Team, I’m with Rey, you can’t pick if the Reps aren’t done. And right along with Pete I don’t think a Reach needs to complete the actual Replenish. I also believe we shouldn’t tie up any doors for a replen either. I recognized this was a challenge for us while I was mapping, so I built rep locations into the cart map (see picture below). This is where a Reach drops off a pallet, and a walkie driver completes the replen and returns it to be moved back up.
This paper analyzes an article discussing the ethics and morality of drone operations by the U.S. government. The article “Is Obama’s Drone War Moral?” by Matt Peterson provides the argument and basis for this analysis. This paper will break down the strengths and weaknesses of the arguments written in the article. This article uses both deductive and inductive arguments as well as fallacies.
Drones look like little remote control helicopters but with cameras in them. Some people fly these just for fun, but sometimes they can be used in the military. However, they have been seen to be becoming an invasion of privacy. Recently, there was a Kentucky man who shot down a drone that was hovering over the houses in his neighborhoods. In an article, he was asked and interviewed about the situation and said, “...To me, it was the same as trespassing”(Hawkins).
Our Innocent Lives At Stake A drone strike can kill a person in one room of a house, also people in the room next door, to even across the street like a school. There has been cases where the drones have had civilians attacked while along the intended target. These were all unplanned deaths, all innocent deaths. I oppose the use of drones in warfare. From all the drone strikes killing innocent people or putting their lives at stake and ours, is a horrendous movement, that’s why in my opinion I think we shouldn’t have drones.
This report does not aim to question the morality of assassinations; rather, given that the decision to assassinate an individual has been made, it analyzes the ethical arguments concerning The United State’s use of a drone strike as a means of assassination rather than spending Special Forces. Recently, the US military has increased its use of airstrikes by unmanned aerial vehicles (UVAs) as a means of assassination. This pivot in foreign policy has popularized the ethical debate concerning the effectiveness of ‘drone strikes’ as a means of killing America’s enemies. The use of drone strikes provides the US with the safest, cheapest, and least politically destabilizing method of assassination, though, increased transparency concerning the
U.S. drone strikes come with risks. They can kill innocent civilians, they can undermine the authority of other nations, and they grant the president the power to assassinate anyone he deems is a terrorist threat abroad, without any authorization. For all the controversy surrounding the drone attacks they have one thing going for them. They are effective and the alternatives are not. Since 2013, President Obama has greatly expanded the use of drones, deploying more than 360 strikes, which is up nearly 50 from the Bush administration.
America, is a child that sleeps all day, and cries all night A nation with a hand stretched out to others, yet cares nothing for it’s own, homeless, and downtrodden. A nation where people come from all over to be something, but die with being a nobody, and dying with nothing.
This may seem like a radical accusation to a surveillance supporter, but the mere existence of drones will inevitably lead to misuse. With no rules currently in place to protect the leakage of drone captured information, the privacy of the public is at
I have high hopes for this drone registry because there have been too many times where a drone strike has killed innocent civilians or targeted the wrong building, yet no one admits their mistake. On the other hand, when groups have admitted their mistake, no consequence or persecution has been put on them. For example, a US airstrike targeting an Al-Qaeda compound resulted in the killing of 2 hostages. Now that drone technology seems to becoming more popular, it’s time that organizations take responsibility for their failed attempts and accidental killings. It’s also time that we start educating government officials, and ordinary individual operators, flight rules so we can America and the world safe.
Drones use for targeted killing is covered by international humanitarian law, or IHL, as long as all usage follows the principles set by IHL: distinction, military necessity, proportionality, and precaution (Radsan 14). In order for a drone to engage a target, the target must be confirmed as a “functional combatant,” which is distinction. People “directly participating in hostilities” are considered to be functional combatants and are legally allowed to be targeted under American law. Next, it must be certain that there is military necessity; the target will not be killed without any military advantage. Third, proportionality is required in making sure that an unreasonable amount of force is not used.
Also, UAVs are America's most accurate weapon thus far. Therefore, the vote for the persistence of drone strikes is most desirable for America and is strongly encouraged. UAVs are a great preventative measure to mitigate potential terrorist attacks. According to the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, “Drone attacks in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen, and Somalia have killed...dozens of high-level commanders implicated in organizing plots against the United States.” UAVs take out highly-skilled terrorists along with
Hundreds of years ago, people used to believe that the earth was flat, but with the research and technology, we were able to find out that it is a perfect sphere. Aliens run along those same lines. Even with all the technology today, there is still no definite answer if we are alone in this massive universe or not. There is so much controversy weather or not aliens exist.
When we think about drone or UAV (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle), first thing comes to our mind is; frightening, alien looking unmanned aircraft that has been involved with so many bombings and targeted killings. In “Drone Home: What Happens When Drones Return to America”, from Time, Lev Grossman wrote drones are dreaded all around the globe, and possibly they have gotten this fear through the United States Military. Drone technology has been greatly improved last decade, now third of entire Air Force’s fleet is unmanned. U.S Government is sending drones to many war zones to eliminate high-ranking enemies or do surveillance successfully. Even though this rapidly growing technology is changing our perspective of war, it also changing our everyday life drastically to help our community.
The military is using the drones on those who are a threat to the U.S. NATO. Air strikes overthrew and eventually captured and killed Qaddafi with the help of Libyan rebels ("Drones: Should"). In 2011, a CIA-operated drone targeted and killed Anwar al-Awlaki when the Obama administration oversaw one of the most controversial drone strike yet. Anwar was a Muslim cleric, the U.S. government to be a senior leader in Al Qaeda ("Drones: Should"). After the 9/11 terrorist attack, President George W. Bush had ordered a deployment of armed unmanned aircraft to assist in overthrowing the Taliban, the Islamist Regime of Afghanistan ("Drones: Should").
While drones are mostly used for surveillance and strike operations for the government, civilians also use them to survey natural disasters, construct 3-D models, and more, but civilian use is not where the controversy is (Zenko 1-5). The argument is over if drones should be used in the military, mostly for air strikes. Even though fewer American lives are put at risk, drones should not be used in war because they have technological problems and are turning United States allies against us. I A. Drones are not immune to the outside world. As proven by Todd Humphreys, drones are able