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: 223

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

Foreign Policy Narratives in Palm Beach

After an invitation to speak at a gathering of the Palm Beach chapter of the United Nations Association of the United States, U.S. Global Engagement Senior Fellow Nikolas Gvosdev reflects on the current scope and direction of U.S. foreign policy. How will new uncertainties in the international system influence the relationships among the democratic community of nations?

Privacy, Surveillance, & the Terrorist Trap, with Tom Parker

How can investigators utilize new technology like facial recognition software while respecting the rights of suspects and the general public? What are the consequences of government overreaction to terrorist threats? Tom Parker, author of "Avoiding the Terrorist Trap," discusses privacy, surveillance, and more in the context of counterterrorism.

A Parting of Values: America First versus Transactionalism

"The existing divide in American foreign policy discourse has been the extent to which the U.S. must actively propagate and spread its values, or defend them or promote them even when there is no interest at stake," writes Senior Fellow Nikolas Gvosdev. How does American civil society demand consideration of moral and ethical concerns in the decisions both to go to war and how the war will be prosecuted?

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

VIDEOS

SUPPORT US

GEO-GOVERNANCE MATTERS

© 2020   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.