For instance, she explains how they’ve only succeeded killing about SO-100 al Qaeda members With 350 drone strikes. She also mentions that in previous similar cases the most effective way of intruding a terrorist group, such as al Qaeda, has been to capture their leader and in that way finding out their plans, how they would proceed it and who would be involved. Audrey also points out that drones work best where group members and the general population can be easily separated, which is a difficulty in the areas where U. S. Use their drones. Therefore, she believes that not killing civilians is inevitable.
Secondly, Audrey investigates if the conflicts actually stay local, or if they in fact breed new enemies. She brings out that even though America use drones as an advanced strategy it may only make local insurgents to join harmless jihads organizations to help attack the LIST. Because tot their eager tort vengeance. She explains that according to different polls over the years it has been shown that there are barely any countries supporting drones as a strategy. According to her it’s shown that ASK, India and the IS,S, are the only nations seeing drones as n effective and useful strategy in the matter.
So since neither Europe nor any Muslim majority country seem to support America’s biggest investment in the counterterrorism program at the time, they tear that they II soon have more enemies than before. She also says that the US. Is in need of public support, since without it no counterterrorism strategy can succeed over time. Despite Address many arguments and reasons to believe that drones might breed America new enemies, she points out that there is yet no evidence that can prove that drone strikes actually kill fewer enemies than they create.
Thirdly, she discuss if the drone strikes will affect the people living in America, and if the people believe that the LIST. Attempts will succeed in a preserved security for the American people. She argues, based on the polls where people living in the LIST. Has got the opportunity to answer the question, if they feel safer now than they did before the drone strikes became one of their main strategies. According to her, a poll has shown that this year 75% of the people felt that there is a larger risk that occasional acts of terrorism will continue to take place on
U. S. Ground. With that said she comments on that there doesn’t seem to be so many more benefits with using drones, then the fact that it has made it harder tort al Qaeda to plan operations and act them out. Since AAA Qaeda now are being kept preoccupied with finding ways to survive and impeding their ability to plan operations as well as carry them out. Audrey concludes by explaining that it’s not the actual machine that she’s against, since she doesn’t really see anything wrong with replacing a human pilot that might result in fewer killed citizens.
Nonetheless, she believes that there has to be a few changes in the drone- operating plan, such as that the drone strikes must become legally justified, transparent and infrequent. TO end she also brings up that if the changes wouldn’t happen, there might be some major consequences. For instance that they encourage Other major countries to mark their own enemies as terrorists and start to chase after them across borders. “If that happens – if counterterrorism by drone strikes ends up leading to globally destabilize interstate wars – then al Qaeda will be the least of the United States’ worries. ”