Comment Paper 6-- The Future Debate

After reading the article Improving the Drones Debate it became apparent clear that need to set guidelines within the debate is essential to unpacking the question as to when it is permissible to use drones in the United States.   So much of what we hear about on both ends of the political spectrum in this country violates the tenants that Bashir outlines in this article.  The main element that I is so apparent in our culture that is arguable not constructive to the debate it he idea of continuing to ask questions instead of provide answers.  Even within my own blog post, it is easy to get caught up in asking more questions about the ethical nature of unmanned strikes instead of answering already posed questions.  If both sides are able to answer simple questions as to if it just to have an enemy that is not harmed when it is killed or it controlled by people on the other side of the world, we would be able to better grasp where the nation stands on this issue.  Furthermore it seems that it is so easy to just continue extending the argument by asking more questions as a means for not coming to terms with the problems that face this topic.  The other element that I find important is the idea of being careful as to how the world perceived our drone program.  It is critical that the United States gives off the image that we are careful when it comes to the use of drones and that we encourage other nations to be careful if they were to possess this technology.

The element that I think that Bashir leaves out of his advice is that the nation must be careful as to what labels they place on their enemies.  So often this country comes up with words to label people we do not agree with as a mean for getting support.  The problem with this is that is corrupt the discussion because we overlook the true values of the people we are targeting.  If we label both an organized group that commits violence for political gain (Taliban) as that same as an organization that engages community organization and may conduct violence as a byproduct (Hamas) the same thing than we are unable to effectively evaluate where it appropriate to use drones.  One of these groups may be far more effectively motivated by the use of drones than the other.  Knowing the effectiveness for the strategy is key to knowing if the strategy is worth using.  We must be clever in clearly identifying each group to the public and not bulking grouping very different groups to gather as a means for getting a green light on using a new war technology.  If the public is educated about the individual characteristics of the people that are on the receiving end of a drone strike than they are better able to derive a true opinion as to the appropriate use of these weapons.  Their judgment is not clouded into thinking that both groups are the same.  The debate will continue and we must not only focus on the critical issues and keep the discussion tightly focused, but also remain educated in the differences in the organization of the groups we attack.