English 101 Sample Essay on The Great Drone Debate


            The United States and other developed countries have in the recent years shifted their focus to technological innovations that involve the use of drones to survey and curb security threats across the world. Drones are only effective in striking roles and when working against objectives with no air defense abilities. Compared with a martial artist jets, the drone providers cannot identify risks to the protection of their airplane. Surface-to-air missiles, therefore, cause a much higher risk to drones than to other types of army aircraft. Such concerns mean that drones have a market part in modern military functions. They are by no means a major technological innovation that has the prospective to make operated journey outdated. This paper seeks to discuss what drones are and the process of their domestication. It will also highlight the arguments that have been put forth both in support and against the use of drones.

Domestic Drones should be accessible to the public and sold in public markets

What are Drones? The usage of unmanned drones by the US has attracted the intervention of President Obama to comment and confirm the presence of unmanned drones in Pakistan. The US as a country relies on drones for the sake of external intervention and maximization of security surveillance within its borders. The case of the drone attack in Pakistan is not the only isolated incidence, but there are several other episodes. This leads to the question concerning the real identity of drones and how their operations foster security situation in the US. This is the beginning of the essay, where it seeks to clarify the true meaning of drones and how they operate within the American Borders.

            Drones are commonly referred to as UAVs (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles) or RPAS (Remotely Piloted Aerial Systems) by the US military. Drones are aircrafts that operate in risky areas where military intervention is considered impossible. Principally, this special unit of US military is charged with the responsibility of providing troops within a 24-hour “eye in the sky”, seven days a week. Therefore, Drones undertake air surveillance, and have the capability of standing for 17 hours at any given time, while taking a complete surveillance of the area, and sending real-time imagery on the ground. The US is the mastermind behind an effective drones operation and conjoins the Air Force and the Royal Air Force for duties like surveillance, intelligence, and reconnaissance craft. However, these drones vary is sizes where some are light enough to be launched by hand, while others are medium-sized armed drones, and finally the large spy planes.

Drones   are charged with the maintenance of security from an aerial view. Therefore, their operations are highly synchronized with the ground levels, and maintain communication with the ground communication military satiations, just to ensure that security alerts are sufficiently made. The first responsibility attached to these drones includes provision of Intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance to the country. USA has always achieved this mandate by deploying adequate number of drones in manning its air as well as grounds levels. This is one means that the US military system enhances its security and ensures that swift actions are taken in case of a security emergency. In addition, surveillance of into the air supplements the operations of well-positioned radar systems. Therefore, drones are special security alert and response system that keeps watch of the entire country, while in the air. This is the fundamental duty that drones have into the US security system; an act that has culminated any potential security hazard into the US borders.

Other than aerial uses are surveillance, drones are served with other numerous mandates. These mandates range from checking for roadside bombs or devices on landing areas. This purpose is enhanced due to the articulate capability of drones to view every object from air and ground. There are two types of drones, and this classification is enabled thorough their respective modes of operations. The first category is controlled from the air, while the other is controlled from the ground. The later specializes in the duty of detonating bombs and other explosive devices on the ground. Due to a network of connectivity, drones are served with a special task of listening to mobile phone conversations. There are many radio calls and satellite communication devices that enhance coordination with the ground and air surveillance drones. In this process, the security situation in the country is enhanced. Drones equally help in tracking mobile phone conversations, hence helping to understand the daily routines of locals to see what are normal behaviors, offer close air support, and attack suspected insurgents.

The tasks described above give the operational scope and definition of drones. Therefore, drones are contingent of military aircraft comprising of a multiagency group that enhances surveillance of both air and the ground. This leads to the validity of drones in the US. President Obama has regularly issued statements regarding the surprising attacks conducted by drones in Pakistan and other rebel countries. It is confirmed that the US drones attack rebel insurgents have increased during the reign of president Obama, than during the tenure of President Bush.

How do Drones become domestic?

Usage of drones in domestic affairs is an increasing phenomenon in the USA. This aspect has become a common practice due to the legal instigations encouraging the use of domestic drones. Therefore, drones became domestic amidst law enforcement that emphasizes the use of domestic drones in the surveillance of the country. This step towards promoting domestic drones is seen as a means of enhancing security surveillance to the country. This implies that both the private and public agencies will take part in the surveillance of the entire country, thereby promoting peace and security. In addition, friendly legislation is amended in favor of domestic drones due to the importance of involving public participation in the security sector. Government alone cannot manage the full security expectation of the county but must be supplemented by private sectors.

