War is not pretty or glorious. It is ugly and terrible. In the words of William Tecumseh Sherman, “It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, more vengeance, more desolation. War is hell.” Sherman saw war for what it was, in its truest state, at its most raw. He saw first hand patriots, countrymen, and brothers slaughter each other on the field of battle, their own lands. Given the option to save the lives of his men there is no doubt he would take it. Luckily this option is present to American Military leaders. Through the use of unmanned drone strikes America now has the ability to eliminate enemies from hundreds, even thousands of miles away from the target. This may sound too good to be true and many people may tell you that it is. Since its inception in the early 1990s, a debate has been raging over the use of such tactics. Drone strikes are controversial, but they represent an important weapon in the War of Terror, and the need to advance Military Technology. Drones limit the need to endanger American military members, they are capable of destroying and dispersing enemy militants, and they represent a staple in America’s Foreign Policy across the globe.

America’s War on Terror has been called its longest continuing war. In fact, the war on terror is not technically a war at all as congress has never officially declared war. Under Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, Congress has sole power "to declare war [and] grant letters of marque and reprisal." Still, the conflict in the Middle East has been on going for the past 16 years, initially being sparked by the terror attacks on September 11, 2001. The felling of the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City was a message to the US and the rest of the world. That message was very clear, we are here, we hate you, come and get us. “We,” in this instance would be originally the terrorist group known as Al-Qaeda. As time and fighting went on, many other terrorist groups emerged like the taliban, the black widows, and ISIS. These groups are not countries and do not recognize any borders, forcing the US and allies to invade several different countries including Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.

Ever since the US and Allies began operations against terrorist groups in the Middle East Unmanned Combat Aircraft have been used and served vital roles in the combat arena. The aerial surveillance alone offered by the MQ-1 Predator has often been enough to turn the tide of battles. Often times a drone like this is deployed alongside soldiers on the ground as a support option. It offers both a bird's eye view of the battlefield, and the possibility of deadly fire to help troops engage the enemy. Drones serve another purpose however, as explosive assassins, and for this they are eternally infamous.

When used to target specific members of the Al Qaeda organization drones offer a ruthlessly efficient option for termination. “U.S. drones have killed an estimated 3,300 al Qaeda, Taliban, and other jihadist operatives in Pakistan and Yemen. That number includes over 50 senior leaders of al Qaeda and the Taliban—top figures who are not easily replaced” (Byman, Daniel). This statistic comprises of only four years of data on the effectiveness of drone strikes. All of these strikes were approved by the Obama Administration in its first term. 3,300 terrorists were killed through these strikes, carried out remotely by American or its Allies. All of these strikes came at the cost of no American casualties while inflicting devastating damage to the leadership of the Taliban and al Qaeda. Further into the article Osama Bin Laden himself is quoted saying that the loss of leadership positions by drone strikes results in, “...the rise of lower leaders who are not as experienced as the former leaders and who are prone to errors and mistakes” (Byman, Daniel). Anyone who has ever experienced war can attest that the loss of leaders on the battlefield results in confusion and disorder. The American Unmanned Aerial Combat Vehicle Program sets out to do exactly that, cause confusion and disorder in our enemy's ranks through the elimination of key personnel. 

Drone strikes do not come without their issues. Every missile launched against the enemy must be very carefully considered and options must be weighed and measured. There are two large problems in the program's success civilian casualties, and retaliation. The former is a very unfortunate, but nearly insurmountable obstacle in warfare. When the drone program saw its first real action under President Bush the percentage of those killed in a drone strike that were militant was 60%, a dismal percentage at best. However, under President Obama this number rose to 85% militant casualties and at the end of his presidency the percentage was closer to 95% (Bergen, Tiedemann). Today that number is still at 95%, to some that 5% civilian casualty rate is too high, but for many the 95% is not only acceptable but excellent. Even this 5% mark is higher then it could be. In recent news it has come out that ISIS militants actively surround themselves with civilians as literal human shields. This dishonorable tactic either keeps them alive, or if they are high valued enough, forced American leadership to make very tough decisions. 

The other part that factors into the decision to launch a drone strike is retaliation. This means retaliation for the strike by other militants and the general public of the country the strike was conducted in. Militant retaliation comes in a few forms, the most common is a direct physical assault in the weeks the follow the strike on US forces or the civilian population. Part of what makes this conflict so unique in the history of American Warfare is the enemy. They have no problem killing their own people in acts designed to terrorize the population and send a message to their own Government. “The infrequent strikes kept public discontent to a simmer and allowed the host government to avoid publicly denouncing them. These strikes stand in contrast to those in 2009-12, when the sheer number of strikes blew the cover off the program, inflamed public sentiments, and forced the Pakistani government to halt its support” (Goel, Anish). In this article the author examines the issue of Government backlash. When strikes are scarce and infrequent the public does not express as much outrage about them. In this example there was so much outcry that the Pakistani government shutdown in support of the US drone program and effectively ended their presence in the skies. Because of this factor, it is not only responsible, but necessary that drone strikes be conducted in a controlled and diplomatic manner.

Since the first Homosapiens, modern day Humans, separated from their evolutionary ancestors about 70,000 years ago, they have been innovating. Nothing drove innovation faster than the need to eat and survive. To do this humans hunted animals, but due to their evolutionary direction they were slower, weaker, and with no natural defences. However, humans had intelligence. They built weapons of wood and stone that extended human reach. They made spears that could distance them from the danger of a predator’s claws as early as 400,000 BCE. 20,000 years ago bows were invented that could shot from afar or above (Timeline: Weapons Technology). Humans made crossbows and catapults and guns. Every advancement was intended to be better, faster, and most importantly, to distance the user from danger.

