Cameron Henry English Discursive Essay
‘Should Unmanned Aerial Vehicles – drones – be used to strike possible terrorist targets?’
Imagine you were at a gathering with your friends and family celebrating the marriage between a close relative, then, out of nowhere missiles start hitting around you, and in the blink of an eye the relatives you had been having a great time with ten seconds earlier have been killed or heavily wounded.[1] The United States of America’s counter-terrorism program has caused some debate in the past, but the case which has acquired the most publicity is the United States’ use of drones in the Middle East. It is currently a vast topic of discussion which has caused controversy and raised many questions across the world. President Obama himself has ordered more than 350 strikes against al-Qaeda and their allied groups in Pakistan. [2] A drone is an Unmanned Ariel Vehicle is an aircraft which does not have a pilot on board and is controlled by the remote control of a pilot on the ground or autonomously by computers inside the vehicle. Drones are mainly used for military surveillance, but recently have been turned into unmanned weapons, with the ability to carry missiles and a tracking system. Many countries have their number and types of drones as secret military information so that it is not accessible by the public, including how many drones they have on hand, and what type of drone it is. Drones are mainly split into six categories depending on what job they carry out: Target and decoy, Reconnaissance, Combat, Logistics, Research and Development, and Civil and Commercial. Unlike most other countries, the United States has openly admitted to owning at least 678 drones– as of 2012 – [2] This has grasped the attention of many people with opposing opinions on the matter, should drones be used, or should on the ground troops be used?
The Term Paper on Comp Stat Community Policing Police
The world of policing is one of constant change. As far back as the early days of Peel ian police philosophy the missions and goals of police departments have constantly been altered. In our diverse communities and cites worldwide we see police departments engaged in very different forms of policing. Even across the many jurisdictions that operate within our nation we see departments that run at ...
Primarily and most importantly is the dispute around the accuracy and guarantee which surrounds the use of drones to kill possible targets. It is argued that one disadvantage of using drones is that they are not accurate enough due to the inability to correctly identify if it is the correct target or not. Due to them flying at high altitudes, and not being on the ground with the target. In addition to this, it is known that in the year 2008, 28% of all casualties were civilian [3], which is the effect of using drones alone since they cannot see the people who are being shot at, unlike ground soldiers, who can easily differentiate between an insurgent and a civilian. This raises questions about the efficiency of drones. On November 5, 2008, Afghan resident Hamid Karzai commented on the USA’s use of drones, saying “Our demand is that there will be no civilian casualties in Afghanistan. We cannot win the fight against terrorism with airstrikes — this is my first demand of the new president of the United States — to put an end to civilian casualties.”[4] Highlighting his negative opinion toward the use of UAV’s. The other side of the argument is that in 2011 the number had decreased to a mere 16% [5], which points out the increase in precision and the decrease in civilian deaths as a consequence of using drones. And the number is likely to continue decreasing as they improve technologically making them more precise. Furthermore, it is also argued that as long as the terrorist threat is eliminated, civilian casualties are not as important, as a terrorist can do damage to many people’s lives and they are such a high priority.
The greatest benefit of using drones, it is argued, is that they prevent the deaths of soldiers in the countries in which the terrorist targets are hiding and plotting attacks against Governments; as the safety of foot soldiers is sealed due to them not being used since the drone can do the work for itself. The United States would not need to send troops over to the Middle Eastern countries and will ultimately save the lives of many soldiers, and will also in turn save them spending money, resources and time sending men to track, and eliminate the threat. The use of a drone high up in the sky negates the need to use any ground forces since the drones are controlled in military bases by an operator, it guarantees that absolutely no American ground forces are in danger. The conflicting argument is that, with the United States only caring about the safety of their men, and not the safety of the people living in these countries, which begs the question. Are the lives of the United States’ men and women more valuable than those in these countries who are at risk of being killed?
The Term Paper on Critical analysis of Good Country People by Flannery O’ Connor
Good Country People is one of the most sought after works of Flannery O’ Connor. It is said to be the biography of O’Connor but she never claimed it to be such. The novel Good Country People seems to reflect the current situation and emotional status of O’ Connor while she was writing the novel, and if it is not in fact her biography, her emotion at that time has influenced the novel greatly. ...
