Unmanned Aircraft: Like a Video Game
Published in Panama America
(Panama) on 16 February 2013
by Carlos Miguélez Monroy (link to
original)
The deaths of thousands of innocent civilians by bombings from drone aircraft destroys the assumption that these technologies are accurate enough to avoid “collateral damage.” According to the neocons, “dead dogs don’t bite,” but people are afraid of going to weddings and funerals in parts of Afghanistan where women and children have died in what some consider war crimes and crimes against humanity.
The secrecy of the U.S. government and military hinders a reckoning of attacks by drones, as these unmanned aircraft are known, and of the fatalities caused by them. It has been calculated that between 2004 and 2012, between 142 and 681 innocent civilians have died. The dance of numbers between the figures of various news organizations explains the opacity and suggests an even more alarming reality.
It appears difficult to reverse the machinery of the use of drones, which has been in operation for years. From September 2001 to April 2012, the inventory of unmanned aircraft has increased from 50 to 7,500, of which around 400 have destructive capabilities. The rest are utilized to point out targets with infrared rays in conjunction with reconnaissance and espionage missions. Their design, production and maintenance, as well as the necessity of training specialists in their operation, have created a dependency on private firms.
Although troop deployment is reduced, the need for services from private contractors increases costs and creates a dependency that detracts from the sovereign state in its defense policies. Four out of every 10 of these airplanes exported between 2001 and 2011 were manufactured in Israel, which could influence the United States’ foreign policy in the Middle East, one of the most unstable regions of the world.
Both former president George W. Bush and Obama have sheltered themselves in the vagueness of the “war on terror” concept in order to justify the means of combating it in Afghanistan, Iraq and other countries: “selective” assassinations; kidnappings; disappearances; and torture. The extension of the use of drones to Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia calls into question the argument of legitimate defense against countries or terrorist groups that put the security of the United States at risk or may have been involved in the planning and execution of the attacks on the Twin Towers.
At first, Bush had only authorized the use of drones for selective assassinations, but in 2008 he expanded the authority of his forces in order to attack Taliban members and persons suspected of belonging to al-Qaida. These attacks were even directed against people with physical resemblance to supposed terrorists.
In Yemen, any male of combat age has come to be considered a valid target, unless he can prove his innocence. Thus it is denounced by the Council on Foreign Relations’ investigator, Micah Zenko, in his report, Reforming U.S. Drone Strike Policies.
Some members of Congress see in the indiscriminate deaths of civilians the seeds of resentment that could breed new terrorists. The nomination of John Brennan as director of the CIA (Central Intelligence Agency) announces the continuity of the counterterrorism policy designed by the neocons. Brennan was one of the principal individuals responsible for putting the unmanned aircraft program into effect — a program that scorns the presumption of innocence and which assumes the deaths of dozens of civilians for the sake of the elimination of one target.
Frequently, these planes violate the sovereignty of the states that have to assume responsibility for what occurs in their territory. They increase distrust and fear in other countries about a possible arms race, which could have effects similar to that produced by the Cold War.
The nuclear powers have not been able to put the brakes on the proliferation and creation of secret programs that other countries utilize to press and defend their interests. They consider them to be legitimate in the midst of such hypocrisy and international double standards. Although they are sometimes sidestepped, ethical arguments exist against the use of drones. Drones increase the distance between the victim and the person who shoots him with a remote control, as if it were in a video game.
No war on terror is above the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which recognizes the right to a fair trial, even when dealing with terrorists.
The secrecy of the U.S. government and military hinders a reckoning of attacks by drones, as these unmanned aircraft are known, and of the fatalities caused by them. It has been calculated that between 2004 and 2012, between 142 and 681 innocent civilians have died. The dance of numbers between the figures of various news organizations explains the opacity and suggests an even more alarming reality.
It appears difficult to reverse the machinery of the use of drones, which has been in operation for years. From September 2001 to April 2012, the inventory of unmanned aircraft has increased from 50 to 7,500, of which around 400 have destructive capabilities. The rest are utilized to point out targets with infrared rays in conjunction with reconnaissance and espionage missions. Their design, production and maintenance, as well as the necessity of training specialists in their operation, have created a dependency on private firms.
Although troop deployment is reduced, the need for services from private contractors increases costs and creates a dependency that detracts from the sovereign state in its defense policies. Four out of every 10 of these airplanes exported between 2001 and 2011 were manufactured in Israel, which could influence the United States’ foreign policy in the Middle East, one of the most unstable regions of the world.
Both former president George W. Bush and Obama have sheltered themselves in the vagueness of the “war on terror” concept in order to justify the means of combating it in Afghanistan, Iraq and other countries: “selective” assassinations; kidnappings; disappearances; and torture. The extension of the use of drones to Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia calls into question the argument of legitimate defense against countries or terrorist groups that put the security of the United States at risk or may have been involved in the planning and execution of the attacks on the Twin Towers.
At first, Bush had only authorized the use of drones for selective assassinations, but in 2008 he expanded the authority of his forces in order to attack Taliban members and persons suspected of belonging to al-Qaida. These attacks were even directed against people with physical resemblance to supposed terrorists.
In Yemen, any male of combat age has come to be considered a valid target, unless he can prove his innocence. Thus it is denounced by the Council on Foreign Relations’ investigator, Micah Zenko, in his report, Reforming U.S. Drone Strike Policies.
Some members of Congress see in the indiscriminate deaths of civilians the seeds of resentment that could breed new terrorists. The nomination of John Brennan as director of the CIA (Central Intelligence Agency) announces the continuity of the counterterrorism policy designed by the neocons. Brennan was one of the principal individuals responsible for putting the unmanned aircraft program into effect — a program that scorns the presumption of innocence and which assumes the deaths of dozens of civilians for the sake of the elimination of one target.
Frequently, these planes violate the sovereignty of the states that have to assume responsibility for what occurs in their territory. They increase distrust and fear in other countries about a possible arms race, which could have effects similar to that produced by the Cold War.
The nuclear powers have not been able to put the brakes on the proliferation and creation of secret programs that other countries utilize to press and defend their interests. They consider them to be legitimate in the midst of such hypocrisy and international double standards. Although they are sometimes sidestepped, ethical arguments exist against the use of drones. Drones increase the distance between the victim and the person who shoots him with a remote control, as if it were in a video game.
No war on terror is above the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which recognizes the right to a fair trial, even when dealing with terrorists.
Previous article![]( "The Pipeline of Strife")
