Steven Le Gall

Professor Caza
WRI 0100
11/15/2017

Cause-Effect Essay

Topic: Indirect Warfare: the American U.C.A.V. Effects on Terrorism, Civilian Populations and
the Operators

Ideas:

- Tactical/Strategical Strikes
- Availability and Endurance
- Survey
- Strikes
- Crew/Operator Safety
- Undirect Perception from the Operators
- Retaliation Apprehension
- Strike Fear
- Detection
- Morale/Psychology
- Limited Payload
- Performances (Endurance)
- Cost -> Hourly and/or Number of Units
- Efficiency
- Technology
 - Limitations of the Target Identification
- C.A.S (Close Air Support)
- Humanism Loss
- Social Perception
- High Rate of Losses on the Civilian Side

Plan:

Topic Sentence:
Effect 1: - Availability/Coverage 24/24
Terrorist - Fear of Strike
- Limitations of movement
Organizations
Effect 2: - High Number of Loss
Civilians - Error of Target
- Social Perception

Effect 3: - Psychological Perception

Operators - Undirect Warfare
- Morale and Loss of Humanity Followed by
High Rate of Depression and Suicide by the
Operators
 Indirect Warfare: the American U.C.A.V. Effects on
Terrorism, Civilian Populations and the Operators

Although often cited in today's media as a simple and deadly weapon of war used to kill, the
Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicles, more familiarly known as "drones", are now common on
various conflicts around the world. After more than fifteen years of service in the various
conflicts of the 21st century, the effect of the U.C.A.V on humans is perfectly felt, both on the
battlefield than thousands of miles away from it. In particular, the shock induced by the drones
results in a severe rate of damage and casualties to the targets, the civilians and also the drones
operators, thus raising ethical questions about their usage.

Originally deployed as simple reconnaissance aircraft since the 1960s, the Unmanned Aerial
Vehicle experienced a renewal in their careers following the various American interventions in
Central Asia as well as in the Near East, being gradually modified to ensure their original
missions of surveillance but also tactical strikes on different small targets. An important effect is
that, because of their low operating cost as well as the possibility of relaying the operators, the
combat drones provide an almost constant coverage of the spaces to be monitored, thus ensuring
a possibility of daily strikes on various targets. This same presence, associated with their extreme
sonic and visual discreetness making them difficult to detect, made the drones a new weapon of
terror, thus limiting the possibilities of movements of their targetsor making those trying to
override regretting it quickly.

However, another important consequence of current U.C.A.V. deployment refers to the high
casualty rate on the civilian side. These last years have seen a rise in the number of civilian
casualties in these "new wars said against the terrorism, where whoever in the population could
be the target or the attacker. Thus, a high degree of confusion, which may be related to the lack
of correct data about the targets, as well as misidentifications, have on many occasions led to the
death of several civilians during tactical strike by combat drones. These important mistakes are
also mainly responsible for the current public perception of these aircraft. Never throughout
history has such a simple weapon fed the periodicals so much; newspapers rushing at every
opportunity to report a new failure or a new mistake related to the U.C.A.V.

A third outcome is also worth noting: if the social perception of these weapons is becoming
worse, it is also question of their psychological and human perceptions which prove more
complex to study. In fact, although drone operators are protected, operating safely at several
hundred or thousands of miles away from the theater of operation, it is interesting to study that
they are much more likely to develop stress disorder than their own equivalent flying on aircraft,
a significant number of them having been concerned by Post Traumatic Stress Disorder or
P.T.S.D. A feeling that can be explained by the perception that these operators have of their
action. What is like some form of video games but in real life at the beginning tends to become
nightmarish for these people over the time. A sense of being an underclass growing in them, not
to mention the fact that the images of their actions tend to haunt them which are leading some of
them to commit suicide. This indirect perception (and yet on a screen in front of their eyes) of
their actions tends to make peoples think on the consequences of the indirect warfare and the
actions concerning it.

It seems impossible today to do without the U.C.A.V. and it is more than likely that they are
announcing a new form of warfare, the long-term consequences cannot be predicted. Although
their deployments are a necessity in the present day, and their effectiveness has been
demonstrated on many occasions, it seems necessary to linger on the numerical aspect of the
war. What is the morality behind the decisions taken and the actions performed thousands of
miles from the combat zone? Do not we lose our human side in deploying this type of system?
As the great Cicero reminds us, The past is unchangeable, the future is unclear.

Words number: 657

Writers Den First Review
Second Draft

Indirect Warfare: the American U.C.A.V. Effects on

Terrorism, Civilian Populations and the Operators

Although often cited in today's media as a simple and deadly weapon of war used to kill, the
Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicles, more familiarly known as "drones", are now common on
various conflicts around the world. After more than fifteen years of service in the various
conflicts of the 21st century, the effect of the U.C.A.V on humans is perfectly recognized, both
on the battlefield and thousands of miles away from it. In particular, the shock induced by the
drones results in a severe rate of damage and casualties to the targets, the civilians and also the
drones operators, thus raising ethical questions about their usage.

