U.S. Drone Policy: Votes for and Against

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

In January 2015, two al-Qaida hostages were accidentally killed during U.S. drone attack in one of the border regions of Afghanistan and Pakistan as stated in the article Should the U.S. Rethink Its Drone Policy published in Debate Club section of U.S. News (The U.S. News and World Report par. 1). This issue caused the burst of discussions in news and social media. In the present essay, the application of different rhetorical strategies like ethos, logos and pathos, applied in the discussion of the U.S. drone policy is to be analyzed.

Elizabeth Beavers, the legislative associate for militarism and civil liberties at the Friends Committee on National Legislation, claims that drone policy should be revised. She provides a structured analysis within three listed issues she thinks to be convincible for the audience. All the issues are supported by the references to the facts mentioned by official sources (the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, Stimson Center, Reuters) and people of trust (Retired U.S. Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal). She clearly applies “the rule of three” (a rhetorical principle that suggests that the arguments that come in three sound more convincing) in her reasoning list. Besides citing facts from the official sources, she turns to the audience’s emotional side by inserting the words of “a child from Pakistan whose grandmother died of U.S. drone strike” (Beavers par. 5). She applies to logos, ethos and pathos correspondingly.

C. Christine Fair, an assistant professor at Georgetown University in her article, claims that the drone program should not be revised. She also lists her the arguments, but, unfortunately, in the less structured way than Beavers. In her analysis she also applies to official sources (the New York Times, Daily Mail, Dawn, PBS, International Committee of the Red Cross, the Atlantic) but she makes logical conclusions by operating the facts she picked. She also tries to analyze the importance of the reason the problem of drones was raised again: “the American identity of Weinstein is not a reason to structurally reconsider the program because it reveals nothing inherently flawed in the way in which drones are used in Pakistan.” (Fair par.2) Fair also uses some emotional structures that reflect her personal attitude to the problem that should get the audience into the sphere of this attitude: “ironically confirm” (Fair par.2), “elsewhere in Pakistan” (Fair par.1), “something genuinely sinister” (Fair par.3), etc. Thus, majorly she tends to apply pathos and logos strategies.

Eugene Robinson, an opinion writer from Washington, D.C., claims against using drones in military operations. Robinson’s article reflects his emotional and extremely negative point of view. He is applying to the audiences feeling and emotions (pathos strategy) describing the world just before a drone attacks, mentioning biography facts of the persons killed, and inserting the video record of one of the murdered hostages. He asks the rhetorical questions invoking the audience to share his opinion, as well as to think of their attitude; and uses the “rule of three” as well:

“Will nearby structures that have nothing to do with terrorism be damaged or destroyed? Did the target’s youngest child stay home from school that day with a fever? Did his wife’s cousin unexpectedly drop by?” (Robinson par.8)

Though, the significant part of Robinson’s article is the appealing to the general principles of humanism that, in my opinion, cannot be applied to the current problem of drones exceptionally. Comparing opposite sides, tagging negative or positive features to the opponents is also applied, as in Micah Zenko’s article words “such a position was considered extremist and even morally unthinkable” referring to the former CIA official in the context of the military respond to al-Qaida (Zenko par.1) That might be considered as applying both ethos and pathos strategies.

In television debates, the large part of the audience’s attention is played to the visual and hearing side. The opinion of the audience varies drastically depending on how the speaker looks, how he or she talks, behaves, and reacts to the opponent. It would be interesting to check Brian Baker and Nigel West debates on Press TV News to analyze this issue. Baker’s speech is rather emotional. He addresses to the feelings of the auditory. His voice is slightly louder than it should be, he repeats the statements about civil victims several times, and he emphasizes the danger and illegibility in every sentence he says. He encourages the audience to imagine their feelings if the drone would attack their neighborhood. He also applies the “rule of three”: “Simply bleed, simply be killed, simply victimized…”(The Debate par.1). He mentions children, women and elderly people killed or injured in drone strikes in a very emotional way. He is also very pressing towards his opponent Nigel West sometimes interrupting and not giving him a chance to speak. This strategy attracts some part of the audience, but the other part can be scared away. On the other hand, Nigel West speaks in a calm voice; he operates the facts, and he is not trying to tease or offend his opponent. However, it would be fair to say that sometimes he addresses Baker an ironical look. Thus, Baker stakes on the emotional side of the audience (pathos) while West stakes on its reasonability (logos).

In the cases analyzed above it is clearly seen that the combination of pathos, ethos and logos is applied to claim any argument and the more balanced this combination, is the more convincing the argument looks. The strategies of multiple repeating the thesis, operating with facts and referring to official sources and studies, questioning the public and turning to its emotional side were the most widely used.

Works Cited

Beavers, Elizabeth. The Tragic Truth About Drones. 2015. Web. 1

Fair, C. Christine. Blame the Terrorists, Not the Drones. 2015. Web.

Robinson, Eugene. Do we still think drones are a good idea? 2015. Web.

The Debate. US Drone Wars. 2014. Web.

The U.S. News and World Report. Should the U.S. Rethink Its Drone Policy? n.d. Web. 2015.

Zenko, Micah. America’s 500th Drone Strike. 2015. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!

U.S. Drone Policy: Votes for and Against

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)