Blogger Seedoo post on October 2012 DAWN.com’s article “Drone strikes in Orakzai kill 16 suspected militants”, argues that drones are an unfortunate necessity in Pakistan until the Pakistani government declares open war against the TTP. Seedoo supports this claim by listing the agencies necessary to have a uniform commitment to defeat the TTP and a metaphor of one’s house being in order. His purpose is to refute blogger’s Amhed’s claim that Drones are not the solution in order to illustrate that there are certain prerequisites Pakistan’s government must enact before it can be independent of U.S drone intervention. He establishes an understanding relationship with his audience of fellow bloggers who are predominantly Pakistani yet read and write in English so probably are classically educated and see their way of life threatened by TTP activity.
Caption: Bill Roggio in his April 2012 interview on Military Drone Use aired on C-SPAN Washington Journal explains why the US has expanded authority and adopted the use of “signature strikes”. Roggio informs his audience by including drone statistics, official statements, and from work his news journal, the Long War. His purpose is to abate growing fears of drone activity and expansion in order to offer a clearer public understanding of a complicated and intricate military initiative. He establishes a concerned relationship with his audience of politically involved viewers that are worried about military action and may not fully understand how drones work are and what drones may mean for national security.
Dina Templeton-Rastons N.P.R news segment “US Drones navigate Murky Legal Path in Pakistan” aired in October, 2012 argues that the U.S has the right to issue drone strikes in Pakistan. Templeton supports her argument by quoting State Department officers, Treasury Department officers, and international law. Her purpose is to raise his reader’s awareness of the tenuous nature of international law concerning drone strikes in order to assure them that the drone attacks are legal. She establishes a professional tone with audience of educated, informed Americans who would respect the experts she includes.
This article has particular significance to me because this is a logos argument that cites several reputable sources. It is necessary to have some standing Washington opinions on this technology especially from foreign affairs officers. These officer’s mission is clear – to seek what is best course for the U.S while being conscious of foreign involvement and opinion. The argument present in this article therefor is strong and informs the readers about this daunting legal issue of military weapons.
Temple-Raston, Dina (2012, October 6). U.S Drones Navigate Murky Legal Path in Pakistan. National Public Radio. Retreived online from http://www.npr.org/2012/10/06/162395399/u-s-drones-navigate-murky-legal-path-in-pakistan
A Majeed’s photo captures Imran Khan’s rally for peace in Pakistan October 2012, he asserts that Pakistan needs peace – which Imran Khan can bring to Pakistan. Majeed supports his assertion by highlighting Imran Khan’s as a leader of people’s rights, Majeed focuses the Image on Imran Khan . Majeed’s purpose is to inform his Al Jazeera audience about the Imran Khan anti-drone peaceprtoest in order to demand that peace for Pakistan is an important matter that can be accomplished by electing Imran Khan to a central government position. Majeed establishes a empathetic relationship with his audience of pakistani’s and other middle-eastern people who find the U.S intervention in middle-east affairs threatening.
A Majeed “Anti-Drone Protests in Pakistan” , October 7 2012, published by Al Jazeera a GETTY image
The Onion’s satirical article “Pakistani Boy, US Drone form Unlikely Friendship” on November 2, 2012 suggests that the Pakistani and American relationship is strained. This claim is supported by the Onion’s fictional story of a Pakistani boy and Drone becoming friends and the comical image above grabs viewer’s attention. The purpose of this article is to raise awareness of Pakistan’s distrust and dwindling relationship with the US in order to call for better Pakistani relations. There is a affable relationship with the audience of readers who are casual enough to not be offended by America’s personification in this article but understand the importance of foreign relations.
The ONION, “Pakistani Boy, U.S Drone Form Unlikely Friendship” November 2, 2012, issue 48-44
James Bridle posted Nov 8 2012, the blog ‘Dronstagragm: The Drone’s Eye View’ argues that these locations (Yemen, Pakistan, Afghanistan) are not so ‘foreign’ – these are places where real people live and are under attack. Bridle’s argument is supported by the inclusion of actual photo’s from drones found from reputable sources within the U.K Bureau of Investigative Journalism. His purpose is to add pathos to the drone discussion and elicit viewer’s sympathy for people who live in these conflict areas in order to gain signatures on the ‘drone wars UK’s petitions to end the secrecy around British drone strikes’ attached the site. Bridle establishes an encouraging relationship with the audience of readers who have an internet presence like Twitter, Tumblr, and Instagram who engage in online discussions of politics and foreign policies.
Al Jazeera’s December 2011 video “US Drones ‘causing mental trauma’ in Pakistan, argues that “escalating drone strikes targeting armed groups injure many ordinary people” in Pakistan. Al Jazeera supports this claim by including footage from inside a mental hospital with victims of PTSD, quotes from those victims, and statistics of the civilian causalities since 2004. The purpose of this video is to raise awareness of the mental consequences of drone strikes in Pakistan villages in order to elicit sympathy for these victims to end drone strikes in Pakistan. There is a sympathetic relationship established with the Al Jazeera audience who – being mostly from the Middle-east, can identify with the ravages of this conflict and would be touched by the sad footage.
Last Modified: 14 Dec 2011 03:55