United States should continue to use drone strikes abroad!
Debate Rounds (3)
johnjohn12 forfeited this round.
Intro: Drone strikes aren't bad in and of themselves. In a battlefield, all goes. However when you drop a bomb on say a wedding with 200+ people with women and children in it, just because one of your "sources" state a terrorist MAY be present there, is fundamentally immoral, illegal and just wrong. I don't want my future tax dollars stained with the blood of children. Now some will come up here and point out hey the drones don"t have people no harm done but that also is a bad thing because since no people are in the drones we will be more willingly to send them in to places with no regrets.
Point 1: anti-American sentiment/countries against drones
"A July 18 Pew poll of 39 nations found fierce global opposition to US drone strikes, particularly in the Muslim world.
"Sometimes we create terrorist with our own anti-terrorism methods like an example is in Yemen for every terrorist killed 40 to 60 more were made due to anti-American sentiment
Point 2: ineffectiveness of drone strikes
"First, only 1.5% of all drone attacks hit their high profile targets as provided by Stanford Law School. This means that 3 of 200 drone strikes reach their targets. The other 197 of 200 either completely missed or hit the wrong person(s). The only nation that approves of the US's strikes are the US itself.
"A drone fires where it is instructed to, however, things change between the time the order is given and the time it is carried out.
Point 2: American drones result in arms race
"Small, inexpensive and lethal, drones enable everyone from terrorists to the Chinese People's Liberation Army to engage in what the Pentagon acknowledges is a new arms race with "alarming" consequences. More than 50 countries operate surveillance drones and, increasingly, are fitting them with weapons. TheHuffingtonPost.com
"Enemy drones could cause many problems like raiding battle ships and posing threats to the U.S.
"The threat from a drone arms race not only stems from other countries, but it also stems from the ability for these countries to sell these drones to terrorists. In fact Iran, the leading state sponsor of terrorism, has already began selling drones to terrorist groups According to Jeremy Hsu
"Iran has already sold its own crude drones to countries such as Syria and organizations such as Hezbollah, a militant group based in Lebanon and backed by Iran. In addition, China-made drones would allow countries like Iran and North Korea to obtain technology.
Point 3: death/cost of drone strikes
"More than 3,000 people have been killed by drone strikes in Pakistan provided by theblaze.com
johnjohn12 forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Imperfiect 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||1||3|
Reasons for voting decision: bad grammar to con. FF otherwise
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.