Drones Have Obviated the Need for Troops to Secure Pakistani Nukes

Peter W. Singer asked an interesting question today: Were it not for drones, would the United States (and allies) have had to invade Pakistan to prevent nuclear weapons from falling into the wrong hands? His question was based on this blog post about some comments made in Australia by counterinsurgency expert John Nagl. Do you agree with Nagl that the benefits of drones in dismantling the Al Qaeda leadership outweigh the problematic aspects of their use (killing of innocents, further radicalization)?

PHOTO CREDIT: mateus_27:24&25 (CC).

Tags: deterrence, nuclear, technology, terrorism, war

Views: 149

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Only partially agree with Nagi i.e.,provided "killing of innocents" in drone attacks is absolutely minimized, 

Drone(s) should not launch missile(s) if probability of civilian casualties is not low e.g., less than20% in most cases (with exceptions for hi-value terrorists with considerable blood on their hands (including Muslim civilians)). Strongly prefer selective drone and special forces attacks over invasion/occupation.  

RSS

Carnegie Council

Reasons for Hope: Earth Day 2018

"You can rest in despair or you can ask: "How can we harness our ingenuity and creativity and ability to cooperate in recognizing that we need to live more sustainably?" We need to be as creative about sustainability as we have been about exploitation." In that spirit here's a selection of Carnegie Council resources from the past year, in honor of Earth Day 2018.

American Engagement: Dialogue at Quail Ridge

A dialogue at Quail Ridge Country Club in Boynton Beach, Florida leads to questions about the efficacy of U.S. foreign policy, gender balance in international decision-making, and the connection between national service and involvement and interest in national affairs.

The Living Legacy of WWI: The Politics & Medicine of Treating Post-Traumatic Stress, with Tanisha Fazal

Although it has been written about for centuries, post-traumatic stress was not officially recognized as a medical condition until the 1980s. However World War I "was really a turning point in terms of acknowledging and starting to identify and treat what we call today post-traumatic stress," says Tanisha Fazal of the University of Minnesota, whose project on treating PTS will make the connection between World War I and current times.

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

E&IA Journal

GEO-GOVERNANCE MATTERS

© 2018   Created by Carnegie Council.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service