            However, legislation that allows the use of domestic drones must always be made strict with the view of containing any adversity to this move. In view of this, the congress instigated an initial process that was viewed as the mastermind behind making drones appear domestic. The USA congress has ordered the Federal Aviation Administration to transform airspace rules and makes it much easier for the police nationwide to adopt the usage of domestic drones. This is a landmark achievement to the creation of domestic drones. However, the use of domestic drones must consider the following safeguard measures:

            The first regulatory measure following the use of domestic drones involves the usage limits. In this regards, drones are supposed to be deployed by law enforcement, and only with a warrant, or in cases of emergency, or when there are substantial grounds to believe that drones will collect evidence regarding a specific data regarding the criminal act. In the second incidence, domestic drones are used alongside data retention limits. In this regard, image captured by domestic drones must be retained only if is a satisfactory suspicion that they contain evidence or hold some relevance to an ongoing trial or investigation. The third condition requires domestic drones to be used subject to policy instigations. Usage policy remains a key restraint in using domestic drones, and this issue must be decided by the public’s representatives, and not police departments. In addition, these policies must be clear and presented through written or open to public (Etzioni). The third condition stipulates that usage of domestic drones must be accompanied by abuse prevention and accountability. This aspect requires open audits, and adequate oversight in order to prevent any possible misuse to domestic drones. Finally, domestic drones must not be equipped by either legal or non-legal weapons, as this contravenes rights of establishing such drones. These few frameworks lead to the creation of domestic drones.

Using Drones in real estate

The possibilities of drone use in household monitoring functions have engendered significant discussion in America, especially in regards to the various governmental camps. Those against the use of the drone monitoring have reported that the use of the unmanned airplane on United States ground intrudes upon essential comfort passions and the ability to easily affiliate with others. Some are specifically concerned about the chance of turning army technological innovation to survey people in America (Hazelton). Supporters have reacted by focusing on their potential benefits, which may include defending public safety, patrolling our country’s boundaries, and analyzing and implementing ecological and criminal law offenses. The stress between security and comfort passions is not new but has been increased by the blast of monitoring technological innovation in recent years. Cops who were once directed to nude eye findings may soon have, or in some cases already possess, the ability to see through surfaces or track your motions from the sky.

Using Drones in the military

Drones have believed a significant aspect in counterterrorism and counterinsurgency, and are projected to be of increasing significance later on army functions. Their low cost makes the disposable and perfect for extremely risky or politically delicate projects (Murray). However, technical restrictions as well as likely developments in competitive technological innovation, especially air defense techniques shall circumscribe the army aspect of drones. Although a vital part of upcoming combat, they are unlikely to completely substitute operated airplane and will instead, complement them. Although the U.S. army and intellect areas had been advertising drone growth since the beginning sixties, it was the Israeli Air Power in 4 decades ago, that led the way in drone technology and produce.

            The 1991 Gulf War saw drones generating more intellect than could be served upon. Although the number of the unmanned airplane implemented in-theatre was small, they still recognized more objectives than the whole resources of the US 7th Corps could hit. Eight years later, drones performed an even more essential aspect in Kosovo, traveling low to recognize objectives, which could then be assaulted by operated airplane working above 15,000 ft (Murray). Through this department of projects, aircraft pilots remained outside the variety of most surface-to-air missiles while drones, being quickly replaceable, experienced the chance of opponent flame. Drones started to believe a striking aspect, being fixed with laser device designators to “paint” prospective objectives, which could then be destroyed by operated airplane. This innovation persuaded further analysis into the chance of suitable light and portable missiles onto drones. US commanders who spearheaded the effort desired to make a system wherein time lag between location and removal of a focus on was minimized (Bary).

