weapons, American forces will be unable to take or interrogate prisoners, accept surrenders, and The thing that is wrong with drones is that they cannot talk to occupy positions”. the terrorists. Drones are just a machine used by the military. A lot of critics believe that the high valued terrorists should be captured and interrogated because that is the humane way of doing things. The problem with this is that it causes a lot of risk for the soldiers. Soldiers would have to go most behind enemy lines to get these high value terrorists. That is completely dangerous and would cause a lot of U.S. casualties. Another author brings up the same argument. Author Amitai Etzioni stated, line of criticism takes the opposite view-point, treating terrorists not as “Another if they were criminals but as if they were soldiers. They hence are to be treated in accordance with the rules of warfare, such as the Geneva Conventions. These rules require that America strike terrorists only in of and treat those in captures as prisoners of “declared theaters War”, Critics would rather risk the safety of soldiers than use drones to help the soldiers take out war”. there enemies. It is fair to say that the U.S. military strikes terrorists in areas that are not declared theaters of war, but the threat of those high value terrorists are too valuable to pass up. Another author brings up the human rights law and how drones violate that. Frederic Megret states, “A weapon that leaves very little chance of survival to the target is unlikely to pass the onerous test of human rights law that loss of life is only justifiable as result of reasonable use of force in the pursuit of a lawful arrest; conversely it will easily pass the test under the self-defense/national security framework, which is relatively indifferent to means used on account of the significance of the goal and has log justified covert drones violate human rights violent action”. Although laws it is justified because of threat to security and defense. Any high valued terrorist that is not killed or captured is a threat to the U.S. military and the U.S.
weapons, American forces will be unable to take or interrogate prisoners, accept surrenders, and occupy positions”. The thing that is wrong with drones is that they cannot talk to the terrorists. Drones are just a machine used by the military. A lot of critics believe that the high valued terrorists should be captured and interrogated because that is the humane way of doing things. The problem with this is that it causes a lot of risk for the soldiers. Soldiers would have to go most behind enemy lines to get these high value terrorists. That is completely dangerous and would cause a lot of U.S. casualties. Another author brings up the same argument. Author Amitai Etzioni stated, “Another line of criticism takes the opposite view-point, treating terrorists not as if they were criminals but as if they were soldiers. They hence are to be treated in accordance with the rules of warfare, such as the Geneva Conventions. These rules require that America strike terrorists only in “declared theaters of War”, and treat those in captures as prisoners of war”. Critics would rather risk the safety of soldiers than use drones to help the soldiers take out there enemies. It is fair to say that the U.S. military strikes terrorists in areas that are not declared theaters of war, but the threat of those high value terrorists are too valuable to pass up. Another author brings up the human rights law and how drones violate that. Frederic Megret states, “A weapon that leaves very little chance of survival to the target is unlikely to pass the onerous test of human rights law that loss of life is only justifiable as result of reasonable use of force in the pursuit of a lawful arrest; conversely it will easily pass the test under the self-defense/national security framework, which is relatively indifferent to means used on account of the significance of the goal and has log justified covert violent action”. Although drones violate human rights laws it is justified because of threat to security and defense. Any high valued terrorist that is not killed or captured is a threat to the U.S. military and the U.S.