We have had several lively discussions on the use of drones by the military. We have talked about its effectiveness and morality, but there is another issue, the proliferation of military drone technology.
Here is a TED talk about this problem in the future of war.
Terrorism gives a non-state organization certain advantages including the ability to blend in with the local population. We employ drones and local hit squads to kill the terrorists in Waziristan. As with all weapons there is a risk to non-combatants who are placed at risk by the terrorists operating from their midst. Face-recognition software is employed to reduce the risk but is blunted by head scarves and no doubt there is eye recognition technology on someone's drawing board.
ReplyDeleteWhat happens when other countries and terrorist organizations become as sophisticated and dangerous as the US in employing drones? The same thing that has happened since the first stick or stone was thrown. Will civilization (I sense an oxymoron within that word) end or will there be a detant? If I were the President and had take an oath to protect and defend the US would I be willing to unilaterally disavow and destroy my drone program. No.
Norm Fairhurst
Norm thank-you for your comment. Certainly, renouncing our own drone program will not stop other parties from developing their own drones. Like it or not we are already in a drone race. Right now we have the lead but, as the TED talk points out, how long can we keep the lead with parts manufactured in China and software written in India. Our military is derived from our industrial base. We cannot expect to maintain military superiority if we neglect our industry.
ReplyDeleteMy dictionary defines terrorism as 1. the use of terrorizing methods. 2. state of fear and submission so produced. 3. a method of resisting a government or of governing. On this basis, I would say that the U.S. (and Israel) are states which practice terrorism, and states have a much higher capability for destruction than individuals. Just today there was an act of terrorism reported in connection with another Iranian scientist being murdered, the implication being that this was done either by the U.S. or Israel. To my mind, there is no reason for Iran not to have a nuclear capability in order to protect itself. It appears that the U.S. is reluctant to attack any country with nuclear capability. Norm states that he would want the president to use any force we have against our "enemies." What enemies? Iraq was not our enemy; the Afghanis are not our enemies; Cuba is not our enemy, and neither is Iran (until we make it one). I don't think we really have any enemies, other than the ones we make. Our military-industrial complex is full of itself and riding high on developing, testing, and replenishing all sorts of dastardly, inhumane and cowardly weaponry. Eisenhower warned against this. We should heed him.
ReplyDelete