Drones, or “unmanned aerial vehicles,” are military technologies that allow our government to conduct surveillance, launch missile strikes and even assassinate individuals all over the world, all without having to declare war and embroil our ground forces. The use of drone technology has enraged foreign governments such as Pakistan, which constantly suffers these attacks on their sovereignty.
Since coming to office, President Barack Obama has authorized more drone attacks than sanctioned in George W. Bush’s entire first term.
One such drone attack targeted the wrong house in Pakistan, killing 20 civilians with victims as young as 5 years old. The estimated death toll, according to the New America Foundation, has now risen to 2,300.
Meanwhile, as our country uses these drones in Pakistan, Yemen and Libya, their legality is being debated in the International Court of Justice. The Court has not come to a decision yet, but it is unlikely that they will rule in favor of such warfare.
To launch drone attacks on countries we are not at war with and to assassinate foreign citizens without the proper legal process (including a trial) is an unmistakable breach of every conventional law of war.
Not only is the legality of drone warfare dubious at best, but such tactics are also counterproductive.
The use of drone attacks in Pakistan, for example, has strained our relationship with their intelligence service. This creates a barrier to more effective intelligence gathering and greatly impedes our joint counterterrorism efforts.
Even more alarming is the reaction of the citizens of these countries. Drone attacks have understandably inflamed anti-American sentiment as innocent civilians die; people have come to realize that the United States has no authority to take such action.
These people are oppressed by their governments and live in impoverished communities — the perfect breeding ground for extremism and violence.
Drone attacks only serve to exacerbate their hopelessness and escalate aggression. Using this technology may achieve short-term security, but such measures will certainly lead to a more violent outcome in the future.
These drone attacks are indefensible from an ethical standpoint. It reeks of audacity and privilege for a country to impede on the sovereignty of other nations and terrorize their civilians, especially if they are free from facing the physical risks of such aggression.
How do you win a politically correct war? So the author believes we shouldn't use our technology huh? Well as a real American, im in favor of anything that saves American lives. As far as rules of war, these muslim terrorist follow no such thing. These are people who disguise themselves in burkas and hide behind children. People like Dana, have no idea how it feels to be on the battlefield and they talk about what they don't know. Drone attacks save lives of our boys. Drone attacks have killed many of Al-Qaeda top commanders. If we stop our drone attacks, the first people that would rejoice would be our enemy. Do we actually want to please our enemies? I thought we were trying to win a war here?
true true sorry……. my mistake……. shout out to the ladies
This article clear states the side she has taken Arafat…. Anybody who doesn't see this, clearly is on her side or just ignorant…. A traitor indeed
Such vitriol! What happened to the civility touted by everyone a few months ago?
I like the fact that despite all the rabid creatures Arafat, Geert, rude and bob, Dana continues to write and there is nothing they can do about it. NOTHING. So keep whining you losers. hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha….
I also like the immaturity you show. No one is suggesting that Ms. El Kurd stop writing. She is entitled to her opinion. If we disagree then we can have a discussion in a civil manner. The sad part, in my opinion, is that everyone in opposition of Ms. El Kurd's position does nothing but post facts and logic while others such as yourself and user 'Abufaisal' preoccupy yourselves with insults and spamming the rating system. If you want to disagree, I suggest you show up with some facts and reason instead of typing 'haha' multiple times. It only makes you seem like a fool.
all he did was post links from jihadwatch.com. that's literally his go-to source
While The Daily Cougar lets stand comments from "go away" and "Abufaisal" my comments –which though controversial — at least add a very real and different perspective have been deleted.
It appears The Daily Cougar is supportive of ill-informed and factually incorrect (or at the least misleading) article by Dana my comments are not to be respected.
It appears The Daily Cougar is more interested in supporting a contributor who continually misleads instead of a poster who corrects her errors. What sort of Editorial Board is this?
your posts on the previous articles were left because you were civil. But when you accuse the author of being a terrorist then you have crossed the line
I like how when someone points out how dumb you look you immediately consult a thesaurus. I, for one, saw plenty of facts in the posts by Arafat.
Page 1.
go away writes, "They made disgusting sexual slurs…"
Where and when?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
"…accused her of racism…"
This is definitely a lie. I accused her of accusing me of racism, not the other way around. I have argued on this site that the true racists are Muslims who believe in the Qur'an, a text which demands Muslims treat non-Muslims as inferior. This is not "racism" this is, sadly, the truth and it explains why in places like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Egypt, Bahrain, Libya, Mauritania, etc… non-Muslims do NOT have the same rights as Muslims do.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
"They (me and others) don't post facts they post insults and slander…you ignorant buffon. {sic}"
I plead guilty of insulting Dana and others. That's my style for better or worse. And I am not embarrassed to say so.
Page 2.
That said, there is a profound difference between insulting someone and printing material that is untrue, and I will NOT let someone accuse me of posting misinformation, as you do, when I did no such thing. In fact it is Dana who is consistently and continually and predictably posting information that cannot be supported with facts, not me. Why The Daily Cougar continues to give Dana a voice is beyond me. Part of an editor's responsibility — or so it seems to me — is to fact check the material they publish.
And Page 4.
As far as I am concerned Dana is doing nothing more than wrongfully accusing Israel, America and the West of being guilty of the very sins that Islamic countries practice without recrimination, particularly recrimination by the likes of people like Dana. I may have stepped over the line in some of my insults – or so the editors at The Daily Cougar believe – but I will NOT apologize for speaking the truth to lies: and Dana provides me with endless opportunities to do so.
Finally, let me say, I appreciate The Daily Cougar’s editorial board for allowing me a forum to make my case. Although they have deleted some of my posts
Page 5.
…they have generally been very reasonable and I truly appreciate this even if I do not always appear to do so. Thank you!
they deleted my earlier post about this but for the record, you post like a schizophrenic.
Uncalled for and distasteful
serving up pun so deeelicious that confetti shoots out of joel siegel's ears and balls: mike wazowski
crispin,
Drones kill sociopaths. Drones have killed some senior Taliban and al Qaeda leaders. Most "Americans" — one would hope — would think this is a good thing, but you never know when it comes to Americans these days.
Could you expand on your "ethically monstrous" accusation? Curious about your reasoning.
Rachel,
This is nothing new, is it? In WWII pilots dropped bombs and never saw where they landed, no? In Iraq Islamists would deploy IEDs in places where they never saw the actual results.
It sounds as if you would rather go back to the days of the Civil War where men would kill one another with bayonets. Tell us the pyschological benefits of this approach why don't you?
haha owned
u mad?
ps what are you even talking about anymore, you racist sack of garbage?
too bad your previous disgusting comment was deleted, i left a pretty awesome reply about you being yet another awkward greasy loser who seriously creeps out every woman who is unfortunate enough to find herself placed in a social situation with you
I don't see any male writers writing articles covering the same topics that Dana does.
you think it's a middle east thing, i think it's a misogyny thing. no reason it can't be both i guess!
would any of the moderators/admins care to explain why my previous post critical of the misogyny in this thread was deleted yet "abu danasawhore" gets to spew bigoted garbage with impunity? i mean, it couldn't be that you guys are preferentially deleting posts on a whim so i'll just assume you accidentally hit the wrong button and let bygones be bygones. please feel free to post a response to this, so as to open a dialogue