Jus in bello norms applied to drones convert combat ethics into necroethics

Evidence

According to this view of military morality, to kill while exposing one’s own life is bad; to take lives without ever endangering one’s own is good. That first principle of drone necroethics is, paradoxically, vitalist. And it is in accordance with this logic that the drone can be said to be a “humanitarian” weapon: the humanitarian imperative is to save lives. And the drone does indeed save our lives. It is therefore a humanitarian technology. QED. — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 453 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

What is emerging here, more fundamentally, is a regime of military violence that claims to be humanitarian but might equally be called humilitarian. It is a power that both kills and saves, wounds and heals, and it performs those double tasks in a single gesture, in an integrated manner: an immediate synthesis of a power of destruction and a power of caring, murder at the same time as care. — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 461 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Drone warfare creates a new ethical-political norm neither war nor peace; Moral philosophy is now being deployed to facilitate war; Drone morality inverts ethics to make unendangered killing good — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 453 (+8 more)

Related

• Drones’ necroethics embody a nationalism of self-preservation (similarity 0.91)
• Drone morality inverts ethics to make unendangered killing good (similarity 0.90)
• Drones fuse killing and caring into an integrated humilitarian power (similarity 0.89)
• Drones are morally justified by preventing one’s own casualties (similarity 0.89)
• Drone warfare creates a new ethical-political norm neither war nor peace (similarity 0.89)
• Drone warfare establishes a norm neither war nor peace via imperial immunity (similarity 0.88)
• Drone warfare fuses killing and caring into a single integrated gesture (similarity 0.85)
• The drone state aims to replace mobilized citizen bodies with mechanical agents. (similarity 0.85)
• Drones create a crisis in military ethos by contradicting traditional warrior values. (similarity 0.85)
• Drone warfare creates a new configuration that is neither war nor peace (similarity 0.84)
• Feigned empathy with victims legitimizes drone homicide publicly (similarity 0.84)
• Drone warfare deactivates the democratic critique rooted in exposable lives (similarity 0.83)
• Combat indifference to killing spread to accept civilian deaths by mistake (similarity 0.83)
• Humanitarian drone justification rests on a logic of the lesser evil (similarity 0.83)
• Remote killing free from retaliation creates a moral hazard problem (similarity 0.83)

Broader Connections

• Drone morality inverts ethics to make unendangered killing good #corroborates (0.90) — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 453
• Drones’ necroethics embody a nationalism of self-preservation #expands (0.70)
• Drones fuse killing and caring into an integrated humilitarian power #corroborates (0.60)
• Drone warfare fuses killing and caring into a single integrated gesture #corroborates (0.60) — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 461
• The 2005 Kasher-Yadlin article reversed noncombatant and combatant priority in war ethics #expands (0.60)
• Drones are morally justified by preventing one’s own casualties #qualifies (0.50)
• Drone warfare establishes a norm neither war nor peace via imperial immunity #corroborates (0.50)
• Humanitarian drone justification rests on a logic of the lesser evil #qualifies (0.50) — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 463