Last year our model UN team studied the use of U.S. drone
practices in the FATA (Federally Administered Tribal Areas) region of Pakistan
– this is where most drone strikes occur and target the killing of terrorists
in the northwest of the country. The drone strike issue is a big deal because
innocent civilians are being injured and killed. It seems the U.S. government rarely acknowledges civilian
casualties so the death toll from these strikes is underreported.
Drones hover twenty-four hours a day over communities. They
also strike homes, vehicles, and public spaces without any warning. Their presence terrorizes men, women
and children and causes psychological trauma among civilian communities. The practice of striking one area
multiple times has also killed rescuers - this makes humanitarian workers
afraid or unwilling to assist injured victims.
The U.S. needs to rethink current targeted killing practices
because the number of high-level targets killed as a percentage of total
casualties is extremely low-estimated at just 2% (www.livingunderdrones.org). I don’t
think this approach is really keeping the U.S. safe from terrorists - which was
the purpose of using drones in the first place.
I most definitely agree with you - drone strikes are a bad idea .The casualties are too great to be ignored, and I feel that they are far more counterproductive than productive when it comes to catching terrorists.
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree with what you've said! Many innocent lives are being taken by the government's inaccuracy and little acknowledgement is given to admit these mishaps! I also feel that through war there is a level of respect involved with the killing of one another- as soldiers look each other in the eye as they accept their defeat. Through drone strikes, even if the target was hit, which rarely occurs, there is not the same equality and fairness involved as a typical dispute involving gunfire.
ReplyDelete