“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. Drones and UAVs are remote control vehicles that need no pilot, instead they use a signal coming from a machine that someone is controlling. Although that is not always been the case for drones, the technology in its primitive stage was available during the late 1800’s. It was seen during the civil war in the form of hot air balloons and both north and south possessed a way to create the machines. They contained a timed mechanism that would release an explosive when the time was over, this seemed very clever, but at the time it was not very effective. Years passed and the Wright brothers and created the airplane in the early 1900’s, and they did needed pilots. The concept of airplanes was moved to the next level when in the 1930’s Britain Royal Navy created one of the first UAVs. This particular UAV was know as “The Queen Bee’’. This particular model was driven by what is said to be a radio signal. Much later Drones became much more complex and that is because years of technological advances were added to old models that were being produced in late 1900’s. Today, ... ... middle of paper ... ...on. Aclu.org. Web. 13 Mar. 2014. . Ungerleider, Neal. "The Science Behind The Drone Terrorism Attack." Fastcompany.com. Fast Company. Web. 13 Mar. 2014. . Withlock, Craig. "Drone Strikes Killing More Civilians than U.S. Admits, Human Rights Groups Say." Washingtonpost.com. Washington Post, 22 Oct. 2013. Web. 10 Apr. 2014. . Wong, Edward. "Hacking U.S. Secrets, China Pushes for Drones." New York Times. NYTimes.com, 20 Sept. 2013. Web. 13 Mar. 2014. .
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.
Article One: Dainel Byman, in his article Why Drones Work: The Case for Washington’s weapon of Choice in an August 2013 article in the Brookings Institute, identifies the positive impact of US drone strikes. Byman contends that US drone strikes are extremely efficient, at little financial cost to the government, and protect the lives of American soldiers. For these reasons, Byman believes that US drone strikes are necessary to the war on terror.
First of all both authors agree that drone strikes cause casualties among civilians. They agree that drones can cause harm among civilians as far as drones hovering above for days or weeks at a time and that; that causes fear, paranoia, and mental health problems for civilians. But where they
target killing might be a necessary evil in order to maintain and protect the ideals of the American people. Sometimes it is necessary to act quickly, precisely, and secretly in order to neutralize a threat to prevent something greater from happening. Also, if the government were to alert the people of its actions, it would affect the outcome of the missions. Because of this there is a thin line between what should be accepted when pertaining to drone use and target killings.
Ever since, the U.S. military has advanced significantly in remote targeted killings, and the drone has become notably popular. These aircrafts are used primarily to spy and eventually kill an individual without having to put army boots down on surrounding ground. Drones are especially important for military missions that are deemed too dangerous for military soldiers to physically be there (Tice). The use of a drone can “get the job done” without having to be concerned with the common death and trauma of American soldiers, that ground combaters encounter daily. Drones are unmanned machines that fly with the help of lithium-polymer batteries, and give information to the drone pilot through attached sensors (Tice). These sensors have the ability to measure the distance and speed of the target, which allows the drone pilot to make an accurate hit on the victim (Tice). Missiles, that are secured onto the drone, are prompted to launch when the drone pilot deems the time is appropriate. Although this newly invented technology greatly assists the United States military in fighting war and potentially preventing danger, I believe that unmanned drones are causing more harm for our future warfare. The use of remotely-controlled aircrafts, in warfare, profoundly desensitizes the drone pilots, to the terrors of war because it makes killing too easy and ultimately
Safety is a big deal when referring to drones. According to Boy Scouts of America, an operator should have a basic understanding of a few safety rules before he/she starts flying.(www.scouting.org) You should keep your drone in your eyesight at all times and you should not intentionally fly over unprotected people or vehicles. You also should remain at least 25 feet away from individuals and vulnerable property. These rules are very simple, and yet they prevent a lot of harm. Imagine if you were flying your drone one day, and it went out of your sight. That is no big deal, right? Well, you would be correct unless you find your drone beside a person that appears to have been knocked in the head by it. After making sure everyone is okay and no one needs medical attention, you are still responsible for any damages. You may even get sued. If you get sued, you could be found guilty because technically you broke the law of letting your drone out of your sight. The rules can save drone operators a lot of stress, money, and time. Safety is a big issue with drones and how well people follow the rules can really help you or hurt
Some cons of utilizing drones are “in some cases, drones make more terrorists than they kill. People who witness loved ones be injured or killed by drone attacks can, consequently, be motivated to join operations that are against the United States” (Drones ProCon). Occasionally “drone strikes may target individuals that are not involved with any terrorist group” (Drones ProCon). Not only do drones falsely target people, they moreover “kill large numbers of civilians and traumatize local populations” (Drones ProCon). Would you be traumatized if a compact unmanned aircraft came to your town or city and started to drop bombs. I sure would be. “Drone strikes mainly kill low-value targets that are not an immediate danger to the United States” (Drones ProCon). “Drone strikes are secretive” and numerous people think that they “lack enough legal oversight” (Drones ProCon). Drone strikes also make it to where if something goes wrong, “citizens cannot hold their leaders responsible” (Drones ProCon). A drone strike also, apparently, “violates the sovereignty of other states” (Drones
Drone strikes have become a popular solution to taking out targets in the Middle East. Although their use is controversial, some say they are effective, and should be allowed, because of how effective they are at killing on the battlefield. Others argue that drones run a high risk of killing innocents, and shouldn’t be allowed. In addition some believe they are helpful at taking out targets, but they set a dangerous precedent that other nations could use. Drone strikes, otherwise known as targeted strikes, should be allowed because of their lower chances of killing the wrong target, low cost and elimination of risks of killing a soldier in battle because they’re operated thousands of miles away.
