Abstract
Although unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) or more commonly, drones, have been used by the military since World War II, the United States began to use drones in earnest following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 in the prosecution of the global war on terror. Today, drones are used for aerial surveillance of combatants, of course, but they can also, purportedly, project military might far into the battlefield without exposing friends force to danger. While military drones therefore appear to be a perfect weapon for waging war against non-state actors that have no qualms about inflicting civilian casualties, their use has actually backfired and a growing number of critics argue that their continued use is only exacerbating already heated tensions in the world’s hot spots. Moreover, military drones are expensive weapons and critics also charge that they are a waste of taxpayer resources that are failing to achieve the desired “bang for the buck.” The purpose of this paper is to provide a review of the relevant literature concerning the effectiveness of using drones for military purposes to demonstrate that these weapons are radicalizing large portions of the Islamic world against Western interests in general and those of the United States in particular. Finally, a summary of the research and important findings concerning the continued use of military drones by the United States are presented in the conclusion.

Are Drones Ultimately Having a Positive or Negative Effect on Winning the Global War on Terror?

Throughout history, nations have constantly searched for the best weapons available to defend their interests and home and abroad, and this quest continues today. When they were first introduced around 150 years ago, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs or more commonly, “drones”) appeared to represent the pinnacle of weapons technologies. After all, here was a powerful weapon that could strike at the heart of enemy territories without risking friendly human lives in the process. Following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, though, the use of drones became virtually synonymous with the global war on terror by the West and the United States continues to rely on these weapons to fight terrorism around the world. Although the U.S. has enjoyed some military successes with drones since 9/11, many critics argue that the collateral damage that is caused by these devices only serves to further radicalize Islamic populations. The purpose of this paper is to provide a review of the relevant literature to demonstrate that the use of drones by the United States and its allies has had a primarily negative effect on winning the global war on terror. Following this review, a summary of the research and important findings concerning the actual effects of drone usage by the United States on the global war on terror are presented in the conclusion.

Review and Discussion

At first blush, drones appear to represent the pinnacle in modern warfare (Sadat, 2012). These unmanned aircraft vary in size from model airplanes to full-sized Cessna aircraft, and some more recent models can even operate underwater. In sharp contrast to the smaller, camera-equipped drone models that are favored by many private citizens, the drones that are used for military applications are aptly named with a corresponding price tag to match. In this regard, Dalziel (2019) reports that, “As may be inferred from their names, the Predator, Reaper, Fire Scout and Global Hawk are some of the models equipped with Hellfire missiles capable of reaching targets from up to 65,000 feet, with a comparably low price tag (the smallest costing approximately US$4 million)” (Dalziel, 2019, p. 3).

Although drones differ in size, function and capabilities, they share the common characteristic of projecting military might without jeopardizing friendly human lives, or so the argument goes (Yolcu, 2019). In reality, though, critics of drone use by the U.S. military and intelligence agencies maintain that these practices only serve to heighten any existing local and regional tensions and further radicalize Moslem populations, especially those that may have been politically...…eventually unraveled under questioning by reporters from CNN and he conceded that these strikes were officially authorized prior to their conduct (Terrill, 2013).

Although such military applications have been the source of severe backlash, the use of drones by the U.S. intelligence community has been a special point of contention by critics since these agencies lack even the modest oversight that is applied to military operations and the potential for drone strikes based on faulty information is always present (Coyne & Hall, 2016). In addition, by operating in a clandestine fashion, critics caution that American operatives may even use drones against domestic targets in the United States if current trends continue (Sterio, 2018).

In sum, the use of military drones by the United States has raised a number of important and timely questions, including their potential violation of state sovereignty and international laws, the newly emerging debate over using robotics in warfare, the potential for collateral damage, and the profound lack of transparency that is in place with respect to the U.S. government’s unfettered use of drones (Rosenthal & Schulman, 2019)

Conclusion

The research showed that drones have been used by the military for more than 70 years for a wide range of applications, but most especially surveillance and as weapons delivery platforms. Although the model drones that are favored by civilian hobbyists carry their own respective risks for aviation and privacy invasion, the use of drones by the military is another matter entirely. Military drones are not only incredibly fast, they are potentially deadly to anyone in the proximity whether they are accurately delivered or not. In the final analysis, it is reasonable to conclude that if people poke a hungry tiger with a sharp stick long enough, they will regret it and this has also been the case with the use of drones by the United States in its prosecution of the global war on terror.