Drone Strikes

11/01/13

Recently, drone strikes have been getting out of hand around the world. There are different types of drones that are used for a variety of reasons. There are drones for radar, targeted attacks, signature attacks and others. Radar drones are prevalent in recent fighting in order to help troops on the ground. By scouting ahead with an unmanned radar drone, the ground troops will be more informed about what is up ahead. Many casualties can be avoided because of valuable intelligence on what lies ahead. Radar can help show troops if they are outnumbered, or if there is an unforeseen enemy counter-attack, reducing the element of surprise.

The other drones used by the U.S military are much more ruthless. Targeted attack drones are unmanned drones used to kill "high value" targets on a kill list the government makes. Since these drones are unmanned, not only is the U.S targeting and killing high priority targets, but they are able to do so without any sort of repercussion.  There are a number of issues with these drones that are controversial. First off, the U.S claims their targeted attacks are only aimed towards threats to the U.S, however, there are many claims saying these drones are hitting innocent civilians.

This brings up the question: How does the U.S know that their targeted attacks are really hitting their targets? And if they are hitting their targets, how does the U.S know that their targets are the correct people, and not just a random civilian? Can we reliably target and kill people using unmanned drones, if not, is the risk of hitting civilians worth it? Unmanned: America's Drone Wars discusses the consequences of these drone attacks. Whether or not drone strikes are killing civilians, countries where these drone strikes are occurring are becoming more and more resentful of the U.S. If civilians are being killed then not only are these countries beginning to hate the U.S, but innocent people are being killed - Which is an intolerable act. These drone strikes are also targeting "high value" targets - How is this decided and enforced? Before drone strikes are supported by American citizens, people must know who and why these people are that we are targeting as well as as have absolute certainty that the people we target, are the people on the list, instead of innocent people.

Signature drone strikes are even more controversial because there is almost no rhyme or reason to them. Instead of targeting those high value targets, signature strikes target anyone that is engaging in "suspicious" behavior, which doesn't have any real meaning and is used at the U.S's discretion. In Unmanned: America's Drone Wars, a story is relived about a child (16) who was targeted by these drones. Whether or not he was enabling terrorist groups or doing something that threatened U.S security will most likely never be done. Both sides of the argument have their claims, and the truth may never be known.

Understandably, war and fighting terrorism is not easy. However, fighting terrorism by terrorizing is not a strategy that sits well with American citizens or helps the U.S's reputation with other countries. As these counties look on at our constant drone strikes, it strikes fear because they could be the next target. In order to gain respect and trust, the U.S should rethink how it fights the current wars of the Middle East. Maybe drone strikes are the way to go, but until we have clear parameters on a kill list, absolute certainty of the target and other safety precautions to reduce civilian killings drastically, fighting terrorism this way will only make matters worse.

"How can we say we're winning when every time we kill one, we create ten?" (Unmanned: America's Drone Wars. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNGz3ht0oyA)