The Instigator
Misterpoker
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
BIGC
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

There Ought To Be An International Ban On The Military Use Of Drones

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: 1/25/2016 Category: Politics
Updated: 10 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 235 times Debate No: 85522
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

Misterpoker

Pro


Definitions -
Ought: A moral imperative, ie. saves lives
International: Not only the US, but also the rest of the world.
Ban: Merriam-Webster defines ban as to forbid people from using
Military Use: Of or relating to the army
Drones: Merriam-Webster defines drone as an unmanned aircraft or ship. If agreeable, I would like to limit this topic to armed drones, as those are the most debatable and most often used by foreign military's.

Rules

1. No forfeits
2. Sources may be provided in the comments
3. No new arguments in the final round
4. Maintain a civil and decorous atmosphere
5. No trolling
6. First round is for acceptance only
7. Violation of any rules is an automatic loss

*Warning* This is one of my first debates on this site, and therefore might be messy, or unclear.

Thanks, and have fun.
BIGC

Con

Okay, I am ready now.
Debate Round No. 1
Misterpoker

Pro

I have two main points:
1. Drone Strikes kill innocent civilian lives
2. Drones create more terrorists than they kill

1. "The drones came for Ayman Zawahiri on the 13th of January 2006, hovering over a village in Pakistan called Damadola. Ten months later, they came again for the same man who would later become al-Qaeda's leader, this time in Bajaur.R32;
Eight years later, Zawahiri is still alive. But seventy-six innocent children and 29 innocent adults, according to reports after the two strikes, are not." [1]
"Documents detailing a special operations campaign in northeastern Afghanistan, Operation Haymaker, show that between January 2012 and February 2013, U.S. special operations airstrikes killed more than 200 people. Of those, only 35 were the intended targets. During one five-month period of the operation, according to the documents, nearly 90 percent of the people killed in airstrikes were not the intended targets. In Yemen and Somalia, where the U.S. has far more limited intelligence capabilities to confirm the people killed are the intended targets, the equivalent ratios may well be much worse." [2] My opponent might state that drone strikes help save lives, that they can protect us. But they can't. They take many innocent lives, lives of people who have done nothing wrong. The international community MUST ban armed drones as it is our moral imperative, as humans and citizens of the world, to protect innocent lives.

2. People who see their loved ones injured or killed in drone attacks become motivated to join actions against the United States. According to author Jeremy Scahill, the vast majority of militants operating in Yemen today are "people who are aggrieved by attacks on their homes that forced them to go out and fight."
"Drone strikes take out a few bad guys to be sure, but they also kill a large number of innocent civilians. Given Yemen"s tribal structure, the U.S. generates roughly forty to sixty new enemies for every AQAP [al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula] operative killed by drones." [3] Even if my previous argument is wrong, we still have a moral imperative to ban armed drones, due to the fact that, even if we accomplish the goal of killing a terrorist, we are simply creating more. Whatever impact the con claims we gain from drone strikes, we merely are creating more of the negative impact that terrorists create.

[1] http://www.theguardian.com...... -Spencer Ackerman (Author)
[2] The Intercept, taken fromhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com......
[3] Nabeel Khoury, who was deputy chief of mission in Yemen from 2004 to 2007, taken fromhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com......
BIGC

Con

BIGC forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Misterpoker

Pro

Unfortunately, my opponent has forfeited this round. This is a rematch of a previous debate, where he also forfeited round 3. He accepted both times. This is one of my first debates on this site, and it is unfortunate that it ended like this. Thanks.
BIGC

Con

BIGC forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Misterpoker

Pro

Misterpoker forfeited this round.
BIGC

Con

BIGC forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.