Using Drones for Military Strikes: Reading, Discussing, and Writing Pro and Con Issues

Using Drones for Military Strikes: By Dean Berry, Ed. D. This PowerPoint represents the first half of the lesson. Use the video version to view the complete lesson.

Evaluating Pro and Con Arguments Prepare to Review the Issue and Write an Argumentative Essay

Issue: Should the U.S. Use Drones to Strike Suspected Terrorist Groups in Other Countries Let’s Review the Issue Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), otherwise known as drones, are remotely-controlled aircraft which may be armed with missiles and bombs for attack missions. Since the World Trade Center attacks of Sep. 11, 2001 and the subsequent "War on Terror," the United States has used drones to kill suspected terrorists in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, and other countries.

The Pro Position Proponents say that drones have decimated terrorist networks abroad via precise strikes with minimal civilian casualties. They contend that drones are relatively inexpensive weapons, are used under proper government oversight, and that their use helps prevent "boots on the ground" combat and makes America safer.

The Con Position Opponents say that drone strikes create more terrorists than they kill. They contend that drone strikes kill large numbers of civilians, violate international law, lack sufficient congressional oversight, violate the sovereignty of other nations, and make the horrors of war appear as innocuous as a video game.

Are Drone Strikes Effective? Let’s Think About the Issue Have drone strikes made the U.S. safer? Do drone strikes reduce the need for combat troops? Who decides when to use drone strikes? Are drones more dangerous to civilians than conventional warfare?

What Do You Think? Use your red or green card to signify your response to this question. Raise your red card if you disagree or your green card if you agree. The U.S. military should use drones to strike targets in other countries.

What Do You Think? Raise Your Red or Green Card The U.S. military should not use drones to strike targets in other countries.

Essential Questions to Guide our Review of the Issue 1. What does the research data say about the issue? 2. How do you know the research is reliable? 3. Are the arguments supported by logical reasoning? 4. Is each argument supported by specific facts and examples? 5. Which side of the issue is supported by a preponderance of the evidence?

Evaluating Evidence Now that we have shared opinions, let’s examine the evidence. Analyze the pro and con arguments on the following frames and determine which position presents the strongest case.

Read each argument closely to see if it passes the smell test? Take careful notes as you read the following arguments.

Review the Evidence and Arguments The Pro Position

PRO US Drone Strikes Reason # 1 Drone strikes make the United States safer by decimating terrorist networks across the world. Drone attacks in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen, and Somalia have killed upwards of 3,500 militants, including dozens of high-level commanders implicated in organizing plots against the United States. According to President Obama, "dozens of highly skilled al Qaeda commanders, trainers, bomb makers and operatives have been taken off the battlefield.

Plots have been disrupted that would have targeted international aviation, US transit systems, European cities, and our troops in Afghanistan. Simply put, these strikes have saved lives.” David Rohde, a former New York Times reporter held hostage by the Taliban in Pakistan for several months in 2009, called the drones a "terrifying presence" for militants. On Nov. 1, 2013 drone strikes killed Pakistani Taliban leader Hakimullah Mehsud.

Reason # 2 Drones limit the scope and scale of military action. Since the 9/11 attacks, the main threats to US security are decentralized terrorist networks operating in countries around the world, not large countries fighting with massive air, ground, and sea armies. Invading Pakistan, Yemen, or Somalia to capture relatively small terrorist groups would lead the United States to expensive conflict, responsibility for destabilizing those governments, large numbers of civilian casualties, empowerment of enemies who view the United States as an occupying imperialist power, US military deaths, and other unintended consequences.

America's attempt to destroy al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan by invading and occupying the country resulted in a war that has dragged on for over 12 years. Using drone strikes against terrorists abroad allows the United States to achieve its goals at a fraction of the cost of an invasion in money, manpower, and lives.

Reason # 3 Drone strikes are carried out with the collaboration and encouragement of local governments, and make those countries safer. US drone strikes help countries fight terrorist threats to their own domestic peace and stability, including al Qaeda and the Taliban in Pakistan, al Shabaab in Somalia, al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula in Yemen, and al Qaeda in the Maghreb in Algeria and Mali. Yemen’s President, Abdu Rabbu Mansour Hadi, has openly praised drone strikes in his country, stating that the "electronic brain’s precision is unmatched by the human brain."

In a 2008 State Department cable made public by Wikileaks, Pakistani Chief of Army Staff General Ashfaq Kayani asked US officials for more drone strikes, and in Apr former Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf acknowledged to CNN that his government had secretly signed off on US drone strikes. In Pakistan, where the vast majority of drone strikes are carried out, drones have contributed to a major decrease in violence. The 41 suicide attacks in Pakistan in 2011 were down from 49 in 2010 and a record high of 87 in 2009, which coincided with an over ten-fold increase in the number of drone strikes.

Reason #4 Drone strikes are subject to a strict review process and congressional oversight. President Obama, in his "Presidential Policy Guidance" released on May 23, 2013, established five criteria that must be met before lethal action may be taken against a foreign target: "1) Near certainty that the terrorist target is present; 2) Near certainty that non- combatants will not be injured or killed; 3) An assessment that capture is not feasible at the time of the operation; 4) An assessment that the relevant governmental authorities in the country where action is contemplated cannot or will not effectively address the threat to U.S. persons.

Reason #5 Drones kill fewer civilians, as a percentage of total fatalities, than any other military weapon. The traditional weapons of war - bombs, shells, mines, mortars - cause more unintended ("collateral") damage to people and property than drones, whose accuracy and technical precision mostly limit casualties to combatants and intended targets.

Although estimates vary because of the secretive nature of the program, it is estimated that 174 to 1,047 civilians have been killed in Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia since the United States began conducting drone strikes abroad following the Sep. 11, 2001 attacks, roughly 8-17% of all deaths from US drones. In comparison, in World War II, civilian deaths, as a percentage of total war fatalities, are estimated at 40 to 67%. In the Korean, Vietnam, and Balkan Wars, the percentages are approximately 70%, 31%, and 45% respectively.

Reason # 6 Drones make US military personnel safer.Drones are launched from bases in allied countries and are operated remotely by pilots in the United States, minimizing the risk of injury and death that would occur if ground soldiers and airplane pilots were used instead. Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and their affiliates often operate in distant and environmentally unforgiving locations where it would be extremely dangerous for the United States to deploy teams of special forces to track and capture terrorists.

Such pursuits may pose serious risks to US troops including firefights with surrounding tribal communities, anti-aircraft shelling, land mines, improvised explosive devices (IEDs), suicide bombers, snipers, dangerous weather conditions, harsh environments, etc. Drone strikes eliminate all of those risks common to "boots on the ground" missions.

Contact You have completed the first half of this lesson. In order to continue this lesson, go to our video library and view the video streamed version. You can access all of our videos by contacting us for your personal password.

26 Copyright Protected © 2013 Dean R. Berry All Rights Reserved No part of this document may be reproduced without written permission from the author