Historical continuity of remote killing does not justify drones

Evidence

In an article entitled “In Defense of Drones: A Historical Argument,” David Bell criticizes those who regard these weapons as “something altogether new—a fantasy of science fiction that has become reality” and he points out that “if our technology is new, the desire to take out one’s enemies from a safe distance is anything but.” That is no doubt true, but how such a “historical” reminder could possibly constitute a “defense of drones” remains more mysterious. — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 337

Categorization

• XREF: Part of the reader’s interest in how ethical-political norms of drone war get argued. — connects to: “Nothing new under the sun” arguments are an ancient device to normalize one-sided killing; Drones are morally justified by preventing one’s own casualties; Impersonal long-range killing is aseptic homicide rather than rational progress (+2 more)

Related

• “Nothing new under the sun” arguments are an ancient device to normalize one-sided killing (similarity 0.89)
• Drones add the remote control’s range to the weapon’s range. (similarity 0.85)
• Impersonal long-range killing is aseptic homicide rather than rational progress (similarity 0.85)
• Drones undermine the tacit geographic limits built into the laws of war (similarity 0.84)
• Invoking historical precedent silences objections to one-sided killing (similarity 0.84)
• Armed drones make killing a priori one-directional, converting combat into slaughter. (similarity 0.84)
• Drones multiplied ballistic reach by adding remote-control distance to weapon range (similarity 0.83)
• Drone missiles have larger lethal radii than conventional infantry weapons (similarity 0.83)
• Drones create a crisis in military ethos by contradicting traditional warrior values. (similarity 0.82)
• Eliminating reciprocal exposure to violence makes drones look like cowardly weapons. (similarity 0.82)
• The drone’s impossibility of capture deliberately converts kill into the only option (similarity 0.82)
• Drones evolved from surveillance eyes into lethal hunter-killer weapons. (similarity 0.82)
• Moral limits on weapons apply only where adversaries are equals (similarity 0.82)
• Unilateral drone killing makes the legal right to kill merely formal. (similarity 0.82)
• Drone-weaponized remote control radicalizes war into one-sided killing from safe zones (similarity 0.82)