The U.S. Drone Program Is Fatally Flawed

Подписаться 215 тыс.

Просмотров 16 тыс.

50% 1

Remotely piloted aircraft, or drones, have been the centerpiece of America's counterterrorism toolkit since the start of the Obama presidency, and the benefits have been clear. Their use has significantly weakened al Qaeda and the Taliban while keeping American troops out of harm's way. But critics of drone strikes argue that the short-term gains do not outweigh the long-term consequences-among them, radicalization of a public outraged over civilian deaths. Is our drone program hurting, or helping, in the fight against terrorism?
For: Ahmed Rashid
For: John Kael Weston
Against: Admiral Dennis Blair
Against: General Norton Schwartz
Like on us Facebook: bit.ly/IQ2onFac...
Tweet at us: bit.ly/IQ2Twitter
Subscribe to us: bit.ly/IQ2onYou...

Опубликовано:

18 сен 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 74

@kokofan50 11 лет назад

A few things: 1) Drones are used far more indiscriminately. 2) A pilot has a lot more situational awareness than a drone operator does, which means the pilot can make better dictions on when to use force. 3) The military is more accountable than the CIA is. If how drones are used changes to being more accountable and far less indiscriminate, I wouldn't have problem with drones.

@miketv2331 11 лет назад

as much as people like arguing on youtube, it's weird that nobody really watches this channel

@sownheard 3 года назад

RU-vid hide's these video's. Because they don't make them any money.

@allrelated1 8 лет назад

Not humanistic at all killing people like this is murder not war.

@AlchemistOfNirnroot 11 лет назад

I think we should stopped developing weapons designed to kill and put our time and effort in helping people live and good life.

@mary-leelutz4911 4 года назад

How will U.S. citizens feel about the issue when Turkey develops drones? And aims them at us?

@sownheard 3 года назад

The USA is the most hypocritical nation in the world if any nation started bombing the USA's radical KKK members with a 70% civilian death rate the USA would be launching nukes.

@fangorn1000 10 лет назад

What to expect from Blood thirsty Generals

@justgivemethetruth 11 лет назад

The other thing is that this is a bogus style of debate because anyone who really wants to work for their side can just vote for the other side first and then switch sides and it looks like that side wins. Do they allow for this or just ignore it?

@ivanandreevich8568 11 лет назад

While I usually enjoy I^2 debates, I feel a bit underwhelmed by this one. The inclusion of the word "fatally" (i.e. without a chance for a correction) in the wording of the question made for a very unbalanced outcome.

@justgivemethetruth 11 лет назад

20:00 - it may be that others were also killed or injured, but Afghanistan is a known combat zone ... I can hardly believe this ... declaring a whole country what they used to call in Viet Nam a "Free-Fire" zone where anyone can be killed and it is just collateral damage. Do you suppose that the people who live in Afghanistan understand this and can just pick up and leave their combat zone?

@alphawwz6752 11 лет назад

As long as respect is shown to China, there will be no disputes.

@nealrutgerskid 10 лет назад

i like the sense of respect given to the generals and admiral and their calm demeanor.. and i glad to hear them talk about military and importance of life with a sense of grace and respect. i hate military people talking terms like "blow their brains", "cut them to pieces"... i dont know these people but i would be glad to serve under them if i join the military (which i am considering).

@sownheard 3 года назад

If your joining the us army be prepared to commit war crimes. And don't forget blowing the whistle gets you 11 year's in prison.

@DonutsReview 11 лет назад

Civilian causalities is 1 to 7 "combatants" except "combatants" is any: male seen with the target, that may or may not have connections to the target group. So once again, wtf?

@Calnelth 11 лет назад

Quite weak debate from the "for" side. Feels like they were debating against war and killing rather than the use of drones. I'm sure I agree with them most of the time when it comes to their opinions regarding war, but that really wasn't what the debate was about. Dissapointed :(

@fobusas 11 лет назад

It's a shame the "for" side couldn't articulate their position better. Generals came better prepared

@kokofan50 11 лет назад

1) Indiscriminate USEAGE that's how!!! Learn to read properly. Don't just read one word. 2) Yes, pilots make mistakes, but they make the same kind of mistakes from lack of context. How the fuck does riding a bus make a person terrorist? 3) how does that effect what I said? War is messy, but that doesn't mean we deliberately make it worse for no reason.

