Anthony Haynes B5 Are Drones Ethical?

War: war never changes; but how its fought has evolved over the centuries, each culture
developing and honing a particular art, weapon, technology, and or tactic. This much is true for
the United States, with one of the most advanced militaries in the world they have a wide arsenal
of assets to choose from, although some of those options may be rather controversial. In the
U.S.s War on Terror the weapon of choice has become UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles) or
drones. Despite their prowess on the battlefield, they leave a wake of frenzy, and when used in
conjunction with inefficient stratagem are highly unethical. Their protocols may lead to possible
innocents being targeted, their actions are counterproductive to the main goal in the War on
Terror, and their controversiality has led to intense international disdain. Support for these
crafts boasts the success and ethicality of drones through the security of the U.S. homeland,
although the reason these claims are illegitimate is because the major goal of U.S. drone use is
cripple the terrorist organization Al Qaeda.

The key asset in any war is intelligence, the U.S. drone program relies heavily upon
intelligence, yet not as heavily as it should; the lack of material information involved in drone
strikes has led to the targeting of possible innocents. Although Washington does indeed use
intelligence, what they use is by normal means not enough to condemn a target Washington
often goes after people whose identity it does not know but who appear to be behaving like
militants (pg. 3 WTDS Cronin) accompanied by Protecting Americans from terrorism may
require early action, even preemption, and early action means striking before knowing that a
threat is imminent.(pg. 5 WTDS Cronin) The source directly indicates that unknown
individuals are targeted and killed by drone strikes, all on situational assumptions; what a
militant acts like can include a wide range of behaviors, if there is no identification or more
substantial information present it is impossible to determine if they truly are a threat.
Justification for such actions relies upon the claim of protecting the American people, yet in the
majority of cases no alternative-potentially diplomatic-efforts are made to diffuse the situation.

The U.S. vowed to dissolve the terrorist organization Al Qaeda for the sake of world
safety and retribution, and the drone program now comprises the centerpiece of U.S. efforts to do
so, but in all reality it only exacerbates the issue. The War on Terror is vaguely focused to
retaliate in response to those responsible for offensive actions taken against the U.S., and to do
so swiftly, but difficulties arose Washington now finds itself in a permanent battle with an
amorphous and geographically dispersed foe. (pg. 3 WTDS Cronin). The drone program is
effective, yet its far reaching effects are malignant to the U.S.s final objective drones are
killing operatives who aspire to attack the United States today or tomorrow. But they are also
increasing the likelihood of attacks over the long term, by embittering locals and cultivating a
desire for vengeance. (pg. 5 WTDS Cronin) The main goal has always been to eradicate Al
Qaeda and its subsidies, yet the drone program is incapable of such a task alone. With the
continuation of the drone program as the sole component leading the way Al Qaeda has adapted
and expanded, as we struggle to contain this expansion we disturb more and more people,
stirring a sea of emotions, conclusively inciting our own opposition.

One of the most important assets any power engaging in anti-terrorist activities needs is public
support, both from those affected and otherwise; the U.S. may see their drone program through
rose-colored glasses, but the world as a whole is adamantly opposed. Countries in the middle-
east directly involved are deeply dissatisfied only 17 percent of Pakistani respondents
approved, ally countries in the region disapprove Jordan (85 percent against and Egypt (89
percent against), and countries in separate regions of the world collectively frown upon the
program 51 percent Poles, 59 percent of Germans, 63 percent French. (pg. 4 WTDS Cronin)
A simple glance of these statistics shows how the U.S. is performing under a dimming global
spotlight, no longer roses of erudition but orchids of ostracization falling at their feet. The main
side effect the U.S. faces is begrudging transactions and strained relations, the information comes
in smaller and smaller doses, and when there is no shared knowledge success falters; effectively
stopping the drone program-as well as many other sectors-from performing any significant
actions.

Regardless of international fire, there are those who support the program, claiming it
helps prevent future 9/11 reminiscent attacks on U.S. soil. While not untrue, this is not solely the
primary objective of the U.S. drone program, there are three in all the strategic defeat of Al
Qaeda and groups affiliated with it, the containment of local conflicts so that they do not breed
new enemies, and the preservation of the security of the American people., Drones do not
serve all these goals. (pg. 1 WTDS Cronin) In the short term, perhaps all three goals can be
reached; Al Qaeda may be quelled, control may be achieved, and America will be secure...but
only for a time. Complete dominance over all three of these goals is certainly possible, although
more resources than the drone program alone must be dedicated. Individually, the drone program
is only capable of retaining temporary control; as time continues, Americas enemies shall adapt,
and America shall be the lesser for it.

The use of drones by the United States is inefficacious and immoral. The absence of
affirmative information and its use in the U.S. drone program has lead to potential civilian
casualties. The unique reliance upon drones in the War on Terror has been self-degradative
over the course of the operation. International morale regarding the U.S.s drone activity in the
middle-east is paltry, negative viewpoints of the program have also spilled over into the worlds
perception of America. And even though America has been successful in defending the
homeland in the past-thanks in part to drones- Washingtons desire is to annul Al Qaeda and its
ilk, drones only pester and distract, with weak lasting effect.