Drone surveillance cannot reliably distinguish combatants from civilians

Evidence

In other words, the argument here is that, so far as the capacity for discrimination goes, the drone technology destroys the traditionally established link between visual acuteness and physical proximity. The proximity of the operator is no longer necessarily a pertinent factor in the identification of targets. — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 1016 (#qualifies, via linked claim)

Furthermore, in determining that status, one slips from an epistemology of manifest observation and statements of fact into an epistemology of suspicion in which a targeting decision is based on the identification of behavior or a pattern of life that suggests membership in a hostile organization. For example, your pattern of life might suggest a 70 percent chance that you are a militant, in other words a combatant, and we accordingly have the right to kill you. — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 482 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Drones are less precise than rifles and grenades at discriminating targets.; Weapon precision cannot improve the adequacy of target identification.; Drone precision claims will fail in actual battle conditions — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 726 (+9 more)

Related

• Drones are less precise than rifles and grenades at discriminating targets. (similarity 0.92)
• Drone targeting hinged on remote visual guesses about sex and combatant status (similarity 0.90)
• Drones produce constant terror because targets never know when they are tracked. (similarity 0.88)
• Drone targeting decisions rest on probabilistic inference from behavior rather than observed facts. (similarity 0.87)
• Drone technology severs visual discrimination from physical proximity to targets. (similarity 0.86)
• Drones are nondiscriminatory because excluding combat erases the combatant-noncombatant distinction. (similarity 0.85)
• Drone precision claims will fail in actual battle conditions (similarity 0.85)
• Drones abolish the condition of combat that makes combatants identifiable. (similarity 0.84)
• Weapon precision cannot improve the adequacy of target identification. (similarity 0.84)
• Drone strikes depend on a network of remote invisible human observers (similarity 0.84)
• Preemptive drone targeting rests on epistemologically fragile predictions (similarity 0.84)
• Preemptive drone strikes rest on fragile and therefore dangerous prediction claims. (similarity 0.83)
• Most drone strikes target suspects whose identity is unknown at the moment of killing. (similarity 0.83)
• Drone surveillance transforms the panopticon from a punishing to an annihilating gaze. (similarity 0.82)
• Combatant status is unascertainable when enemies wear no uniforms and all carry weapons (similarity 0.81)

Broader Connections

• Drone targeting hinged on remote visual guesses about sex and combatant status #corroborates (0.65)
• Drone technology severs visual discrimination from physical proximity to targets. #qualifies (0.60) — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 1016
• Drone targeting decisions rest on probabilistic inference from behavior rather than observed facts. #corroborates (0.55) — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 482