Originally deployed as simple reconnaissance aircraft since the 1960s, the Unmanned Aerial
Vehicle experienced a renewal in their careers following the various American interventions in
Central Asia as well as in the Near East, being gradually modified to ensure not only their
original missions of surveillance but also tactical strikes on different small targets. An important
effect is that, because of their low operating cost as well as the possibility of relaying the
operators, the combat drones provide an almost constant coverage of the spaces to be monitored,
thus ensuring a possibility of daily strikes on various targets. This same presence, associated with
their extreme sonic and visual discreetness causing the difficulty to detect them, made the drones
a new weapon of terror, thus limiting the possibilities of movements of their targetsor making
those trying to override regretting it quickly.

However, another important consequence of current U.C.A.V. deployment refers to the high
casualty rate on the civilian side. These last years have seen a rise in the number of civilian
casualties in these "new wars declared against the terrorism, where whoever in the population
could be the target or the attacker. Thus, a high degree of confusion, which may be related to the
lack of correct data about the targets, as well as misidentifications, have on many occasions led
to the death of several civilians during tactical strike by combat drones. These important
misidentifications are also mainly responsible for the current public perception of these aircraft.
Never throughout history has such a simple weapon fed the periodicals so much; newspapers
rushing at every opportunity to report a new failure or a new misidentification related to the
U.C.A.V.
 A third outcome is also worth noting: if the social perception of these weapons is becoming
worse, it is also question of their psychological and human perceptions which are more complex
to study. In fact, although drone operators are protected, operating safely at several hundred or
thousands of miles away from the theater of operation, it is interesting to study that they are
much more likely to develop stress disorder than their own equivalent flying on aircraft, of which
a significant number has been concerned by Post Traumatic Stress Disorder or P.T.S.D. A
feeling that can be explained by the perception that these operators have of their action. The
operation of these systems, which is like some form of video games but in real life at the
beginning, tends to become nightmarish for these people over the time. A sense of being an
underclass growing in them, not to mention the fact that the images of their actions tend to haunt
them which are leading some of them to commit suicide. This indirect perception (and yet on a
screen in front of their eyes) of their actions tends to make people think on the consequences of
the indirect warfare and the actions concerning it.

It seems impossible today to tussle without the U.C.A.V., and it is more than likely that they
are announcing a new form of warfare, and the long-term consequences cannot be predicted.
Although their deployments are necessities in the present day, and their effectiveness has been
demonstrated on many occasions, it seems necessary to linger on the numerical aspect of the
war. What is the morality behind the decisions taken and the actions performed thousands of
miles from the combat zone? Do we lose our human side in deploying this type of system? As
the great Cicero reminds us, The past is unchangeable, the future is unclear.

Words number: 694

Academic Support Center Review
Third Draft

Indirect Warfare: the American U.C.A.V. Effects on

Terrorism, Civilian Populations and the Operators

Although often cited in today's media as a simple and deadly weapon of war used to kill, the
Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicles, more familiarly known as "drones", are now common in
various conflicts around the world. After more than fifteen years of service in the various
conflicts of the 21st century, the effect of the U.C.A.V on humans is well recognized, both on the
battlefield and thousands of miles away from it. In particular, the capabilities of the drones result
in a severe rate of damage and casualties to the targets, to the civilians, and also to the drones
operators, thus raising ethical questions about their usage.

Originally deployed as simple reconnaissance aircraft in the 1960s, the Unmanned Aerial
Vehicle experienced a renewal in its missions following the various American interventions in
Central Asia as well as in the Near East, being gradually modified to ensure not only their
original purpose of surveillance, but also tactical strikes on different small targets. An important
effect is that, because of their low operating cost as well as the possibility of relieving the
operators, the combat drones provide an almost constant coverage of the spaces to be monitored,
thus ensuring a possibility of daily strikes on various targets. This same presence, associated with
their extreme sonic and visual discreetness causing the difficulty to detect them, made the drones
a new weapon of terror, thus limiting the possibilities of movement of their targetsor making
those trying to override it regretting it quickly.

