Drone warfare, enacted by George Bush and expanded on by President Obama to provide safety for Americans against al-Qaeda. Rather than retrieving intelligence from sources within the country, the use of weaponized unmanned surveillance drones allowed for far better independent targeting decisions. These strategic implications created a question among Americans, is the use of drones to target individuals ethical? This question has arisen due to a high number of civilian casualties, making it seem unmoral. Kenneth Anderson, however, provides readers a strong argument as to why drone warfare is strategically effective with his tone, organization, use of quotes, and appeal to logic in his article, “The Case for Drones.” Anderson uses a formal
…show more content…
The beginning of the article introduces drone warfare along with describing its history, giving the readers a synopsis as to what the argument is going to be centralized around. Anderson then presents his side of the argument on how drone warfare is strategically effective followed by the opposition. Presenting the opposition gives Anderson a chance to respond to the objections or concerns that the readers may have, as well as showing that he has considered both sides of the issue. Instead of making the opposition out to be completely false, Anderson states that the opposing side is reasonable and partially correct. This shows that Anderson understands the oppositions are not completely false, and that both sides have their rights and wrongs. Next, Anderson counters the opposition, addressing the major complications that people find with drones in hopes of convincing the reader to his side. Overall, the organizational pattern Anderson uses plays a substantial role in proving that drones are beneficial to the military. A major key aspect of the article was the use of questions that Anderson presented. This method allows Anderson the opportunity to go into detail on any points that he believes are important to analyze. For instance, before talking through the criticism of drones, Anderson asks readers’ questions regarding
The beginning of the article introduces drone warfare along with describing its history, giving the readers a synopsis as to what the argument is going to be centralized around. Anderson then presents his side of the argument on how drone warfare is strategically effective followed by the opposition. Presenting the opposition gives Anderson a chance to respond to the objections or concerns that the readers may have, as well as showing that he has considered both sides of the issue. Instead of making the opposition out to be completely false, Anderson states that the opposing side is reasonable and partially correct. This shows that Anderson understands the oppositions are not completely false, and that both sides have their rights and wrongs. Next, Anderson counters the opposition, addressing the major complications that people find with drones in hopes of convincing the reader to his side. Overall, the organizational pattern Anderson uses plays a substantial role in proving that drones are beneficial to the military. A major key aspect of the article was the use of questions that Anderson presented. This method allows Anderson the opportunity to go into detail on any points that he believes are important to analyze. For instance, before talking through the criticism of drones, Anderson asks readers’ questions regarding