Comment Paper 2

             One of the main reasons why drone warfare is widely accepted within the United States is because of the realization that it is a safer method of surveillance and combat than physically sending troops into enemy territory. This is precisely why Bruntstetter’s section titled Risk and Human Element caught my attention right away. It initially seemed thought-provoking that Bruntstetter was writing about the human risk involved within drone warfare, which itself is designed to eliminate human risk all together. After reading this section for a first time, I found myself questioning the existence of drone warfare all together. According to the author drone pilots are still experiencing serious levels of PTSD, drone launching zones are hazardous, and there have been incidents of friendly fire that have accidentally killed both U.S. and Pakistani soldiers.

            However, after reading the Risk and Human Element section a second time, I realized that the section contained little to no proof backing up any of his statements. The author provided no direct evidence comparing drone pilots PTSD to the rest of the militaries PTSD, he listed one example (only one!) of an attack at a launching zone, and presented no statistical information backing up his claim that drones have caused several friendly fire deaths. Though the author’s statements are most likely true, it is hard to fully trust an article like this due to its lack of statistical evidence. He did not achieve his original goal of attempting to present the positives and negatives of drone warfare, because he fails to present any concrete examples on either side. Though this article was certainly interesting, it is difficult to understand how serious each these issues are with only the information presented by the author.