Yes I think that drone attacks do more harm than good because drone attacks invade peoples privacy they spy on us they kill lots of people and of course drones attacks often destroy everything rather than being good ok ok so yeah we should have to not allow drones anywhere else too
One of the greatest deterrents to a country or nation going to war is the ugliness of sending men and women to their deaths and facing the devastation that accompanies fighting physically in its most grisly form for a cause. Drones take away the sense of losing one’s own people to an enemy force despite the fact that even if no civilians or military settlements of the enemy are completely wiped out, damage is done. That damage is always collateral in nature, there would be no point in deploying a weapon if it fired a puff of smoke at a charging bear. Drone technology for gathering information was a breakthrough in being able to keep a watchful eye on enemies and ensure the safety of our own people and allies, but in turning anything into a weapon it becomes an object of destruction. There is also the question of malfunctions; these drones are electronic equipment which, more than humans, is prone to error and in this instance those errors could be catastrophic. A drone with powerful enough missiles malfunctioning in its target could obliterate a town full of innocent women, children, elderly, and ill while they are blissfully unaware in their homes, schools, hospitals, or on the streets. Long-distance weaponry is always an iffy contraption to use in war because while it does prevent harm from the person who wields it, they are not 100% in control of the item at its greatest distance. While the goal is to spare as many lives as possible on one’s own side and that makes long-distance and drones seem like a logical and effective alternative, should we not as evolved and intelligent creatures also have the goal to spare as many lives period (including the perceived enemy) as possible? Drones will not make that kind of differentiation or ever have that kind of choice . . . that is the very definition of a drone.
Yes, targeted drone attacks do more harm than they do good. Some argue that it takes our men out of the field and therefore out of harm's way, but realistically, many civilians are put at risk when drone attacks are used. A drone can't tell the difference between a civilian and a terrorist like a solider could.
I believe drone attacks do more harm than good. We have had many instances where these drone attacks are used against civilians, one group was even a wedding party. I do not believe these unmanned missions are doing much good for the Americans and I believe it is giving us a bad name.
Drones save lives of US troops and can take out a enemy target very efficiently. Yes drones can miss occasionally but still the effectiveness of drones out weighs the civilian casualties that we see abroad. Drones in the end do more good than harm, Yes there are situations were we see civilian casualties but the overall good out of the drones out weighs the bad, And Drones are a necessity in fighting terrorism abroad.
The use of drones on both military and civilian targets is both cost-effective and personnel-effective. They allow for targeted strikes deep in enemy controlled territory without exposing troops to hostile fire or giving away the location of strike assets. They also can are excellent tools for intelligence gathering sorties in high-risk enviroments.
Drone attacks do more good than harm, because they allow for U.S. forces to carry out very specific attacks. Rather than blow up an entire neighborhood, the drone can make a very specific attack on one person or building. With that, there is fewer loss of life, and less loss of intelligence.