Discuss: Drones

Yes but ideally with permission from the country in question.

We are killing innocents. We are destroying hospitals by mistake. Sometimes I think about the panic our citizenry would fly into if other nations started using killer drones on us. We would be outraged. And yet here we are, doing this very thing to them.

Absolutely to gather intelligence. Assassination should be reserved for undeniably confirmed terrorists

No, this is a violation of these country’s sovereignty as well as a violation of international law.

The United States should not have any resources in foreign countries, and should stay out of places that do not concern them, because getting involved and adding military bases, and stuff like that only makes room for conflict

The military can gather intelligence, however they cannot kill terrorists without Congressional approval or a declaration of war

Yes, but only if there is no risk of any civilian casualties

Yes to gather intelligence, but no to killing suspected terrorists unless they are highly proven they are a terrorist.

Isn't this exactly why we have secret spy agencies?

Yes and nuke china if they try to start a war with us

They should gain intelligence, but to kill suspected terrorists, they should gather substantial evidence first before making any action.

I think it is fine to prevent terrorism, but drones could cause implications and i do not think it is right to kill them if it is not confirmed they are terrorists.

They should only gather information, or kill actual terrorists, and it must be with permission from the country in question

I think its necessary if they are causing a issue with our country. If we are doing it with no background I do not think it is necessary.

Only if there is reasonable suspicion to believe terrorists are present, and if given permission from the country to do so.

Double edged sword. What if suspected terrorists were not terrorists at all, or incriminated as such?

The war on terror was kind of a failure, but the ISIS and Al-Qaeda movements are mostly damaged or destroyed

No, only to gather intelligence and only to kill with permission from said foreign country unless the country is a hostile state and an enemy of the United States or if they have committed an attack against the United States.

Yes, but only with permission from that country and only if that terrorist has committed terroristic acts on America.

No, only for surveillance and with permission from the country or a declaration of war from congress

If others are going to do it to the United States, then we have the right to do it to them. If they stop doing it to the United States then we stop.

Yes, but only kill if they can prove the suspect is a terrorist or potential terrorists beyond reasonable doubt.

since this is asking about suspected terrorists my answer would vary since there's no proof that the suspect is the terrorist

No, only gain intelligence if the other country gives permission and absolutely do not kill anyone without discussion.

Yes, but only when U.S. intelligence knows unequivocally that the alleged terrorist will conduct an operation that will undermine American intelligence in the process.

Yes, but only with undeniable evidence that they are a terrorist who plans to or has committed a crime against our country.

no the government should only do that if it is absolutely nessassery for the grater good of lives in america

The U.S. can use the drones for spying, but can only kill once they have definite confirmation that these suspects are terrorists

Yes, with permission from governments that will work with us or in an act of war with those that won't.

yes, but they need to make sure that these people are terrorists because they could just be killing innocent people

Seek permission from the country, but if they hate us then well idk this is a hard question, like most honestly, but I would say overall we should stop getting involved in these nations which have radicalized many of its citizens against us and a lot of the world.

Yes, if the country has history of a bad government and have many people involved with hurting either their country or other countries.

This is a touchy subject but I feel that instead of drones,we should go back to having more opperatives

Not to kill terrorist, but we can't be offended to other countries if they do it as well when we do it to them. We ARE NOT special, and need to get over our own egos.

No. Death, destruction, and poverty has been heavily linked to terrorism. Instead we should focus on rebuilding efforts and helping to establish a strong free market economy in third world countries that would allow them to grow and thrive and eliminate the motivators for terror.

fly overs are ok, but murdering a SUSPECT is insane. a confirmed terrorist is a different story, but you cant kill on suspicion.

Yes, but only if there is undeniable evidence that the suspect has committed an attack on the country. Also, more should be done to prevent civilian casualties.

Would the US be fine if other countries do this to us? I think we need a better way to prevent evil people from doing evil or continuing to do evil and if it saves innocent lives, I'd consider it, but also know the US is just as guilty as inappropriately spying on others just as it does its own citizens.

No, drones should only be used to gather good intelligence. We cannot kill “suspected terrorists” unless there is beyond reasonable doubt, clear evidence, and an established immediate threat. Unless it’s necessary action to combat clear terrorism & inaction is negligible, the military has no right to do so without permission from the country in question and/or a Congressional declaration of war.

No, you would be invading other territories and probably start a war on a country that probably was not even worried about us

The military should usually only fly over for intelligence gathering. If the foreign government is linked to the terrorist, then permission for missions should not be asked for.

No, because by spying on foreign territory they are looking at the security of their country and could fall into a national conflict.

Yes, but only use lethal means if there is undeniable evidence of an impending attack on the United States or its allies

If it can kill only the specified group or targeted person I would agree, If civilians are being killed then the drones shouldn't be apart of the fire zone.

Yes if needed if the country is an immediate dangers otherwise we are risk our cover and could put ourselves in more jeopardy.

I'd prefer drone use to actual people. But usage of these drones has to be very well justified because people will still be losing their life if they're used to kill.

No, only to gather intelligence. Congressional declaration of war would be needed for anything further.

Yes with permission because the country is giving access and allowing us to gather intel but i am also for no because how it has been used it other parties it has become dangerous but constitutionally no

Only if the country in question agrees with it, or if NATO permits it if this so-called country is doing something wrong or hiding something last time we had this Obama blew up a hospital in the Middle East not trying to do that again.

Flying drones to gain intelligence yes, but not to kill suspected terrorists we need to have confirmed information to do so. We do not want retaliation.

Yes, to flying drones over foreign countries to gather necessary intel. However, killing of a terrorist individual or group should be reserved to drone strike only when the evidence and intelligence has been compiled and confirmed. "Suspected" terrorists should not solely warrant a drone strike that would/could also kill innocent bystanders and civilians, which also can become propaganda for terrorist organizations looking to spin hate and distain towards the US. We need to protect our country, own interest, and foreign counterparts, but do so in a tactful manner and I am in favor of drone strikes when confirmed evidence is provided and civilian casualties can be limited (as much as possible).

No. Instead, cooperate with the country to capture the suspected terrorist. If we're complaining about other countries spying on us, we shouldn't spy on other countries.

Yes and with the permission and aid of the country in question. Should the country refuse, any transport routes from that country be it people or cargo should be monitored strictly and within regulation.

yes but kill only confirmed terrorists or confirmed risks of threat to prevent killing innocent citizens.

Yes the military should be able to fly drones over foreign countries to gain intelligence, however they should not be permitted to kill unless there is no other choice due to the risk of ending hundreds of innocent civilian lives.

The use of drones for intelligence and targeted strikes raises significant ethical concerns. While they can eliminate high-value targets, the risk of civilian casualties often leads to increased extremism and resentment. It is vital that military actions are based on verified intelligence and that there is clear accountability in defining who qualifies as a "suspected terrorist." Prioritizing diplomacy and local engagement over unilateral force is essential to respect human rights and foster a deeper understanding of local contexts.

yes, provided congress has been informed, at least to the select committee on intel or armed forces oversite and approved with a vote for the record

Mainly to gain intelligence but in very few specific scenarios where it is necessary to use violence.

Yes, the US Military should fly drones over foreign countries to gain intelligence, but not kill "suspected" terrorists. "Suspected" is not enough