DRONE STRIKES 2
DRONE STRIKES 2

Drones technology are not only used by the military but also used by militants or terrorist groups such as Small drones and quadcopters have been used for strikes by the Islamic State (ISIS). A group of twelve have been piloted by specially trained pilots to drop munitions onto the U.S backed ground forces. They have been able to evade ground defence forces. During the battle for Mosul, the Islamic State was able to kill or wound dozens of Iraqi soldiers by dropping light explosives or 40-millimetre grenades from numerous drones attacking at the same time.

There are a number of vocal critics of the use of a drone to track and kill terrorists and militants. A major criticism of drone strikes is that they result in excessive collateral damage. David Kilcullen and Andrew Exum wrote in the New York Times that drone strikes “have killed about 14 terrorist leaders”. It has also killed an unknown number of militants. But, according to Pakistani sources, they have also killed some 700 civilians. Grégoire Chimayo’s analysis, of one three-hour-long surveillance and attack operation on a convoy of three of SUVs that killed civilians in Afghanistan in February 2010, shows a typical if notorious, case. Throughout the operation, there is a sense of the drone controllers’ desperation to destroy the people and destroy the vehicles whatever the evidence of their clearly civilian nature. It is difficult to reconcile these figures because the drone strikes are often in areas that are inaccessible to independent observers and the data includes reports by local officials and local media are neither of whom are reliable sources. Critics also fear that by making killing seem clean and safe, so-called surgical drone strikes will allow the United States to remain in a perpetual state of war. However, others maintain that drones “allow for a much closer review and much more selective targeting process than do other instruments of warfare” and are subject to Congressional oversight. Like any military technology, armed UAVs will kill people, combatants and innocents alike, thus “the main turning point concerns the question of whether we should go to war at all. The New America Foundation stated in mid-2011 that from 2004 to 2011, 80% of the 2,551 people killed in the strikes were militants. The Foundation stated that 95% of those killed in 2010 were militants and that, as of 2012, 15% of the total people killed by drone strikes were either known civilians or unknown. The Foundation also states that in 2012 the rate of known civilian and unknown casualties was 2 per cent, whereas the Bureau of Investigative Journalism said the rate of civilian casualties for 2012 is 9 per cent. In the Mid-2011, the Bureau, based on extensive research claims that at least 385 civilians were among the dead, including more than 160 children. As this fact and figure shows that the rate of civilian death is also high in drone attacks so the drone technology can be used where militants are present not on the civilian or unknown person and also drone attacks are a crime against humanity, We Need Humanity, More than Cleverness, We need kindness, We need all of the Human qualities more than USA definition. USA and other countries Drone Program Needs to Be Accompanied by Hard Facts on Civilian Deaths.USA Added Black Pages to History of Humanity. Drones are noted as dangerous for the Human Kind, fundamental rights, rights of life liberty and pursuit of happiness.

Drone technology is one of the most important parts of the future of warfare. It is also a threat to liberties around the world. As drone strike play an important role in new warfare so there should put some limitation as in every successful drone strike terrorist kill as well as innocent people also become victims. Drones have uncountable advantages as well as disadvantages. It is also a fact that drones become necessary for security as it can be used where fighting is difficult or too risky. It is a need of time.