“FALL BACK!” The soldier, pinned down in Afghanistan, has no way out. He looks back to his fellow Marines, a terrorized look on his face. The enemy approaches, and he can’t move. As if by a miracle, the incoming terrorists are quickly neutralized by an overhead drone, saving the soldier's life and allowing him to return back to his comrades. This, an example of one of the many uses of drones today, serves to show how much of an impact drones can have. A drone, or UAV, is a pilotless craft that is controlled by a remote (“Drone” 2015). As technology advances, the use of drones becomes progressively more prominent. Drones, an extremely useful tool, have a multitude of uses.
The United States has become increasingly dependent upon drones to carryout not only surveillance but warfare altogether. According to Peter Bergman and Katherine Tiedemann
Drones are commonly used for warfare by the U.S. Military to carry out missions that the government does not wish ground troops to carry out. Not all military drones are meant for violence. They have drones that can be changed into saving lives. Fox News writes, “Both Stalker and K-MAX are designed to be cutting-edge military tech, but they also have great potential for civilians to help reduce the loss of life and life-changing injuries suffered every year”(Allison Barrie, par. 7). This suggests that the military’s drones can be used to save lives instead of taking them. These two drones actually communicate to each other to help firefighters put out fires before possible lives are lost. Military drones are also being used by the FBI to help in the prevention of serious crimes breaking out. CNN reports that the FBI have used surveillance drones at least a dozen times in hostage and breakout situations (Carol Cratty, par. 4). CNN’s point is that the FBI will have more information on the problem they face and will be able to make better strategies on how they will stop the crime. The drones can give them the upper hand to save innocent lives and keeping damage to a minimum. The military's drones also can be used for rescue missions. According to Fox News, “Drones equipped with infrared sensors are particularly useful for search and rescue missions. The autonomous aircraft can fly
Works Cited Anderson, Kenneth. A. The Case for Drones. Commentary. Jun. 2013: 14.
Drones are “unmanned aircraft systems”, that come in “many shapes, sizes, and designs” (Hartman). Under the Federal Aviation Administration drones have regulations: “drones over 0.55 lbs. have to be registered” (Hartman). Furthermore, there are restrictions on the altitude and airspace that drones can fly in (Hartman). Most importantly, drone pilots should complete a pre-flight inspection prior to flying the drone to ensure safe travel; there are a lot of potential hazards when using drones.
Yenne, Bill (2004). Attack of the Drones: A History of Unmanned Aerial Combat. MN: Zenith Imprint.
However, with drones, civilian fatalities are considerably less if they are compared with other forms of warfare. According to Source J, drones create less unintended damage to people and property than traditional weapons, such as war bombs, shells, mines, mortars, because drones have technical precision to limit casualties to combatants and intended targets. With such accuracy, drones can kill one person in a room of a house and spare the lives of those who are in the other rooms. While it may be argued that drones are dangerous because they have killed an estimated 1,047 civilians, this amount is miniscule compared to WWII stats. As stated in Source J, "... roughly 8-17% of all deaths from US drones. In comparison, in World War II, civilian deaths, as a percentage of total war fatalities, are estimated at 40 to 67%. In the Korean, Vietnam, and Balkan Wars, the percentages are approximately 70%, 31%, and 45%