1 / 10

Drones: Why Care?

Delve into the moral implications of drone use, exploring how these machines affect lives, policy decisions, and global perceptions. Consider your role in supporting drone actions by your government and the consequent impact on targeted individuals.

macklin
Download Presentation

Drones: Why Care?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Drones: Why Care? Phil 250—Making Moral Decisions Irfan Khawaja Nov. 5, 2018

  2. Drones and you • So far we’ve done topics that are in some sense inescapable in your lives. • Even if you didn’t want to discuss or study them, there’s no way to avoid them. • But drones seem obviously escapable. • You’ll probably never be killed by a drone. • You probably don’t know anyone who is or will be. • You’ll probably never see a drone, much less use one. • You probably don’t know anyone who will.

  3. Drones and them • But while drones are escapable for you, they’re not escapable for other people. • Some people are targeted by them. • Specific targeting (p. xi) • Signature strike targeting (p. 10) • Some people are collateral damages in drone strikes. • There’s no reliable count of how many people that amounts to, but we’re talking thousands per year. • The question remains: how can drones be relevant to you if this happens, but only to other people?

  4. Drones, you, and them • The drones are sent in the name of the American people, which includes you. So the drones have your names on them. • You support the drones, whether by action or by omission. • Action: you pay for them. • Action: you support the people who send them. • Omission: you don’t object to them enough to stop them. • The targets are more aware of these things than you are. • The targets regard themselves as being at war with you. • You live directly within what the targets regard as the war zone.

  5. To it simply • True, you’re not a target of a drone strike. • You’re a target of the targets of drones strikes. • You know practically nothing about them. • They know all about you. • You don’t care about them. • They want to kill you. • The average American’s idea of a response to this is to figure that someone out there has your back. • But the average American has no idea whether this someone is stopping the killers or creating more of them.

  6. Scared yet? • Drones may look “escapable,” but drones are just a stand-in for terrorism, which is inescapable. • Maybe if you lived in Bismarck, North Dakota, you could afford to yawn your way through all this. • But you don’t. • You live in the one place that terrorists want to blow up more than any other. • And don’t think you can escape by avoiding New York City. • Garden State Plaza, anyone? Met Life Stadium? Prudential Center? The Lincoln Tunnel? Newark Airport?

  7. The moral issue • Nor is the issue simply a matter of risk assessment. • The issue isn’t merely: what are the odds that our policies are creating more terrorists than they’re deterring? • The issue is also: are these the policies you want issued in your name? Are they policies worthy of your name? • Either they are, or they aren’t. • If they are, you should be willing to defend them, here and abroad. • If they aren’t, then either you should oppose them, or you should be able to explain why they’re not your problem.

  8. Moral issue continued • But most Americans have no idea how to defend American policies. They don’t know the first thing about them. • Nor do they oppose them. • Nor can they consistently say that government policies are irrelevant to your life. • How can people who people who get federal or state financial aid for college say that? • Or people who hire tax accountants to save money? • Or people who oppose inclusionary zoning in wealthy suburbs? • Or people who get federal or state financial aid for college? • Or people who want Social Security, Medicare, or unemployment benefits?

  9. “Government policy is irrelevant…” • How can people who people who get federal or state financial aid for college say that? • Or people who went to public school? • Or people who hire tax accountants to save money on their taxes? • Or people who oppose inclusionary zoning in wealthy suburbs? • Or people who want Social Security, Medicare, or unemployment benefits? • Or people who rely on 911? Or the courts?

  10. “…irrelevant” • Employment law? • Landlord-tenant law? • Family law? • Probate law? • Veterans benefits? • Environmental law? • How is it possible to argue that one and only one type of policy is irrelevant to your life when so many are so obviously relevant, and you support this one as much as the others?

More Related