The media is a powerful tool that
can ultimately control masses of people. Over the past few years, media
coverage on the War on Terror has sky rocketed significantly. However, media
sources are only conveying information that they see fit. Many of the American
people believe that the Obama Administration is justified with their attacks on
Pakistan. But, how can we fully support a cause if we do not have all of the
information? We have to be mindful that the media and the Obama Administration
have released limited information on what is actually going on in Pakistan and
Afghanistan. With that being said the Obama administration is using the media
coverage to his advantage by gaining supporters. What would be the consequence
if the American people knew the truth? The President would lose his support,
his intentions would be exposed and questioned, and drone usage would probably
come to a halt. The US government needs to release the critical information
about the drone strikes policies. According to the Bureau of Investigative
Journalism, “From June 2004 through mid September 2012, available data indicate
that drone strikes killed 2,562-3,325 people in Pakistan, of whom 474-881 were
civilians, including 176 children.” These numbers are alarming, especially for the
children, because the media reports a much lower number of causalities. Another
alarming fact that the media does not share is that drones surveillance
innocent civilians all day long; this of course, causes anxiety, psychological
trauma, and frustration among the community. So far we have killed innocent
civilians, increased the anti-American community, and have had little success
with targeted killings. It is clear why the Obama Administration has withheld
critical information from the public. We have the right to know how our leaders
are handling foreign affairs and must demand answers.
While I would rather see no civilians lose their lives, I have to say that the numbers you cite are much less than what would be the casualties of normal warfare. As a percentage, the number of civilian deaths makes up about 23% of all deaths, which, while much higher than we'd like, is significantly lower than what would happen if traditional firefights and/or bombing. In one of the readings, the author points out that the "alternative to drone use is not no killing", it would simply be non-targeted killing where more civilians (not to mention American soldiers) are liable to die. Plus, I believe that the fact that the Obama administration has been able to take out several high-profile terrorists, including leaders of Al Queda and other terrorists groups, has spoken volumes about how much better equipped we are to fight terrorism.
ReplyDeleteMedia coverage changed the Vietnam War, and the same effect is being felt by drones. The media will report on it, and suddenly people are up in arms, forgetting that many more people have and will continue to be killed in combat.
ReplyDelete