Drones are unmanned aerial vehicles deployed by U.S. defense and intelligence agencies to collect data and strike suspected enemy targets. The first known U.S. strike was the 2002 killing of al-Qaeda operative Qaed Salim Sinan al-Harethi in Yemen. Between 2022 and 2020 the U.S. killed between 9,000 and 18,000 enemy combatants and 900-2200 civilians with drone strikes. Opponents of drone strikes have long contended strikes that kill civilians essentially serve as a recruiting poster for terrorist groups. In 2010, a man named Faisal Shahzad tried and failed to bomb Times Square in New York City. Later, Shahzad cited US drone strikes as his motivation for the failed bombing. Proponents of drone strikes argue that they can kill high value w=enemy targets without putting soldiers into combat.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Discussions from these authors are shown:
Voting for candidate:
No, this is a violation of these country’s sovereignty as well as a violation of international law.
fly overs are ok, but murdering a SUSPECT is insane. a confirmed terrorist is a different story, but you cant kill on suspicion.
@9VPF7RB8mos8MO
In relative terms yes, but there should be a risk assessment and a vote called by cabinet members if death is the ultimate goal.
@9V997Y78mos8MO
If they can provide evidence that the terrorist were planning to attack Americans in America. But the military should have to show their evidence after they strike as I suspect more often than not that they are just war hawks looking to kill and provoke foreigners to keep military spending high so they have job security.
@9D8CL8F2yrs2Y
If we have evidence and we’re certain than yes
@9SK8GN79mos9MO
Yes for gaining intelligence. They should only be used to kill terrorists if we are absolutely certain the target is there, and that there will be as little collateral damage as possible.
Yes, but only to gather intelligence unless the information gathered proves beyond reasonable doubt that the person is a terrorist
@95NRF4C3yrs3Y
Only with permission, and only to gain intelligence
@952JXKW3yrs3Y
Yes, to gather intelligence, but there should be more oversight when it comes to killing suspected terrorists.
@944F39V3yrs3Y
Yes, but only when there’s undeniable proof
@93WW549Republican3yrs3Y
Yes, but only with extensive rules of engagement and intelligence gathering for kill orders
@TheRealRonnieJSocialist3yrs3Y
No we should not meddle in foreign affairs.
@8Z79QFF3yrs3Y
Yes, but with increased confirmations/requirements for drone strikes
@ogoldman3yrs3Y
Yes, but only to gather intelligence and kill confirmed terrorists with no or minimal civilian casualties
@8XDV5C64yrs4Y
If it can be done without any traces back to America, then killing the terrorist would be fine. As you gathering data, they may fly whenever.
@8WYRDH24yrs4Y
Not enough insight on this issue
@7YS3KJPIndependent4yrs4Y
Yes, but only with the appropriate warrants and cooperation from the countries in question and only to gather intelligence.
@8WT7YTW4yrs4Y
Flying drones seems fine but killing suspected terrorists should be the last resort.
Yes; but only with public approval of the nations leadership, a full, public, accounting of the results, and a 24-hour notice of intent on any operation.
@8VLBV424yrs4Y
Yes, but as a last resort.
@8VJG3TB4yrs4Y
Yes, but only if there’s undeniable evidence.
@8TZWLTWIndependent4yrs4Y
Yes, use technology as much as possible. It can save troops and expense. Surveillance and ONLY confirmed terrorists, not just suspected.
@8QX7P9GIndependent4yrs4Y
Not if it is a breach of a nations sovereignty. If the US has troops stationed there, then yes. If we do not have military assets in the foreign nation, no.
Yes but only if it's a matter for the safety of our country and it's allies
@8NGL7LQ5yrs5Y
need to conduct more research
@8KV56QZRepublican5yrs5Y
yes, but only with known terrorists
@8JKJ5VQ5yrs5Y
No, it could be wise to gain intelligence but on foreign soil what jurisdictions would the U.S. military have, it isn't our right to do damage on someone else's land
@8HR4HXF5yrs5Y
With permission from the country yes for gaining intelligence but killing should only be a last resort to preventing tragedy.
@9CMX7NY2yrs2Y
Yes but only with the permission of the the other country and civilians are not in harms way
@9C54P5M2yrs2Y
With reasonable suspicion and evidence
@99MZDHJ2yrs2Y
Yes, but only when there is overwhelming evidence of a threat to the American people.
@7YS3KJPIndependent3yrs3Y
Yes, but only with Congressional approval along with the appropriate warrants and cooperation from the countries in question, and then only to gather intelligence
@93RYYVR3yrs3Y
Definitely not for killing.
@8S4Q3XP4yrs4Y
Yes, but only allowed to kill if there is undeniable evidence that they are planning an attack or have committed an attack
@8H4DF7B5yrs5Y
Yes but only with permission unless congress declares war
The historical activity of users engaging with this question.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
