Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 2

Research Paper Final Draft Julia Nguyen A2 Since the dawn of time, humans have fought in wars to solve

their disagreements. In society today, governments debating on whether drones/UAV (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles) should replace the average human soldier in battles and use them for targeted military strikes. For targeted military strikes, etc, it is unethical for the United States government and any other governments to use drones. Unmanned Aerial Vehicles are more likely to accidentally kill innocent citizens. Drones will be able to temporarily suspend terrorism for a period of time, rather than stopping terrorism itself. Drones are more likely to cause tension towards other nations, thus causing future wars to occur. Citizens are at risk when drones are in the situation. Even with pilots, drones do not have realization of who is innocent and who is not. The writer, Sean Davies, of the article Just War wrote about drones. We have yet to create a perfect error-free piece of complex software. Us as humans, havent been able to develop any invention that is capable of never causing unwanted situations. Drones are designed to carry out orders, and who is to say that there wont be any malfunctions along the way? Lives are endangered when this type of technology is introduced. Replacing soldiers with drones, for war, will not improve any situations. Former chief scientist of the Air Force, Werner Dahn, writes in the Wall Street Journal about his opinions on the subject. We dont gain anything from them if they work-and theres plenty of pain if they dont. Soldiers go to war, and in the end, an agreement can be made with the price of multiple tragedies and deaths. However, if drones were to substitute the soldiers, they would fight without purpose and the battle would have no worth. The theory that drones can be the answer to situations without human deaths is not possible without some type of tragedy at stake.

Drones would not be able to terminate terrorism. In the perspective of Foreign Affairs article, Why Drones Fail: When Tactics Drives Strategy, this technology will not be able to achieve the goal. Targeted killings have not thwarted the group's ability to replace dead leaders with new ones. Terrorism cannot simply stop, because if one leader is killed, then another will take the leaders position. Drones are ordered to kill suspected/ definite terrorists, but then the government would lose the ability to investigate the individual. Drones are helpful in saving lives. These robots, since 2002, have only killed five Americans in total, and if they plan to replace soldiers, less humans would die. Brianna Lee, author of the article, Drones, states that drones are just like average inventions to improve the future. people die in drone wars, just like they died from the automation of arrows when the crossbow was invented. Every weapon from the dawn of time, were intended for uses in war. However, drones arent the same as the average crossbow created centuries ago. Wars will be seen as a type of amusement if drones were to be used as weapons, because nothing is at stake in the situation. World wide problems will not find solutions with the aid of drones.ely safe to citizens. Citizens will be harmed most definitely when this technology is placed in issues that the government believes will solve situations. Placing drones as military does not improve the future or solve world wide problems. Drones do not have the capability to terminate the important issue on terrorism.