Only a tool, not a menace

The inexorable march of technology has always been on the minds of our creative artists through the generations.
Therefore, I will address the concerns of the majority opinion using concepts from a movie, a video game and a book.
The movie “Captain America: The Winter Soldier” is a superhero film masquerading as a political thriller.
The allusions the film makes to our current geopolitical situation are clear.
Samuel L. Jackson’s character, Nick Fury, justifies launching a trio of computer-controlled Helicarriers with enough firepower to level a city to Steve Rogers as necessary.
“We’re going to neutralize a lot of threats before they even happen,” he says.
Rogers responds with, “I thought the punishment usually came after the crime.”
This is one of the major criticisms of the CIA’s drone program, where the United States goes to ridiculous lengths to prosecute supposed threats before they materialize.
But when enemy combatants resort to tactics not covered by the Geneva Convention, we must make do with what we have.
This is not preemption.
The drone campaign in Pakistan and Yemen is made specifically to root out terrorism and take down Al Qaeda with the President’s enemies list carefully vetted.
These are not random trigger-happy video game players who have control of these drones and are given carte blanche to blow up blocks indiscriminately.
Speaking of which, a video game mentality is the majority’s primary concern with the use of drones.
The concern is that viewing the carnage and horrors of war through a screen is somehow different from viewing the carnage and horrors of war through eyes.
However, nothing could be further from the truth.
It is fallacious to assume that acts of war committed from a secret base in Nevada or Colorado are somehow more detached than deployment to Afghanistan.
On the surface, this would appear to be the case, but the truth of the matter is that “playing” this most dangerous game is just as involved.
As much press as drones get for causing collateral damage, their primary use is for surveillance and reconnaissance rather than raining down rockets.
Thus, drone operators see the suspected terrorists quite a lot as they go about their daily lives.
In our quest to minimize civilian casualties, drones are a least–worse option that must be carefully weighed against more traditional military action.
Mark Bowden’s “Black Hawk Down” provides a perfect example of a snatch-and-grab operation in Mogadishu, Somalia, gone horribly wrong.
Drones are much safer and reduce the chances of embarrassing incidents where American troops or operators are caught in a dangerous situation.
Furthermore, the tragedy of civilian casualties is greatly reduced with drones, which is especially useful when the realities of modern warfare require precision weaponry.
In fact, arms manufactures have jumped to deliver munitions that hit softer, but much more precisely, as a consequence of the prevalence of drones and their efficacy.
Though they might seem like Orwellian sentinels ready to strike at the whim of eggheads in Langley, drones are actually not the menaces they seem to be.

mjsu@indiana.edu