Pros And Cons Of Drone Strikes
Since 2011, there has been debated over the War on Terror. To be more specific the targeted strikes with the use of drones. The drone has brought forth many controversies over the years. The controversies have caused a division wither or the drone program should still be in use. First, this paper will give background into the program. Then this paper will look into the pros and cons of the drones and drone strikes.
Before we get into the different side we first have to look into some of the background going into the War on Terror. The War on Terror started soon after September 11, 2001, when al Qaeda attacked the World Trade centers in New York. In the war on terror, the military used new ways to find and kill the enemy. The new way is drones …show more content…
and drone strikes. Drones were first used for surveillance and then later the drones were given the ability to strike their enemies. There has been debate over the pros and cons of drones and drone strikes.
The next part we will look at is the Cons of the drones and drone strikes. The first argument according to drones.procon.org is that “Drone strikes create more terrorists than they kill”. Those who live in countries that the US attacks using drones see their loved ones killed and they join in the efforts to stop the attacks on their homes and love ones. These drone attacks are recruiting thousands into al Qaeda. According to drones.procon.org is that “300 in 2009 increased to 700 in 2012. One example that supports this is the time square bomber who stated that their motivation was the drone strikes.
The second argument according to drones.procon.org is that “Drone strikes violate international law.” In order to be legal under international law, the individual has to pose an imminent threat. The CIA definition that the state is sufficient is not sufficient to make someone a permissible target for killing. The act of the drone strikes can be considered war crimes under international law.
The third argument according to drones.procon.org is that “US drone strikes give cover for other countries to engage in human right abuses.” Countries could use drones to attack thoughts who they think are terrorist but the rest of the world does not. The United States may see in this case that it is a violation of human rights. In this idea, anyone in any country can justify using drones by saying that they were terrorist.
That next we are going to look at the pros of drones and drone strikes.
The first argument according to drones.procon.org is that “Drone strikes make the United States safer by decimating terrorist networks across the world.” The drone strike has killed around 3,500 militants and due to these strikes have saved lives. A hostage reporter stated that drones were a “terrifying presence for militants.
The second argument according to drones.procon.org is that “Drone strikes are legal under the international law.” The United States claims that their drone strikes are legal under the international law as self-defense. It is legal to target groups in self-defense and is legal to attack them if the nation that they are in are not able to control the group. The nations have to give consent to this and officially the nations have given consent to this. The international law also allows the United State to use anticipatory self-defense.
The last argument according to drones.procon.org is that “Drone strikes are carried out with the collaboration and encouragement of local governments, and make those countries safer.” The US drone strikes help terrorist threats and help ensure domestic peace and stability. Some countries even ask for more strikes not less than many believe. With the help of the drone strike, there has been a decrease in violence in those
countries.
There will always be people who agree or disagree with the drone strikes. People will be either on one side or the other or on nether. The drone has brought forth many controversies over the years. The controversies have caused a division wither or the drone program should still be in use. First, this paper has given background into the program and why it is in use. Then this paper has looked into the pros and cons of the drones and drone strikes.
Before we get into the different side we first have to look into some of the background going into the War on Terror. The War on Terror started soon after September 11, 2001, when al Qaeda attacked the World Trade centers in New York. In the war on terror, the military used new ways to find and kill the enemy. The new way is drones …show more content…
and drone strikes. Drones were first used for surveillance and then later the drones were given the ability to strike their enemies. There has been debate over the pros and cons of drones and drone strikes.
The next part we will look at is the Cons of the drones and drone strikes. The first argument according to drones.procon.org is that “Drone strikes create more terrorists than they kill”. Those who live in countries that the US attacks using drones see their loved ones killed and they join in the efforts to stop the attacks on their homes and love ones. These drone attacks are recruiting thousands into al Qaeda. According to drones.procon.org is that “300 in 2009 increased to 700 in 2012. One example that supports this is the time square bomber who stated that their motivation was the drone strikes.
The second argument according to drones.procon.org is that “Drone strikes violate international law.” In order to be legal under international law, the individual has to pose an imminent threat. The CIA definition that the state is sufficient is not sufficient to make someone a permissible target for killing. The act of the drone strikes can be considered war crimes under international law.
The third argument according to drones.procon.org is that “US drone strikes give cover for other countries to engage in human right abuses.” Countries could use drones to attack thoughts who they think are terrorist but the rest of the world does not. The United States may see in this case that it is a violation of human rights. In this idea, anyone in any country can justify using drones by saying that they were terrorist.
That next we are going to look at the pros of drones and drone strikes.
The first argument according to drones.procon.org is that “Drone strikes make the United States safer by decimating terrorist networks across the world.” The drone strike has killed around 3,500 militants and due to these strikes have saved lives. A hostage reporter stated that drones were a “terrifying presence for militants.
The second argument according to drones.procon.org is that “Drone strikes are legal under the international law.” The United States claims that their drone strikes are legal under the international law as self-defense. It is legal to target groups in self-defense and is legal to attack them if the nation that they are in are not able to control the group. The nations have to give consent to this and officially the nations have given consent to this. The international law also allows the United State to use anticipatory self-defense.
The last argument according to drones.procon.org is that “Drone strikes are carried out with the collaboration and encouragement of local governments, and make those countries safer.” The US drone strikes help terrorist threats and help ensure domestic peace and stability. Some countries even ask for more strikes not less than many believe. With the help of the drone strike, there has been a decrease in violence in those
countries.
There will always be people who agree or disagree with the drone strikes. People will be either on one side or the other or on nether. The drone has brought forth many controversies over the years. The controversies have caused a division wither or the drone program should still be in use. First, this paper has given background into the program and why it is in use. Then this paper has looked into the pros and cons of the drones and drone strikes.