However, another important consequence of current U.C.A.V. deployment refers to the high
casualty rate on the civilian side. These last years have seen a rise in the number of civilian
casualties in these "new wars declared against terrorism, where anyone in the population could
be the target or the attacker. Thus, a high degree of confusion, which may be related to the lack
of correct data about the targets, as well as misidentifications, have on many occasions led to the
death of civilians during tactical strikes by combat drones. These unfortunate misidentifications
are also mainly responsible for the current public perception of these aircraft. Never in history
has such a simple weapon attracted so much negative attention; newspapers rush at every
opportunity to report a new failure or a new misidentification related to the U.C.A.V.
 A third outcome is also worth noting: if the social perception of these weapons is becoming
more negative, it is also questions psychological and human perceptions which are more
complex to study. In fact, although drone operators are protected, operating safely at several
hundred or thousands of miles away from the theater of operation, it is interesting to note that
they are much more likely to develop stress disorders than their own equivalents flying on
aircraft, of which a significant number have been afflicted by Post Traumatic Stress Disorder or
P.T.S.D. This is a feeling that can be explained by the perception that these operators have of
their action. The operation of these systems is like some form of video games at the beginning,
but it tends to become nightmarish for these people over time. A sense of being an underling
grows in them, not to mention the fact that the images of their actions tend to haunt them which
leads some of them to commit suicide. These indirect perceptions (on a screen in front of their
eyes) of their actions makes us think of the consequences of the indirect warfare and the actions
that cause it.

It seems impossible today to wage war without the U.C.A.V., and it is more than likely that
the drones will become a new form of warfare, and the long-term consequences cannot be
predicted. Although their deployments are necessities in the present day, and their effectiveness
has been demonstrated on many occasions, it seems necessary to linger on the numerical aspect
of the war. What is the morality behind the decisions taken and the actions performed thousands
of miles from the combat zone? Do we lose our human side in deploying this type of system? As
the great Cicero reminds us, The past is unchangeable, the future is unclear.

Words number: 689

Writers Den Second Review
Final Draft

Indirect Warfare: the American U.C.A.V. Effects on

Terrorism, Civilian Populations and the Operators

Although often cited in today's media as a simple and deadly weapon of war used to kill, the
Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicles, more familiarly known as "drones", are now common in
various conflicts around the world. After more than fifteen years of service in the various
conflicts of the 21st century, the effect of the U.C.A.V on humans is well recognized, both on the
battlefield and thousands of miles away from it. In particular, the capabilities of the drones result
in a severe rate of damage and casualties to the targets, to the civilians, and also to the drones
operators, thus raising ethical questions about their usage.

Originally deployed as simple reconnaissance aircraft in the 1960s, the Unmanned Aerial
Vehicle experienced a renewal in its missions following the various American interventions in
Central Asia as well as in the Near East, being gradually modified to ensure not only their
original purpose of surveillance, but also tactical strikes on different small targets. An important
effect is that, because of their low operating cost as well as the possibility of relieving the
operators, the combat drones provide an almost constant coverage of the spaces to be monitored.
Therefore, it ensures a possibility of daily strikes on various targets. This same presence,
associated with their extreme sonic and visual discreetness causing the difficulty to detect them,
made the drones a new weapon of terror, limiting the possibilities of movement of their targets
or making those trying to override it regretting it quickly.

However, another important consequence of current U.C.A.V. deployment refers to the high
casualty rate on the civilian side. These last years have seen a rise in the number of civilian
casualties in these "new wars declared against terrorism, where anyone in the population could
be the target or the attacker. This leads to a high degree of confusion, which may be related to
the lack of correct data about the targets, as well as misidentifications; this has on many
occasions led to the death of civilians during tactical strikes by combat drones. These unfortunate
misidentifications are also mainly responsible for the current public perception of these aircraft.
Never in history has such a simple weapon attracted so much negative attention; newspapers rush
at every opportunity to report a new failure or a new misidentification related to the U.C.A.V.
 A third outcome is also worth noting: if the social perception of these weapons is becoming
more negative, it also questions psychological and human perceptions, which are more complex
to study. In fact, although drone operators are protected, operating safely at several hundred or
thousands of miles away from the theater of operation, it is interesting to note that they are much
more likely to develop stress disorders than their own equivalents flying on aircraft, of which a
significant number have been afflicted by Post Traumatic Stress Disorder or P.T.S.D. This is a
feeling that can be explained by the perception that these operators have of their action. The
operation of these systems is like some form of a video game at the beginning, but it tends to
become nightmarish for these people over time. A sense of detachment grows in them, not to
mention the fact that the images of their actions tend to haunt them which leads some of them to
commit suicide. These indirect perceptions (on a screen in front of their eyes) of their actions
makes us think of the consequences of the indirect warfare and the actions that cause it.

It seems impossible today to wage war without the U.C.A.V., and it is more than likely that
the drones will become a new form of warfare, and the long-term consequences cannot be
predicted. Although their deployments are necessities in the present day and their effectiveness
has been demonstrated on many occasions, it seems necessary to linger on the numerical aspect
of the war. What is the morality behind the decisions taken and the actions performed thousands
of miles from the combat zone? Do we lose our humanity in deploying this type of system? As
the great Cicero reminds us, The past is unchangeable, the future is unclear.

Words number: 689