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: 221

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

Loisach Group and the Democratic Community Narrative

Senior Fellow Nikolas Gvosdev reports from the Berlin meetings of the Losiach Group, a U.S.-German strategic dialogue, where the trans-Atlantic relationship and the rise of China are important points of discussion. Could countering China be the basis of a new Euro-American conneciton?

The Ethics of Gene Editing & Human Enhancement, with Julian Savulescu

What does "good ethics" means when it comes to gene editing? What types of conversations should we be having about this technology? Julian Savulescu, director of the Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, shares his thoughts on these topics and more, including moral and human enhancement, and why he called Dr. He Jiankui's experiment "monstrous."

Vox Populi, Eurasia Group Foundation, and Narratives

The Eurasia Group Foundation (EGF) has released its report on public attitudes towards U.S. foreign policy. Senior Fellow Nikolas Gvosdev notes that, like the project on U.S. Global Engagement at the Carnegie Council, EGF is attempting to get at the twin issues of "the chasm which exists between the interests and concerns of foreign policy elites and those of ordinary citizens" and "the reasons why Americans are increasingly disenfranchised from foreign policy decisions being made in Washington."

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

VIDEOS

SUPPORT US

GEO-GOVERNANCE MATTERS

© 2019   Created by Carnegie Council.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service


The views and opinions expressed in the media, comments, or publications on this website are those of the speakers or authors and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions held by Carnegie Council.