The Moral Case for

artappraiser — Sun, 15 Jul 2012 03:36:18 +0000

The Moral Case for Drones
By Scott Shane, New York Times Sunday Review, July 14/15, 2012

[....]

By the count of the Bureau of Investigative Journalism in London, which has done perhaps the most detailed and skeptical study of the strikes, the C.I.A. operators are improving their performance. The bureau has documented a notable drop in the civilian proportion of drone casualties, to 16 percent of those killed in 2011 from 28 percent in 2008. This year, by the bureau’s count, just three of the 152 people killed in drone strikes through July 7 were civilians.

The drone’s promise of precision killing and perfect safety for operators is so seductive, in fact, that some scholars have raised a different moral question: Do drones threaten to lower the threshold for lethal violence?

“In the just-war tradition, there’s the notion that you only wage war as a last resort,” said Daniel R. Brunstetter, a political scientist at the University of California at Irvine who fears that drones are becoming “a default strategy to be used almost anywhere.”

With hundreds of terrorist suspects killed under President Obama and just one taken into custody overseas, some question whether drones have become not a more precise alternative to bombing but a convenient substitute for capture. If so, drones may actually be encouraging unnecessary killing.

Few imagined such debates in 2000, when American security officials first began to think about arming the Predator surveillance drone, with which they had spotted Osama bin Laden at his Afghanistan base, said Henry A. Crumpton, then deputy chief of the C.I.A.’s counterterrorism center, who tells the story in his recent memoir, “The Art of Intelligence.”

“We never said, ‘Let’s build a more humane weapon,’ ” Mr. Crumpton said. “We said, ‘Let’s be as precise as possible, because that’s our mission — to kill Bin Laden and the people right around him.’ ”

Since then, Mr. Crumpton said, the drone war has prompted an intense focus on civilian casualties, which in a YouTube world have become harder to hide. He argues that technological change is producing a growing intolerance for the routine slaughter of earlier wars.

“Look at the firebombing of Dresden, and compare what we’re doing today,” Mr. Crumpton said. “The public’s expectations have been raised dramatically around the world, and that’s good news.”

Relates to both the above &

artappraiser — Tue, 13 Mar 2012 06:23:49 +0000

In reply to My Drone War

Relates to both the above & to current news about Afghanistan:

Obama: Never Mind Afghanistan, It’s All About The Drones,

by Spencer Ackerman @ Danger Room, Dec 16, 2010

To clarify to those who might not click, the article suggests "it's all about the drones" in the northwest provinces of Pakistan, i.e., it's getting the foreigners and their Taliban et. al.. protectors in Af/Pak "Pashtunistan" that is the main mission, not Afghanistan as a whole. A more stable Afghanistan would be a help to prevent a replay, but is not the main mission. Obama's goal is really about cleaning out northwest Pakistan (where there is little Pakistani government) and south Aghanistan without ground troops invading northwest Pakistan. Which is what I have long suspected but never seen stated so succinctly.

(Just ran across as a link at the bottom of more current drone stories)

dagblog - Comments for "My Drone War "

The Moral Case for

Relates to both the above &