@dragonmas444 11 лет назад

Not too long ago the French requested U.S. support in Mali which would include, among other things, the deployment of U.S. drone systems in support of their intervention.

@IHLWonk 7 лет назад

John Kael Weston's arguments are around 95% weasel words/statements. Most of the civilian population cannot tell the difference from a drone strike, or any other sortie... you can't. Amnesty international interviewed a number of people from Pakistan... they say things like they hear them at night, and travel in formations... this is not the description of a drone strike from the US, that fits the description of Pakistan air force sorties.

@aatayyab 8 лет назад

Two of the finest Generals amongst U.S. Military brass were pitted against a "mere" journalist (emotionally charged) and a "mere" adviser (again emotionally charged by the Drone victims' families or neighbors) to U.S. Marines on ground. The motion got defeated right at the moment of selecting the debating teams. Moderator did a great job though, by explaining questions and the answers for the audience.

@aatayyab 8 лет назад

Jeremy Scahill, Ibrahim Mothana or Farea Al-Muslimi.

@TheKibeer 11 лет назад

2) Pilot can observe for shorter time due to fuel consumption and fatigue . He sees the same pictures on screen as drone operator unless he flies low enough. Plus he is under more stress being in danger therefore prone to mistakes.

@allrelated1 8 лет назад

Bet he has a contract driving drones.

@shinjinobrave 11 лет назад

engage, conduct strikes, act with force.... the verb kill was rarely used

@sownheard 3 года назад

Because there all drenched in blood. The USA is spawn camping "terrorist" based on there skin color Image if this was reversed the USA is a absolute dystopian terrorist nation

@IHLWonk 7 лет назад

@16:18, "the fallujahans would look up and hear a flying lawnmower." Well, this is a lie. Drones are silent, especially at the altitudes they operate at. Hence they're perfect for ISR.

@kokoth 9 лет назад

Ahmeds answer at 1:02:00 illustrates how irrational and emotionally based the counter-drone argument is. Is "sinister" not another word for effective? He may as well have said "its unfair that America has such effective weapons".

@Barre76 7 лет назад

sinister means that yes, you got the enemy you where targeting, but also 5 innocent civilians, effective for sure, but not moral.

@Potentialwinner2 11 лет назад

1:35:00 "It would have killed mostly tourists, but also a number of people." (yes I'm drinking and listening)

@justgivemethetruth 11 лет назад

1:01:00 - "and the point is you can see the weapon from these platforms" says the general. Not sure if what the Bradley Manning video showed was from a drone or not, but I'm not sure it matters, because they saw some guys with video cameras ... i.e. journalists and opened fire on them and their children as well, and the responders who came to their aid.

@miketv2331 11 лет назад

1:16:40 it just occurred to me...is this guy the inspiration for Stewie Griffin's voice, by any chance?

@valor0dragoon 11 лет назад

I agree

@Micscience 10 лет назад

I admit I like to listen to these debates however once again, there are issues that these debaters don't bring up like the fact that drones kill many innocent civilians Bradley Manning (unless I missed that part), needs to be brought to the table of discussion. There has been an outcry from some documentaries and investigative journalists over seas and also the victims families stating that there is an illegality of how the US labels there so called terrorist kills. Many have said that the US calls suspected terrorist's though unconfirmed terrorist's after they have been killed. So civilians who are killed in the line of fire are considered terrorists and then are added to the drone kill stat ratio.

@illusionist11 11 лет назад

Such a naive comment.

@justgivemethetruth 11 лет назад

The moderator is far too blabby, I wish they would find someone else who is more background and professional.

@SocialDissimulation 11 лет назад

What's the difference between a bomb and any drone aside from the accuracy?

@sownheard 3 года назад

Both create terror and hate only one 1 follows you based on your skin color.

@SocialDissimulation 11 лет назад

1. Indiscriminately how? What's more indiscriminate than a bomb? 2. Pilots make mistakes as well and generally speaking, if you are with a known terrorist suspect on a bus I don't consider that person a civilian like most counts do. 3. Perhaps, but that doesn't change who is the pilot of the strike. If your contention is how the drones are run then you may be oblivious just how war works. The major contentions are generally drawn from skewed numbers and semantic definitions.