The United states needs to use military drones because they help eliminate foreign threats, keeps the country safe and prevent future attacks from happening. Critics,say drones kill thousands of innocent civilians, make foreign publics angry, illegally target Americans, and set a dangerous principle that irresponsible governments will abuse overtime. Some comments are true, others are not. In the end, drone strikes will remain a great tool for counterterrorism because no U.S troops on the ground can get injured or killed. The united states will not tolerate terrorists in parts of the world where we can't get too and drones can offer a low risk way of targeting these areas while viewing collateral damage.
The dependability of a government isn't what it once. Everyone in the world needs to unite... ... middle of paper ... ...ets. (Wilcox Par 6) The challenge for governments is to persuade people that the killing of civilians by terrorists is absolutely unacceptable whatever the political motive. Winning the hearts and minds of citizens against terrorism so that terrorists can be isolated and exposed is thus a vital part of successful counterterrorism.
In contrast to this, drones strikes violate the authority of the counties they attack, most attacks are carried out without the authorization of the country .Pakistani Prime Sharif said that the "use of drones is not only a continued violation of our territorial integrity but also detrimental to our resolve at efforts in eliminating terrorism from our country... I would therefore stress the need for an end to drone attacks. "( Anderson ). How are terrorist groups sopost to respect us when the example set is that invading other countries is complete okay. Not to mention that the fury by them and the rest of the country could lead someday to a devastating war or a massive attack.
The war would be massive and devastating to everyone. For some countries, nuclear weapons will lull them into a false sense of invulnerability and they will not make wise decisions and engage in war anyways, resulting in deaths that could have been prevented. In conclusion, no country has the right to possess nuclear weapons. They are dangerous and should not be tampered with.
(ABC News)Even though their points are valid, these reasons do not warrant the cease of drone activity. One of the benefits of the Drone is preserving U.S. life. Drones can now replace surveillance missions inside enemy territory without risking the pilots capture and death. Drones are able to slip across borders without risking lives of pilots. They can linger in foreign countries and scout potential threats for a long period of time.
In the face of such choices, we do not understand why these same government officials refuse to give pilots a last chance to prevent such a tragedy” (Madden 1). Pilots want and deserve the ability to defend the plane, as a last resort, should the need arise. Terrorists will be discouraged by a pilot with nothing to lose in this last attempt at defending their plane. The next reason pilots should be armed is because it creates a sense of safety for the passengers. When the pilot is armed the passengers will be more relaxed and not afraid of a terrorist attack.
Hopefully these deaths were not in vein, now other countries have joined George Bush in the war against terrorism and are launching repeated strikes on Afghanistan (the Al-Quaida’s supposed base.) They hope that these attacks will prevent any further events from happening. These attacks have in my view displayed that the Taliban can control the US economy and hit any target they wish, no matter how well guarded it is. Perhaps America should have been more cautious and handled the threats more carefully. Maybe they were being too proud and this is why the Taliban believe it is justifiable to kill innocents, or they chose to attack now because America was just feeling safe.
Each human life is as important as the other, and to save one you cannot destroy the other. To deem any breathing body in any corner of the globe as ‘collateral damage’ is a pathetic indictment directly insulting to humanity. Contrary ... ... middle of paper ... ...nes. Sending in drones instead of military personnel also means losing out on the invaluable intel that perhaps would have been obtained if the latter were used. A captured terrorist can offer all sorts of precious leads, which a dead terrorist cannot.
We Must Take Action Against Drones Now There is currently an immense controversy going on, it is questioning the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), or also known as drones, by the United States in warfare and also its effectiveness on the long run. UAVs or drones, are aircrafts without a human pilot on board that are controlled either by computers in the vehicle or under the remote control of a person. The reason behind the controversy is the fact that one third of the casualties resulting from drone attacks are innocent civilians. Evidence shows that the benefits of the United States’ use of drone attacks in warfare do not outweigh the costs. Although drones may seem like something new they have actually been around for quite a while now.
They could also be used to fight fires.The domestic use of drones could compromise our right to privacy. I think weapons on domestic drones must be prohibited. There shouldn 't be any logical reason why a weapon must be attached on a drone. It is probably alright to have an armed drones at war but not on a civilian population especially on our own backyard. Law enforcers must have a probable cause before collecting data using drones on a suspect.