The Instigator
masterdebater96
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
sahilbhardwaj
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

A Bill to Ban the use of Drone Attacks in Pakistan

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/10/2012 Category: News
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,271 times Debate No: 23537
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)

 

masterdebater96

Con

We have come to a time where we can drive places in luxurious automobiles, access millions of information at the click of a button, and we can also fly across the globe within hours. We have accomplished all of this with man behind the wheel, but who would have ever thought that it was possible to control an automobile or an aircraft without man behind the wheel. Today we have developed a technology which can do exactly this, and this technology is known as an unmanned aerial vehicle or UAV. The CIA has recently begun to use these UAVs on our war on terror. I am in strong negation of this bill.

Firstly, Civilian casualties will always exist in war. According to a 2001 study by the Red Cross, "the civilian-to-soldier death ratio in wars fought since the mid-20th century has been 10:1, meaning ten civilian deaths for every soldier death." Also the lowest civilian-to-soldier ratio, according to Professor Alan Dershowitz of Harvard Law School, "was in 2007, when Israel achieved a ratio of 1:30." . A recent article by the Washington Post published in April 2010 stated, "the CIA has refined its techniques and made technological improvements that are reducing civilian deaths. The CIA is able to do this by using new smaller missiles and advanced surveillance techniques, which minimizes these civilian casualties."
sahilbhardwaj

Pro

please start the debate
Debate Round No. 1
masterdebater96

Con

alright just start i stated my first argument already
sahilbhardwaj

Pro

sahilbhardwaj forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
masterdebater96

Con

According to the CIA, "just over 20 civilians are known to have died in drone attacks since January 2009, in a 15-month period that witnessed more than 70 drone attacks that killed 400 suspected terrorists." Another article from the Washington Post mentioned that "a drone fired a missile at a building, which killed a top al-Qaeda leader and nine other suspected terrorists. The article also mentions no one else was hurt or killed in the town of 5,000 people." This shows that these drones are becoming more and more accurate.

These drones are helpful. According to General James Cartwright, "these drones can fly low. Their ability to get lower to the ground enables them to see the target more clearly, so their shots are more accurate." The other plus is that we are not risking the lives of young soldiers. On top the 400 suspected terrorists killed, a recent ABC news article published in 2011, "describes a CIA drone that successfully killed three top al- Qaeda leaders." So as we can see these drones are not only beneficial by saving soldiers but they have helped us target terrorists.
sahilbhardwaj

Pro

sahilbhardwaj forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by masterdebater96 5 years ago
masterdebater96
support
Posted by RedneckR0nin 5 years ago
RedneckR0nin
I am pretty sure he is con( against) a bill that would ban the use of Uav's over Pakistan.
Posted by MarquisX 5 years ago
MarquisX
Are you arguing in support of UAVS or against?
No votes have been placed for this debate.