            Their initiatives, which predated the 9/11 strikes, got a remarkable increase from the “War on Terror”. In Nov 2002, an Al Qaeda enemy in Yemen was murdered by a drone-launched rocket – the first of many such strikes. With the release of strike drones into counterinsurgency functions in Irak and Afghanistan, time between recognition and devastation of aggressive causes reduced to just five moments. However, after the Nearby Gulf War in 1991, the U.S. intellect equipment and the U.S. Air Power became the significant motorists in drone growth and growth. In the beginning 90’s, as an aspect of a categorized weapons venture, the U.S. Air Power and the CIA underwrote and advised the growth and production of what became the Predator UAV, the first war-fighting drones that were originally implemented in ISR projects during the Balkan conflicts in 1995. The 1995 implementation of the disarmed Predator A by the CIA and Air Power stimulated new interest within the U.S. army and intellect apparatus, resulting in at least $600 thousand in new R&D acquiring for drones with Common Atomics. According to a U.S. Air Power analysis, “The CIA’s UAV system that persisted in the beginning Nineties and that still prevails these days provided Predator and GA-ASI an important chance that set the base for Predator’s achievements.

            The army guidelines consist of a lot of “no strike” objectives such as diplomatic workplaces, medical features, jails, educational institutions, and components whose devastation will outcome in uncontainable ecological loss. They also consist of a variety of other components, which are usually limited from being focused, such as farming features, water and power resources, leisurely buildings, leisurely areas, dining places, and suppliers. These guidelines also protect a variety of prospective dual-use targets.

Debate on the use of Drones

The drone discussion carries on hot and heavy. Crucial issues range from the values of focusing on choices and issues about unintended accidents and anti-Americanism to issues of lawful and bureaucratic management. These are pushing questions; the U. S. States’ use of drones as a tool of war is increasing, and other nations are interested in obtaining them. Like piloted equipped airplane, equipped drones offer details as well as strike potential. They can achieve a variety of military results, as other air systems (Sterio). They can destroy, turn off, assistance competitors on the ground, eliminate, john, restrict, reject access, notice, and track. Like airplane pilots offering close air assistance, shooting missiles, or dropping tanks, drone providers are required to regard the rules of war, stunning depending on clear details, such as evaluation of potential human costs.

            Drones offer several advantages over operated equipped flight tickets and sea-based releases. They are stated to do less security harm than either missiles or operated antenna bombing; they can float expense for relatively long time to collect details for a strike (up to 14 hours); they can strike quickly, and the rocket can be redirected from its unique focus on in a deliberate skip. They are also less expensive than operated systems. Compared with other distribution systems, however, they require a permissive atmosphere, which is likely to restrict their application in some cinemas. Moreover, although the Chief professional had specific Afghanistan and its airspace as a fight area, the United States has used drones in other areas around the globe, such as Yemen, where al-Qaeda causes have been focused and murdered.

             In fact, the U.S. strategy for the use of drones is that members of al-Qaeda causes may be focused anywhere in the world: that the battleground follows those individuals who have been specific as opponents due to their association with al-Qaeda. While many in the worldwide group have belittled the United States’ extensive regional use of drones against al-Qaeda causes, authorities in the Shrub Management have protected the drone system as reliable and contouring to worldwide law (Thompson). President Obama has proceeded with this strategy and has extended the use of drones in the war on terror. Moreover, high-level authorities in the Obama Management have provided specific lawful explanations for the validity of the United States drone system. Drones, like other air and sea systems, are a form of power projection. They give the United States the ability to install ideal attacks without actually placing US employees straight in harm’s way, potentially evoking household resistance. They also allow the United States to avoid placing its causes in a foreign area, possibly eliciting a nationalistic reaction.

            When President Obama came into office, he promised to end the ‘war on terror’ and to recover regard for the concept of law to the United States’ counterterrorism guidelines. The primary size of United States counterterrorism plan have hardly modified between the two companies, though there has been a move in overall tone and focus. While President Bush devoted himself to protect ‘civilization’ against the chance of terrorism, Obama has fought his war on terror in the dangerous areas, using drone attacks, special functions and innovative monitoring to battle an intense secret war against Al-Qaeda and other Islamist systems.

