Drone Strikes
However, UAV’s gives the US government the capability of avoiding democracy all together, because there are no actual foot soldiers on the ground. If the United States undermines democracy through drone strikes, then what does the US constitution stand for? Of the Realpolitik persuasion “ethical considerations in war are downright dangerous, as they can prevent a state from taking action conducive to its national interest” (Dalziel, 2014, pg.2). While there are individuals in favor for no moral considerations, the party against argues “that if we make no moral considerations when taking the life of an enemy, we effectively render them vermin that may be exterminated without moral regard” (Dalziel, 2014, pg. 2). The United States must hold itself
…show more content…
Drones are still considered a new technology, and harbor many difficulties when creating and enacting laws. Drones have become problematic with their uses, their targets, and illegal surveillance. Since drone warfare has increased dramatically under Obama’s presidency, we can still see no regulations or laws in sight. The United States created this new technology faster than they could understand and create laws. Therefore, the US may still not understand the destruction and problems that drone strikes cause. For the United States to continue its drone program, the world would be grateful to see regulations be put in place. Since there are several types of drones ranging from commercial use to military use, it can be difficult to create rules that satisfy both types of drones. However, the United States needs separate laws for military drones and commercial drones. Commercial drones are different, because they could be used by police agencies, sports teams, or as a hobby. Civilians are not flying their drones around the world, so they need separate laws compared to the military. The military is using their drones for warfare and surveillance, but we must enact a series of laws: for example no use of military drones surveilling over America. Second, in order for a drone strike to be initiated our intelligence information must be detailed. It is also important that when America is initiating drone strikes, the government must attempt to not kill
Drones are still considered a new technology, and harbor many difficulties when creating and enacting laws. Drones have become problematic with their uses, their targets, and illegal surveillance. Since drone warfare has increased dramatically under Obama’s presidency, we can still see no regulations or laws in sight. The United States created this new technology faster than they could understand and create laws. Therefore, the US may still not understand the destruction and problems that drone strikes cause. For the United States to continue its drone program, the world would be grateful to see regulations be put in place. Since there are several types of drones ranging from commercial use to military use, it can be difficult to create rules that satisfy both types of drones. However, the United States needs separate laws for military drones and commercial drones. Commercial drones are different, because they could be used by police agencies, sports teams, or as a hobby. Civilians are not flying their drones around the world, so they need separate laws compared to the military. The military is using their drones for warfare and surveillance, but we must enact a series of laws: for example no use of military drones surveilling over America. Second, in order for a drone strike to be initiated our intelligence information must be detailed. It is also important that when America is initiating drone strikes, the government must attempt to not kill