
Drone pilots could be experiencing 'sniper's syndrome' - goodcanadian
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-09-29/unmanned-combat-drone-pilots-moral-injury-warfare-dissonance/11554058
======
tehjoker
Love how the perspective of this argument is that instead of drone pilots
succumbing to a real sense that what they are doing is unjustifiable, this guy
is an "ethicist" that is attempting to say that we need to find a way to train
morality out of people so they can push remote kill buttons and feel fine.

~~~
matz1
Or just hire people who has different moral values. Is it so difficult to
find? I personally don't have the problem pushing the kill button.

~~~
glloydell
I'd say it's absolutely vital to have the responsibility in the hands of do
have problems with "pushing the kill button", and then provide them with
psychological support services to handle that duty.

Giving people with no qualms or moral struggles with taking human life the
tools to do so on a massive scale is an absolutely terrifying idea.

~~~
matz1
Well, it depends on what the main objective of the job is. If it to kill
someone then do you really want to give it to someone that have moral
struggle?

~~~
glloydell
I'd argue that the main objective of the job is to achieve the strategic
objectives of the country engaged in armed conflict. Indiscriminate killing
completely devoid of a moral or ethical framework definitely does not
accomplish that objective.

~~~
matz1
Thats more of a higher level objective and sometimes to achieve that
objective, killing people is required.

Yes Indiscriminate killing is a problem but that is a different problem. The
article is in regards of actual pushing the button, I'm assuming the killing
is already decided after careful judgement .

~~~
glloydell
It doesn't matter how much care was taken in making the initial judgement if
the information using it to reach it is flawed, or if the situation changes in
the time between the decision being made and it's execution.

I'd imagine that someone with no qualms about taking human life would be far
less likely to confirm the validity and accuracy of those justifications.

I don't think anyone wants drone operators who dismiss a group of children
playing near a target because they don't place a value on human life.

~~~
matz1
>It doesn't matter how much care was taken in making the initial judgement if
the information using it to reach it is flawed, or if the situation changes in
the time between the decision being made and it's execution.

Of course, thats the leader job to make sure that the information is not
flawed and take into account the time decision being made and it's execution.

>I'd imagine that someone with no qualms about taking human life would be far
less likely to confirm the validity and accuracy of those justifications

Sure but the solider, during actual combat situation, can't always second
guess and debate your commander. There might be simply no time.

The solider utmost job is to execute the action that the leader has ordered.

Thats why you have chain of command, separation of concerns.

If every soldier or drone operator has to do the job of making strategic
decision and operating drone at the same time, I think that would be too much
cognitive load.

~~~
glloydell
TL;DR; DoD Manual says subordinates have an obligation to question morality of
orders. Lack of empathy is a severe handicap and liability for a soldier.

The DOD is pretty clear on this point (
[https://tinyurl.com/yxqfwyrx](https://tinyurl.com/yxqfwyrx) [link to PDF of
the DoD Law of War Manual] )

""" 5.10.2.4 Duty Not to Comply With Clearly Illegal Orders and the Principle
of Proportionality. In the context of the principle of distinction, it would
often be clear whether a given situation implicates the duty not to comply
with clearly illegal orders to commit law of war violations – such as the duty
of a subordinate to refrain from complying with an order to attack the
civilian population. However, the nuances involved in applying the principle
of proportionality could make it more difficult to know whether an order given
is clearly illegal. The duty not to comply with orders that are clearly
illegal also applies to violations of the principle of proportionality, in
particular, the case of a commander who orders subordinates to conduct an
attack that is expected to result in civilian casualties that the commander
himself or herself acknowledges would be excessive """

You're absolutely right that the ability to make those assessments in the
field isn't always going to be there, but that doesn't mean that there is no
requirement or need for subordinates to be able to assess orders and actions.

I'm assuming the type of person who has no issue at all with taking life lacks
(or has seriously damaged) capacity for empathy. Beyond the basic issues of
morality and human decency, someone without the capacity for empathy is
severely disadvantaged when it comes to assessment and awareness.

