story ‘Button, Button’ is often alluded to as a simplistic representation of drone policy. Imagine a man offered you a box with a big red button on it. He tells you if you press it, you will receive a hefty sum of money, no questions asked. There is only one consequence: someone you don’t know will be killed. It’s an interesting dilemma – would you press it, knowing some nameless person’s life rests in your hands?
“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.
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.
It’s important to acknowledge that yes, drone strikes have brought about a completely different type of warfare, one which the original thinkers behind just war theory probably could not fathom. As put by Yemeni activist Farea al-Muslimi, “When there is a normal war, people can hide, or they can stay away from the military – they can make choices and be careful, but when drones come, you just don’t know when you’ll be next. The fear is incredible.” Drone usage comes at a great cost; the psychological effect of constantly being on guard on Yemen’s civilians are perhaps a new aspect of war that should be considered when considering the behaviors considered ‘just’ during
Some of us might remember how beautiful it was this day, how blue and clear the sky was. September 11, 2001 is not just a regular day anymore it marks the day terrorists attacked, not only New York but also America. Much like Pearl Harbor this is the day we were taken off guard and the day we struck back and went to war. With everything stripped away from us and no sense of what was going on, a country that was just fine on September 10, 2011 was now broken, on such a beautiful day such terror occurred. According to The Best American Magazine Writing in the article “Experts from the Encyclopedia of 9/11” there is a quote that reads, “Many of us remember going to work that week, searching for an appropriate journalistic response to a world that was changing in ways we couldn’t yet see.”(page 107) When our country was expecting failure and loss of control, we pulled together as a nation and started picking up the pieces from this tragedy that tore us apart this day. After reading this article I asked myself, how could anyone do such a horrible thing? Why would anyone want to give the...
9/11 was one of the darkest days in America, but some say the government could have been part of these attacks. For many years people have debated about the 9/11 cover up. This theory cannot explain why the government would do this. Once people understand why the 9/11 cover up is fake, they will begin to see the answer to their problem, could the government have done this? This conspiracy theory is wrong because, terrorists admitted to the attacks, so many people died, and there's no evidence against the government.
The moment I received the prompt to explore just war theory, the first controversial topic containing strong arguments on both sides that interested me was that of drone warfare. As tensions rise between countries and technology improves, the possibility of advanced warfare among nations seems imminent as drones are deployed in replacement of soldiers. The purposes of these unmanned drones in present day are primarily intel collection and target acquisition, which usually leads to extermination of known and presumed threats to the dispatcher. In the United States, when it comes to the topic of using drones within foreign countries, most of the citizens will agree that it is an efficient way to remotely deal with immediate threats to the country.
War can be defined as “an organized and deliberate political act by an established political authority, which must cause 1,000 or more deaths in a twelve-month period, and which requires at least two actors capable of harming each other” (253, Mingst.) This is a broad definition as war can take several different forms, categorized in various ways. Today, the United States is engaged in the War on Terror. In a post-9/11 world, terrorist attacks are even greater sources of fear to citizens, as well as massive threats to national and international security. Over the past few decades, terrorists have been successful in increasing support and achieving political aims. This poses a major security dilemma to victims, such as the United States. It is this sense of insecurity that leads to military action. Any sense of threat is likely to send a nation to arms (251-252, Mingst.) The U.S. government thus must decide as to what the best course of action would be, in protecting the nation. Over the past decade, drone use has increased exponentially for this purpose. These unmanned aerial vehicles, or drones, are often used in attempts to eliminate terrorism. While it is evident that terrorism poses massive threats to the nation, drone strikes are not conducive to a just war.
“You can’t win the war on crime, or the war on terror. You can’t repeal human nature.” (Robert Harris). Robert Harris is a writer and a former journalist for the BBC. He examines the war on terror in this quote saying it is unwinnable and it is just human nature for people to terrorize and commit crimes. If this is true, the US government has been spending money and resources on a war that is unwinnable. But, this is just someone's opinion, right? The argument of the validity of the war on terror will be examined as well as how the US should cease funding for it because it is destroying the economics and society of the United States.
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.