Good vs bad of US drone strikes on other countries

Contention 1: Drone strikes increase terrorism The use of drone strikes in foreign nations has led to the mass slaughter of children and civilians. Not only are these deaths a problem, but the deaths of civilians also leads to huge adverse effects for the United States. According to a CNN article,, 2012: "Drone Strikes Kill, Maim and Traumatize Too Many Civilians, U.S. Study Says." CNN. Cable News Network, 25 Sept. 2012. Web. 08 June 2013. <http://www.cnn.com...;. "In contrast to more conservative U.S. statements, the Stanford/NYU report -- titled "Living Under Drones" -- offers starker figures published by The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, an independent organization based at City University in London. "TBIJ reports that from June 2004 through mid-September 2012, available data indicate that drone strikes killed 2,562 - 3,325 people in Pakistan, of whom 474 - 881 were civilians, including 176 children. TBIJ reports that these strikes also injured an additional 1,228 - 1,362 individuals," according to the Stanford/NYU study. Based on interviews with witnesses, victims and experts, the report accuses the CIA of "double-striking" a target, moments after the initial hit, thereby killing first responders." One of the uses of drone strikes is to deter terrorism, but under our current policy, the use of drone strikes has actually increased terrorism, and has fueled radicalism throughout targeted areas. One example of this is in Yemen, one of the most targeted areas by the U.S. According to Glenn Greenwald for the guardian in 2013 Greenwald, Glenn. "A Young Yemeni Writer on the Impact and Morality of Drone-bombing His Country." The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 01 May 2013. Web. 11 June 2013. <http://www.guardian.co.uk...;. Certainly, there may be short-term military gains from killing militant leaders in these strikes, but they are minuscule compared with the long-term damage the drone program is causing. A new generation of leaders is spontaneously emerging in furious retaliation to attacks on their territories and tribes. This is why A.Q.A.P. is much stronger in Yemen today than it was a few years ago. In 2009, A.Q.A.P. had only a few hundred members and controlled no territory; today it has, along with Ansar al-Sharia, at least 1,000 members and controls substantial amounts of territory. Contention 2: Drone Strikes leads to an arms race Drone strikes not only increase terrorism, but due to their broad use by the United States, a drones arms race is now being seen throughout the world. According to David Wood for Huffington Post in 2012: Wood, David. "American Drones Ignite New Arms Race From Gaza To Iran To China." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 27 Nov. 2012. Web. 11 June 2013. <http://www.huffingtonpost.com...;. Small, inexpensive and lethal, drones enable everyone from terrorists to the Chinese People's Liberation Army to engage in what the Pentagon acknowledges is a new arms race with "alarming" consequences. More than 50 countries operate surveillance drones and, increasingly, are fitting them with weapons. Already, the Pentagon is worried that China not only is engaged in an "alarming" effort to develop and field high-tech drones, but it intends to sell drone technology abroad, according to the Pentagon report. Indeed, the momentum of the drone wars seems irresistible. "The increasing worldwide focus on unmanned systems highlights how the U.S. military"s success has changed global strategic thinking and spurred a race for unmanned aircraft," the Pentagon study reported. A new Pentagon study frets that enemy drones could be a "very serious threat" to U.S. aircraft carriers in the Pacific and elsewhere, as well as to "supply convoys and other combat support assets which have not had to deal with an airborne threat in generations." On the battlefield, an enemy could create chaos and confusion simply by flooding the airspace with drones, and any U.S. bases within drone range would have to be closed, the report said. The threat from a drone arms race not only stems from other countries, but it also stems from the ability for these countries to sell these drones to terrorists. In fact Iran, the leading state sponsor of terrorism, has already began selling drones to terrorist groups. According to Jeremy Hsu for Mother Jones in 2013: Hsu, Jeffrey. "Cheap Drones Made in China Could Arm U.S. Foes." MNN - Mother Nature Network. Mother Nature Network, 03 Apr. 2013. Web. 11 June 2013. <http://www.mnn.com...;. Iran has already sold its own crude drones to countries such as Syria and organizations such as Hezbollah, a militant group based in Lebanon and backed by Iran. In addition, China-made drones would allow countries like Iran and North Korea to obtain technology which Western countries refuse to sell. Contention 3: Drone Strikes ultimately devastate communities. Sub point a: Drone strikes create poverty Drone strikes not only have adverse effects for the United States, but more harms to civilians come about due to drone strikes as well. Poverty in these regions is being exacerbated due to drone strikes. According to Kevin Gosztola in 2012: Gosztala, Kevin. "The Economic Toll US Drones Have on Pakistani Communities | The Dissenter." The Economic Toll US Drones Have on Pakistani Communities | The Dissenter. The Dissenter, 25 Sept. 2012. Web. 11 June 2013. <http://dissenter.firedoglake.com...;. A new report from the International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic of Stanford Law School exhaustively details the toll that United States drones are exacting on Pakistani communities. Multiple families can be impacted by drone strikes because in North Waziristan, as the report describes, extended families live together in compounds that often contain several smaller individual structures." Strikes can do damage to "three or four surrounding houses," in addition to the target house. This destruction has an incredible effect because "underdevelopment and poverty are particularly stark" in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) with "savings, insurance and social safety nets" mostly unavailable "Primary income earners" are often incapacitated by drone strikes. Men typically provide for families. When they become victims, families lose a key source of income. Children are forced to abandon education and enter the workforce. Families can rack up gigantic medical bills as a result of surgeries, mental health care or having to stay in the hospital after being injured in strikes. There are no "major emergency medical centers or adequate hospitals in North Waziristan," which means victims often go to Peshawar and have to journey over "rough terrain" and through "poor security" to get treatment. This can take hours or several days. The use of drone strikes create poverty within impacted regions. By destroying houses, and wounding the primary income earners within families, drone strikes force children to stop education and to instead find a job. Sub point b: Drone strikes prevent children from getting education Due to drone strikes, children are either forced away from education, or in fact must work due to the primary income earner in their family being wounded. According to the global justice clinic at NYU School of Law in 2012: GLOBAL JUSTICE CLINIC AT NYU SCHOOL OF LAW, LIVING UNDER DRONES: DEATH, INJURY, AND TRAUMA TO CIVILIANS FROM USDRONE PRACTICES IN PAKISTAN (2012). http://livingunderdrones.org... First, some of those injured in strikes reported reduced access to education and desire to learn because of the physical, emotional, and financial impacts of the strike.