The use of drones by the US government is a widely accepted practice, but the details of the program are shrouded in secrecy. The Obama administration has carried out eight times more drone strikes than its predecessor, but the decision-making process and criteria for targeting are unclear. The definition of an "imminent threat" and a "civilian" are also subject to interpretation.
Despite the lack of transparency, a majority of Americans support the use of drone strikes to fight extremists abroad. However, the program has had a profound psychological impact on people living in countries where drones are used, such as Pakistan and Yemen. Children have been traumatized by the constant presence of drones, and the threat of death from above has become a reality.
Critics argue that the program's secrecy and lack of accountability are troubling, and that the executive branch's claim to have the right to kill anyone anywhere on earth for secret reasons is frightening. The use of drones has also raised questions about the definition of a civilian and the counting of civilian casualties.
Ultimately, the speaker argues that while the use of drones may be a convenient way to fight terrorism, it is not a solution that comes without consequences. The program's secrecy and lack of transparency have created a culture of fear and mistrust, and it is time to ask hard questions about the consequences of our actions.
Here are the key facts extracted from the text:
1. The U.S. has carried out drone strikes in Pakistan's tribal areas, killing at least eight people.
2. The U.S. has launched two deadly drone strikes in two sovereign nations that almost no one in the U.S. heard about.
3. The Obama administration has launched eight times the number of drone strikes than its predecessor.
4. Drone strikes have declined slightly in recent years.
5. The CIA often counts able-bodied males of military age who are killed in strikes as militants unless they have concrete evidence to prove them innocent.
6. The U.S. government has a confidential 16-page Justice Department memo that outlines the rules for drone strikes.
7. The memo states that an imminent threat does not require the U.S. to have clear evidence that a specific attack on U.S. persons and interests will take place in the immediate future.
8. The U.S. government has consistently gotten away with vague answers about drone strikes, including not knowing who they have killed.
9. The first CIA drone strike in 2002 killed three men, reportedly because they thought one of them might have been Osama bin Laden.
10. The U.S. government has been criticized for not knowing exactly who they are killing in drone strikes.
11. Drone strikes are a routine feature of life in Pakistan, with news networks presenting statistics about them.
12. Yemeni and Pakistani civilians have expressed fear and anxiety about living under the threat of drone strikes.
13. A 13-year-old Pakistani boy who lost his grandmother in a drone strike expressed his fear of blue skies because drones do not fly when the skies are gray.
14. The U.S. government's framework for authorizing and justifying drone strikes is not well understood, even by experts.
15. A former defense department advisor has criticized the U.S. government's claim that it has the right to kill anyone anywhere on earth at any time for secret reasons based on secret evidence in a secret process.