Blog 2

In regards to yesterdays lecture on technology and politics, I believe that it is simply impossible to make a broad generalized statement on whether technology chance causes political change or whether political change brings about technological change. I personally believe that each time this is brought into question it must be addressed to a specific instance or example. As mentioned in the lecture, the printing press lead to political change for that specific region of the country, that specific time period. In the case of drone usage and technology in the war on terror i believe that politics caused the evolution of technology and drone usage. There are several points about this matter that i would like to discuss. To start off, the United States of America was attacked September 11, 2001. This is clearly an issue of politics between two countries or groups. The US vs. Taliban, US vs Middle East, what ever you would like to categorize it, two groups with different ideas resulting in an attack. Because of this attack we went to war. The United States was infiltrating the Middle East, brothers, sisters, fathers, mothers, friends and neighbors were fighting on behalf of politics. These people were losing their lives. We needed a change, we needed a safer way to defeat the enemy without wasting AMERICAN human life. The politics in America began to stir as both parties argued for different troop loads, policies etc. Then the use of drones came into the picture, technology began to change. Suddenly, the use of technology was reducing the amount of lives. The use of drones to gave the US better intel, more accurate killing, targeted attacks in locations that troops can't even get access to. The possibilities are endless. For example, lets look at a leader of a terrorist organization. He has murdered thousands of his own people, attacked innocent people in other countries, captures young girls and boys and sells them for sex slavery. For 3 years we have been looking for him with no leads or trace. We know he is planning another attack somewhere in the world. Who knows it could be in Washington D.C. which is close to home for the 38,000 students at this university. Suddenly, due to drone intel that isn't capable by humans. He and we don't who else is hiding in a compound in the mountains of Pakistan and we have the opportunity to take him out with a drone strike. Should we sit back, relax and wait for an attack to happen to a US military base, US consulate, or worst US soil, because of known or unknown casualties that may result. This may come off as intense but ladies and gentleman we are at war. Simply put, it is us or them.
Furthermore, I think it is a little unfair that the Obama administration is criticized for the amount of drone strikes used in this war. War develops over a period of time. The war on terror fluctuated with intel, enemy position, and a hundred other factors that me and you have ZERO idea about. The CIA, FBI, Military has so much more information that isn't realesed to the public we don't really know what is happening. For all we know, the war could have taken a drastic change when Obama took over and it was neccesary for the increased usage of drone strikes. Additionally, technology developes over time. In the Bush administration the Drone technology was infantish compared to what it is now and has developed. Food for thought, the first iPhone wasn't created until 2007 and Bush's administration ended in 2009.

The Ender's Game, where to begin. The enders game to me is sort of like a hybrid situation of the Cuban Missle Crisis and the War on Terror in a crazy time switched scenario. This may sound absolutely rediculous but before you stop reading hear me out. Pretend that the The taliban and russians are the same team and they are against the United States. In the enders game, the United States are potrayed the humans and the taliban/russains are the Aliens. The human world suffers this devestating attack. The aliens have ships all over destroying human life, infrastructure and absolute terror. This is, in my mind, parallel of the attacks on US Soil by the Taliban. In the movie enders game, they use technology and drones and futuristic devices to discover an enemy planet is colonizing on a country near earth. This is where i draw the comparison to the Cuban Missle crisis. The Soviet Union or Russia wanted to put nuclear war heads in Cuba to in case it was necesarry to fire against the united states on this side of the world. However, in real life the United States had a 72 hour stand off with Russia and ultimately prevailed. Violence wasn't necesary. However, in the movie ender's game the general council of war (i think thats what they were) had a decision to make. Do we allow the aliens that attacked us previously to fester and colonize and possibly attack earth again with a stronger larger army, or do we strike using advanced technology (aka the equivilant to our drones, that the enemy does not have) and wipe out any possibility of that happening. Well, we all know what happens, Ender defeats the enemies and finds out that there is a single queen barely living, causualties were lost on both sides, but the threat to his planet from that Alien species was gone. Just like we  have discussed in lecture this is a matter of ethically debate. I feel that the general council made the right decision to use their advanced technology to conquer the enemy as did the president of the United States, Barack Obama did.

As i said before...it is us or them.