In the recent debates between Romney and Obama, the issue of drone attacks were supported by both Romney and Obama. Romney said in of the debates " I support that entirely and feel the president was right to up the usage of that technology and believe we should continue to use it..." take note that none of the candidates ever stressed on the amount of innocent civilian deaths from these attacks so why should they be continued? Romney believes that the president should continue this because enemy targets pose a threat to the American nation.Drone attacks are Obama's key national security policies. According to CNN, Obama already authorized 283 strikes in Pakistan which is 6 times more than the number during Bush's eight year's in office. These constant attacks from Obama's drone strikes have killed 333 civilians in 2012. So why is this method still put to use?
Although, these drones do protect the citizens of America, they do take the life of innocent people in foreign countries. I think that drones should only be used to watch and attack enemy targets in open lands where there are no civilians around because the death of these civilians will start up another war for America eventually. Also, more military personnel (as much i hate to say it) should be used to take down these enemies because they are much more accurate and much more aware of the civilians around them. One more point is that there should be less drones in the sky over foreign countries because if they are shot down, the technology could be used to build drones in foreign countries and that could possibly even bring a disaster to the American nation.
Work Cited
Nnamdi,
ReplyDeleteGreat post! You've got some good facts infused in some great writing. Nice work.
Great pics, too.
This is one of your best posts, because it has a consistent tone, flow, and good organization.
Excellent work.
GR: 100