Being able to conceptualize and examine the intellectual and emotional state
of another human provides a huge predictive advantage. Assessing someones
potential to be a threat is far easier when you can understand what could
potentially cause them to justify violence towards you.

To sum up, If you have no qualms with taking life, and you lack the capacity
for empathy, you are not properly equipped to serve in the military.

------
jedimastert
The title should be more explicit about the fact that they're talking about
"military drones" as opposed to quad-copters, which was my first thought. It's
pretty obvious at first glance after the first click, but still...

As far as the article itself, it feels somewhat worrying that the people who
implemented these programs didn't think people would be bothered about killing
other people. Someone had to have thought of that.

~~~
scoot
For "quad-coptor" substitute multi-rotor (not all are quads).

The fact that you associate the term "drone" with hobby aircraft is a sad
inditement of todays "press", who, in their attempt to demonise said multi-
rotors (or to downplay the rise of the military drone?) have managed to
confuse the general public as to the difference.

~~~
prawn
I think you ascribe too much malice to the press here. Drone is what the
public understand them to be called. I fly a drone and that's the term used by
everyone who raises the topic with me. I don't know that they led by the
press, though it'd obviously be a feedback loop.

------
drtillberg
> ... if a UAV campaign is part of a war that has a justified cause, the use
> of force is necessary and proportionate to the threat posed by the enemy,
> the UAV pilot's actions can be seen as potentially justified.

Maybe part of the problem is that the drone killings are occurring in a
nontraditional conflict with no formal declaration of war and remote or
conjectural threats to the territory of the United States....

------
mnm1
They are human beings killing people on command in an unjust situation. They
should feel bad. They should be mentally hurt. They shouldn't just go about
their lives like they completed a level in a videogame. This is what it means
to be human and what it means to murder someone. All the bullshit
justifications aside, it's impossible to keep rationalizing all the killings
of the last seventy plus years. At least from a US perspective, we haven't
been in a just war since WWII. The operators know this. So good. Maybe this
will make the armed forces think twice about deploying such murderous
technologies. I doubt it. But at least, hopefully less people will volunteer
for sure murderous roles and missions. Once can only hope.

------
devoply
Well the US government, bastion of freedom and human rights can't have this
can they? Time to replace people with AI and machines and Google is here to
help.

~~~
brokenmachine
Just wait... soon the Captchas will be aerial pictures of Afghanistan.

"To access this site, please click on all the boxes that contain males over 16
years old".

------
mieseratte
Does anyone have an interesting perspective to discuss, or all we just going
to pile on our politicized opinions of the validity of the Afghanistan War?

------
techntoke
In other news, murderers experience some guilt. Government neglects Vietnam
vets yet allowed to prey on vulnerable high school students.

------
stygiansonic
There was a movie, _Good Kill_ , that came out a few years ago. Its plot dealt
with similar topics.

------
anigbrowl
The other day a drone in Afghanistan killed 30 civilians. Rather than being
ISIS members holding a meeting, they were pine nut farmers gathering around a
fire to relax after their day's work. [https://www.reuters.com/article/us-
afghanistan-attack-drones...](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-afghanistan-
attack-drones/u-s-drone-strike-kills-30-pine-nut-farm-workers-in-afghanistan-
idUSKBN1W40NW)

I don't really give a fuck about the psychological condition of the drone
pilots except insofar as it puts their children at risk. They and their
commanders should feel ashamed to look other people in the eye.

~~~
golergka
Then you really lack perspective on what any warfare is: it's always critical,
life or death decisions that have to be taken without sufficient information.
US civilian to combatant casualty ratio in the recent conflicts have been
significantly better than any other modern wars as well.

So, what do you suggest instead?

~~~
hackeer
Shooting people from a drone is definitely not a life or death decision. And
doing it just because they look like criminals is not a casualty of war, it's
outright murder.

Any cop would be in death row for pulling something like this in American
Soil.

~~~
mieseratte
> Any cop would be in death row for pulling something like this in American
> Soil.

That’s a dubious claim.

~~~
hackeer
I meant to say He would be granted a paid leave.

