The Pros And Cons Of Drone Warfare
Matt Clement
RD Willard (9:25-10:40)
Final Paper
Is Drone Warfare the Answer? In recent discussions of the use of unmanned drone strikes in the war on terror, a controversial issue has arisen in relations to the collateral damage involved in such attacks. Despite the popular beliefs of many people around the world they sky is not full of unmanned killing machines. These machines are piloted from a safe distance from the battles or target areas. They are flown by experienced Air Force pilots who have trained for years with these machines. Although this does not mean others are not killed in missile strikes that target terrorist organization leaders. What this means is they are trained to minimize what is known as collateral damage. Collateral …show more content…
But everyone agrees that too much blood was shed. The first blood that was shed was that of Harmon McCoy who was murdered by the sons of a Hatfield. The feud ended in 1891, after all was said and done a combination of twelve Hatfield’s and McCoy’s were dead. But the most significant of all was the death of Alifair McCoy; she was shot in the back by Ellison Mounts by accident. Years later Ellison Mounts was hanged for this crime which was the signal of the end of the feud. The reason why I raise this point is that these two people were senselessly killed due to other people actions. Ellison Mounts who was “mentally slow” was taken advantage of by the Hatfield’s, and Alifair was shot due to Ellison being dragged there. Both deaths in many historian’s opinions were collateral damage in an almost three decade long …show more content…
In recent headlines a drone strike in North Waziristan (near the afghan border) killed sixteen Taliban militants. In a report later published by “Dawn” an English language newspaper in Pakistan the drone launched a second strike on the camp while rescuers were trying to save any survivors. While it is not known whether the rescuers were hostile or not the CIA launched the second missile and killed three of the search team members. This apparent collateral damage happened in the wake of CNN publishing an article on the recent decrease in civilian casualties during drone strikes. After hearing about this I researched the percentage of deaths (militant and civilian) in Pakistan, the number was eye opening a staggering sixteen percent of people killed during drone strikes in Pakistan were non-combatants. To me this means that the US and NATO have “murdered” hundreds of civilians for the “greater
RD Willard (9:25-10:40)
Final Paper
Is Drone Warfare the Answer? In recent discussions of the use of unmanned drone strikes in the war on terror, a controversial issue has arisen in relations to the collateral damage involved in such attacks. Despite the popular beliefs of many people around the world they sky is not full of unmanned killing machines. These machines are piloted from a safe distance from the battles or target areas. They are flown by experienced Air Force pilots who have trained for years with these machines. Although this does not mean others are not killed in missile strikes that target terrorist organization leaders. What this means is they are trained to minimize what is known as collateral damage. Collateral …show more content…
But everyone agrees that too much blood was shed. The first blood that was shed was that of Harmon McCoy who was murdered by the sons of a Hatfield. The feud ended in 1891, after all was said and done a combination of twelve Hatfield’s and McCoy’s were dead. But the most significant of all was the death of Alifair McCoy; she was shot in the back by Ellison Mounts by accident. Years later Ellison Mounts was hanged for this crime which was the signal of the end of the feud. The reason why I raise this point is that these two people were senselessly killed due to other people actions. Ellison Mounts who was “mentally slow” was taken advantage of by the Hatfield’s, and Alifair was shot due to Ellison being dragged there. Both deaths in many historian’s opinions were collateral damage in an almost three decade long …show more content…
In recent headlines a drone strike in North Waziristan (near the afghan border) killed sixteen Taliban militants. In a report later published by “Dawn” an English language newspaper in Pakistan the drone launched a second strike on the camp while rescuers were trying to save any survivors. While it is not known whether the rescuers were hostile or not the CIA launched the second missile and killed three of the search team members. This apparent collateral damage happened in the wake of CNN publishing an article on the recent decrease in civilian casualties during drone strikes. After hearing about this I researched the percentage of deaths (militant and civilian) in Pakistan, the number was eye opening a staggering sixteen percent of people killed during drone strikes in Pakistan were non-combatants. To me this means that the US and NATO have “murdered” hundreds of civilians for the “greater