This brings up the final argument surrounding the unclear distinction between war and peace that using drones brings. As the United States are using the drones in countries that they are not at war with, and have no legal authority in, so attacking the country and killings it’s people while at ‘peace’ with the country is thought of as inhumane. Between 2006 and 2009 drone strikes have killed between 750 and 1,000 people in Pakistan. Of these, about 20 people were leaders of Al Qaeda, Taliban, and associated groups. Overall, about 66-68% of the people killed were militants, and between 31 and 33% were civilian casualties.[6] Not only that, but it also blurs the distinction between the enemy and citizens of the countries, as anyone who is seen as suspicious or around the target area is regarded to be a threat. Which also emphasises the inhumanity, as any innocent bystander could be seen as a target and could potentially be killed. What if you were walking across the street and missiles from a drone 15,000 feet in the air started to hit the ground around you? Shahzad Akbar, an anti- drone lawyer who works in Islamabad has a very strong opinion on drones, and said: “I believe in very simple principles that were taught to us by the West, that everyone is presumed innocent unless proven guilty. So anyone who is killed in drone strikes unless and until his guilt is established in some independent forum – that person is innocent.” [8]
The Essay on War With Iraq Country Terrorist Remember
In my opinion I do not think the United States of America should go to war with Iraq. Who knows what Iraq has over seas in their dirty, insane, third world country. They probably have bombs the United States does not even know exists. Iraq may also have another country on his side and ready to fight against America. Think of all we could lose if we went to war. Much needed money, military ...
On the other hand, the situation is seen as a conflict between the USA and possible terrorist threats, so it should not matter whether the terrorists are hiding in other countries. If the United States let the insurgents hide in countries then they are allowing them to plot against America and other countries, which could another huge disaster such as 911 and London Bombings, which have happened in the past, resulting in the deaths of hundreds and thousands of innocent people. Another point in favour of using drones is that it is by the far the most effective easy way of deterring and eliminating targets since there is no threat to America, and the worst case scenario is the aeroplane being shot down. The fact that the terrorists can do almost nothing to help themselves except hide makes them an excellent counter terrorist weapon. This will result in less terrorist groups appearing.
In conclusion, I feel that both sides of the arguments have equally great points. All in all, I feel that the advantages of using drones to eliminate threats outweighs the disadvantages on the grounds that they are getting technologically more advanced every year, thus improving the amount of terrorists killed compared to citizens: leading to the ever increasing effectiveness of stopping terrorist groups from devising plans against countries across the globe. Hopefully resulting in the prevention of a horrific event with consequences as dreadful as 9/11 from ever happening again, and will protect us, our friends and our families from threats for years and years to come. “To do nothing in the face of terrorist networks would invite far more civilian casualties.” [7]
Word Count: 1,300 words
[1] – Fox news – November 5th 2008 – “U.S Strike Reportedly Kill 40 at Afghanistan Wedding”
[2] – BBC News US & Canada – May 24th 2013 – “Obama shows a strong commitment to the drone programme”
[3] – The Guardian – August 3rd 2012 – “Drones by Country: who has all the UAVs? – Information provided by ‘International Institute for Strategic Studies”
[4] – USA Today November 5th 2008 – “Karzai ‘demands’ Obama end civilian deaths after latest incident”
[5] – The New York Times – July 14th 2012 – “The Moral Case for Drones” – Percentages found by ‘Bureau of Investigative Journalism’ in London.
The Term Paper on Burma (Myanmar): Country Profile
Burma is a developing country located at the Southeast region of Asia. 61 years ago, Burma was under the colony of Britain but through the struggle and passion of the “48 million multi-ethnic people” of Burma, they gained their independence. As a result, an independent democratic parliament government with a new constitutional system was established which have helped in providing structure to the ...
[6] – The Christian Science Monitor – December 11th 2009 – “Drone aircraft in a stepped-up war in Afghanistan and Pakistan”
[7] – Quote by US President Barack Obama during his national security speech in Washington DC
Bibliography:
BBC News – www.bbc.co.uk/news/
The guardian News – www.theguardian.com/world/drones
How stuff works – www.science.howstuffworks.com/predator.htm
Drone Wars – www.dronewars.net/aboutdrone/
International Institute for Strategic Studies – www.iiss.org
Truth Out – www.truth-out.org/news/