            The Obama strategy, which focuses on relatively few ground operations and prevents nation-building tasks, has been described by associates of his management as efficient, and even fairly necessary, given the state of the US economic system and the war-weariness of the United States citizens. The use of drones is very impressive in eliminating enemy agents in areas that cannot be reached without causing private accidents to innocent citizens. There are more reasons to why people should favor the drone strikes than reject or oppose them. Justifications for the potency of drones can be divided into four individual claims: (1) that drones are efficient at eliminating terrorists with little private casualties; (2) that drones have been effective at eliminating so-called ‘high value targets’ (HVTs); (3) that the use of drones places such stress on enemy companies that it degrades their business potential and capability to strike; and (4) that a cost–benefit research of their use comparative to other options—such as the implementation of ground troops—provides a powerful discussion in their favor. Supporters of drones have suggested that these private victim percentages, along with the low financial cost of drones and the lack of risk to US employees in their function, make a powerful case for drones as an efficient and ethical tool of war.

Despite the above aspects, drones have yet to confirm themselves as better than operated airplane, on the reasons for common requirements of efficiency. For a start, drones are only effective in striking roles and when working against objectives with no air defense abilities. Compared with a martial artist jet cause, drone providers cannot identify risks to the protection of their airplane. Surface-to-air missiles, therefore, cause a much higher risk to drones than to other types of army aircraft. Such concerns mean that drones have a market part in modern military functions. They are by no means a major technological innovation that has the prospective to make operated journey outdated. Extended use of drones could even confirm unproductive, as it would endanger to cause to mass confusion. At present, Predator and Reaper drones in Afghanistan provide around 400 hours of video clips everyday to US causes. The transmitting of this information to ground remotes based in the United States takes in bulk of internet bandwidth.

Annotated Biographies of the Works Cited

Bary, T. “Drones Over the Homeland how Politics, Money and lack of Oversight have           sparked Drone Proliferation and what we can do”. (2013): n.pag.             <Http://www.ciponline.org/images/uploads/publications/IPR_Drones_over_Homela    nd_Final.pdf>.

            This new CIP Worldwide Plan Review shows how the military-industrial complicated and the appearance of the country protection equipment have put boundary drones at the leading edge of the intensifying public discussion about the appropriate part of drones domestically

Etzioni, A. “The Great Drone Debate”. (2013): n.pag.             <Http://icps.gwu.edu/files/2013/03/Etzioni_DroneDebate.pdf>.

            This article presents different views of the debate on drones. It shows the strong points of those who support and oppose the use of drones as weapons.

Hazelton, J. “Drones: What Are They Good For?” (2013): n.pag.             Http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/parameters/Issues/WinterSprin            g2013/4_Article_Hazelton.pdf.

            This is an extensive look at the increasing nuisance of automatic warfare, with an extensive research of who is generating the drones, where they are being used, who “pilots” these unmanned aircraft, who are the sufferers and what are the lawful and ethical effects.

Murray, P. “National: U.S. Supports Unarmed Domestic Drones”. (2013): n.pag.             <Https://www.monmouth.edu/assets/0/32212254770/32212254991/32212254992/3221            2254994/32212254995/30064771087/409aecfb-3897-4360-8a05-03838ba69e46.pdf>.

            In both a stunning and an understandable design, the article looks at what activists, attorneys and researchers are doing to ground the drones, and methods to progress.

Spalding, K. “Unmanned Aircraft and Privacy Law: A Technological Leap into a Legal       Gap “. Privacy & Information Security Practice Group. (2014): n.pag.             <Http://www.kslaw.com/imageserver/KSPublic/library/publication/ca020414b.pdf>.

            This book offers an overarching worldwide legal structure to help determine the validity of the use of any tool, as well as its legal supply. It outlines the functions of States and non-State stakeholders as well.

Sterio, M. “United States’ Use of Drones in the War on Terror:  The (IL) legality of   Targeted Killings under International Law, The”. Case Western Reserve Journal of       International Law. 45. 12. (2012): n.pag.             <Http://law.case.edu/journals/JIL/Documents/45CaseWResJIntlL1&2.11.Article.Ste  rio.pDF>.

            This important and appropriate book addresses all aspects of worldwide weaponry law and suggests a new view on worldwide law regulating weaponry. Also included is a specific conversation about equipped drones and cyber attacks, two highly external issues in worldwide law and worldwide interaction.

Thompson, R. “Drones in Domestic Surveillance Operations:  Fourth Amendment     Implications and Legislative Responses “. (2013): n.pag.       <Http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R42701.pdf>.

This outlines the history of how drones have been used in the US for over the years, the impacts and the global opinion of other country leaders on the same.