In the recent past missiles were developed that can shoot halfway across the globe and jets that can circumvent the Earth in a day. Presently however, humans have something that represents a momentous shift the art of war. Automated aircraft capable of destroying targets with the precision and detachment only a machine can offer. This technology has created a divide in the populations of the few countries capable of creating such terrifying wonders. The debate over the use of drones has been on going since they were first armed with missiles in the late 1980’s by Iran. 

Since then the United States of America has invested incredible amount of time and money into their Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicle (UCAV) Program. In the 2017 fiscal year alone, President Obama approved the spending of 4.61 billion dollars on “drone-related spending” this actually represents a decrease in spending by 1.2 billion dollars from 2016 (Drone Spending in the FY17 Defense Budget). This decrease does not represent a lessening use of the technology, rather the pentagon is seeking cheaper aircraft and allocating more money toward other research projects. This stage in the drone program’s life is a time of stability. It is no longer a prototype or an experiment it is a fundamental part of the American arsenal and requires less money in upkeep, further pushing the field of new technology.

The success of the UCAV Program has opened a pandora’s box of new innovations onto the battlefield of the future. Robotics has become a huge field in the Military’s Research and Development labs, while the cost of robots on the battlefield may seem high it is nothing by comparison to aircraft. The price of one F-35, an aircraft that has not yet been fully cleared for activation, could buy 30 MQ-1 Predator Drones. (Singer, P.W.). Aside from drones the largest arsenal of robots is for bomb disposal. Many different variations are available from the 42 pound PackBot to the 350 pound MAARS. These robots have been saving lives since they were first implemented in bulk in 2004. The PackBot specifically after four years their numbers on the battlefield had by a factor of 10 to 15,000.

The cutting edge of today’s military robots is the pack robots. They are still in the experimental phase, but their purpose is strictly a support roll. Since the average soldier carries anywhere from 40 to 80 pounds of gear with them the idea of this robot is to take the burden off of 

(Picture Boston Dynamics).

the soldier, literally. The picture here is of the Big Dog, a Boston Dynamics pack mule robot. These robots are mechanical pack mules they are designed to carry up to 300 pounds of gear for the soldiers and through a variety of sensors and programming know how to move in specific formations. They are the first all terrain robots of their kind, they can be outfitted with armor plating, and can even take a direct kick to the body without losing balance.

Drone strikes represent a lot more than just another weapon to kill the enemy with. They are capable of surgically precise attacks on specific targets, and they are a driving force behind the development of more robotics on the battlefields of the future. Another thing they play an extremely important role in is United States Foreign Policy. Much like the nuclear capability of the United States in the Cold War, Unmanned Aircraft are affecting future foreign policy by our ability to attack targets quickly and with extreme precision. Aside from this, the ability to use our drones abroad comes after a great deal of negotiating. Since the war on terror is not against any specific country the United States must gain the permission of the country they are operating in to use drones in their air space. The United States’s real mission must not be lost in during the conflict however, “Short of defeating al Qaeda altogether, a top strategic objective of U.S. counterterrorism should be to prevent fighters in local conflicts abroad from aligning with the movement and targeting the United States and its allies” (Cronin, Audrey Kurth). This idea seems to have been lost over the near two decades until very recently. Until the international campaign of ISIS over the last few years, the United States and her Allies were on a search and destroy mission to kill and dislocate as many militants as possible. During this crusade the real object was lost sight of and drone strikes and entire campaigns were used against the US in militant propaganda. In fact one of the leading tools for recruitment by terror organization is the use of drone strikes against them.

Unfortunately the fallout from the very attacks used to kill militants and prevent terror attacks is used as to recruit for further attacks. To combat this the United States needs to be very careful about the amount of strikes it launches in a given area and over a given period of time. The rise of ISIS has further forced these restraints to be tighter. ISIS excelled at recruiting not only from locals, but from people around the world. Their propaganda spoke of drone strikes and the civilian casualties they cause. While they often incorrectly sight the number of civilians killed and whether the civilians were being used as human shields by the targets of the strike, their words resonated with thousands.

The most current policy regarding drones is good news to some and terrible to others. The current President, Donald Trump, has recently signed a new legislature about the use of drones. The Trump Administration has seen fit to abolish some of the limits set forth by the Obama Administration about the regulation and depth of drone strikes. After Trump’s new declaration the battlefield in which drones can operate in has drastically expanded. It allows strikes from Unmanned Combat Vehicles and Special Forces Units in countries that we are not currently pursuing terrorist activities in. The reason behind the change is terrorists often move their operations to other countries that the know the US has not jurisdiction to pursue them in, the local government is sympathetic to their cause, or authorities would never look for terrorist cells to be located in. Many people fear, however, that by opening up the these new areas to strikes and raids sets forth a dangerous precedent that the United States will become involved in more and more conflicts and interfere in more countries many believe we have no right to be in.

America is has dug itself into quite a deep hole after over 16 years of conflict in an undeclared war against no nation. Over these years it has lost hundreds of service members from every branch of the Military. Thousands of American citizens have lost life or limbs fighting to try and fight terror abroad, while it unfortunately still found its way to the mainland. One of America’s most controversial wars has given rise to good things and bad, one of the most debate things about this Global War on Terror has been the use of Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicles or Drones. They have been seen as completely unethical by some, and totally necessary by others. But at the end of the day the numbers show that they are extremely efficient killers that risk no American lives. They have spawned dozens of further projects into the development of new battlefield robotics and represent a very important tool for intimidation and foreign policy. Whether for good or bad drones are here to stay, and it is up to the next generations of Americans and military members to decide the best way to use them.
