標(biāo)題: Titlebook: Opposing Perspectives on the Drone Debate; Bradley Jay Strawser,Lisa Hajjar,John Fabian Witt Book 2014 Palgrave Macmillan, a division of N [打印本頁] 作者: malignant 時間: 2025-3-21 18:43
書目名稱Opposing Perspectives on the Drone Debate影響因子(影響力)
書目名稱Opposing Perspectives on the Drone Debate影響因子(影響力)學(xué)科排名
書目名稱Opposing Perspectives on the Drone Debate網(wǎng)絡(luò)公開度
書目名稱Opposing Perspectives on the Drone Debate網(wǎng)絡(luò)公開度學(xué)科排名
書目名稱Opposing Perspectives on the Drone Debate被引頻次
書目名稱Opposing Perspectives on the Drone Debate被引頻次學(xué)科排名
書目名稱Opposing Perspectives on the Drone Debate年度引用
書目名稱Opposing Perspectives on the Drone Debate年度引用學(xué)科排名
書目名稱Opposing Perspectives on the Drone Debate讀者反饋
書目名稱Opposing Perspectives on the Drone Debate讀者反饋學(xué)科排名
作者: Figate 時間: 2025-3-21 20:41 作者: BULLY 時間: 2025-3-22 00:46 作者: NOCT 時間: 2025-3-22 07:51
A Sociological Intervention on Drones and Targeted Killingre. To date, only Israel and the United States have adopted a policy of targeted killing. Their assertions that the practice of targeted killing is lawful under international law have not obtained international credibility but rather have become the subject of rising controversy..作者: 營養(yǎng) 時間: 2025-3-22 10:53 作者: omnibus 時間: 2025-3-22 14:25
eeper questions regarding the justice of war and the United States‘ bellicose foreign policy? Opposing Perspectives on the Drone Debate pulls no punches in answering these questions as five scholars square off in a lively debate over the ethics of drones and their contentious use in a point-counterp作者: arterioles 時間: 2025-3-22 19:51
Book 2014ical science, and law. Topics debated range from the US‘s contested policy of so-called "targeted killing" in Pakistan‘s tribal regions to fears over the damaging effects such weaponry has on our democratic institutions to the more abstract moral questions raised by killing via remote control such as the duty to capture over kill.作者: 顛簸下上 時間: 2025-3-23 00:30
On Adopting a Posture of Moral Neutralityiological warfare were added to the list of hotly controversial new technologies of combat. Closer to our own time, we see protests against antipersonnel landmines, munitions with undetectable fragments, incendiaries, and blinding laser weapons.作者: 逃避責(zé)任 時間: 2025-3-23 01:28
Book 2014tions regarding the justice of war and the United States‘ bellicose foreign policy? Opposing Perspectives on the Drone Debate pulls no punches in answering these questions as five scholars square off in a lively debate over the ethics of drones and their contentious use in a point-counterpoint debat作者: Feigned 時間: 2025-3-23 08:04
978-1-349-49249-7Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Nature America Inc. 2014作者: BIAS 時間: 2025-3-23 12:24 作者: 大范圍流行 時間: 2025-3-23 16:03
https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137432636Drone; Drones; UAVs; targeted killing; FATA region; Pakistan; Yemen; Afghanistan; ethics; morality; terrorism; 作者: Vo2-Max 時間: 2025-3-23 20:01
Even War Has LimitsBradley Strawser’s much- disclaimered defense of the use of drones ultimately obscures more than it illuminates. That he chose to title his essay “More Heat Than Light” is thus unwittingly ironic.作者: Recessive 時間: 2025-3-23 23:44 作者: 草率女 時間: 2025-3-24 05:17
Introductionry Group. The format for this debate point- counterpoint type of book is drawn from that initial symposium, but with some modifications and significant expansions, including the entirety of the final six chapters. I will briefly outline how the book proceeds.作者: RODE 時間: 2025-3-24 07:11 作者: 送秋波 時間: 2025-3-24 11:00 作者: 殺死 時間: 2025-3-24 15:17 作者: 對手 時間: 2025-3-24 21:25 作者: 神化怪物 時間: 2025-3-25 02:40 作者: ABYSS 時間: 2025-3-25 04:10
Introductionry Group. The format for this debate point- counterpoint type of book is drawn from that initial symposium, but with some modifications and significant expansions, including the entirety of the final six chapters. I will briefly outline how the book proceeds.作者: 可互換 時間: 2025-3-25 09:33
More Heat Than Lightrnalists to write a positive story on a politician these days.. Something similar could be said regarding the debate over the morality, legality, and prudence of our most recent weapon of war: the unmanned aerial drone. Critics and supporters alike tend to oversimplify the moral complexities that an作者: COMA 時間: 2025-3-25 12:48
Is Targeted Killing War?ited to grappling with the “deep- seated moral tension” manifest in the rise of unmanned aerial vehicles armed with missiles. He argues that there is a pressing need and value in assessing drones as an object of moral theory distinct from their actual use. He uses as an empirical example, the Federa作者: NOCT 時間: 2025-3-25 18:32 作者: AMEND 時間: 2025-3-25 20:41
On Adopting a Posture of Moral Neutrality condemned the crossbow and the longbow alike in the Second Lateran Council of 1139. Centuries later, some objected that rifled weapons— which were vastly more accurate over far longer distances than their smoothbore predecessors— should be prohibited lest warfare become more like assassination from作者: Bumble 時間: 2025-3-26 00:52
Reply to Criticsarious ways on this issue. Each chapter raises important points that deserve thorough discussion, for which I am grateful. Before I respond directly to each author, however, I will first discuss the now infamous Department of Justice (DOJ) white paper on drones, the moral and legal reasoning of whic作者: 猜忌 時間: 2025-3-26 06:34
A Sociological Intervention on Drones and Targeted Killinggical intervention” in order to engage with the (nonabstract) relations within which choices and consequences of drone warfare operate. What makes drones controversial is not the technology per se but rather their use for the purpose of targeted killing.. In my first essay, I posed the question, is 作者: 整頓 時間: 2025-3-26 10:08
The Other Side of the Line intent on my part to venture outside the boundaries of reasoned debate, and with all due respect, I don’t think I did. If there was a certain acerbity in my views, it was perhaps because Mr. Strawser and I are residing in different nations. Mr. Strawser lives in a nation of drone operators. I live 作者: phytochemicals 時間: 2025-3-26 13:53 作者: archenemy 時間: 2025-3-26 19:53
Arguing in Good Faith about Dronesr, rallying the Second Crusade, and negotiating the end of a schism. In addition to these exploits, he also apparently led a campaign against mills.. Yes, mills: those structures where local farmers would bring their grain to be milled and turned into flour. As more and more mills were developed thr作者: Foment 時間: 2025-3-26 21:12 作者: uncertain 時間: 2025-3-27 03:30
Reply to Criticsolitical theater.. In terms of substance, the white paper does not provide much . information regarding the administration’s legal and moral reasoning behind US drone operations— they have made similar overtures defending the practice in other venues.. The DOJ argument is that lethal drone strikes, 作者: 暗語 時間: 2025-3-27 07:41
A Duty to Capture?Qaeda. All of these claims appear in the essays that make up this book. But each begs a single underlying question. The question is whether the United States’ use of force in these areas is right or wrong, just or unjust.作者: 玩忽職守 時間: 2025-3-27 10:50 作者: 緩和 時間: 2025-3-27 14:17 作者: 追蹤 時間: 2025-3-27 18:22
zu besitzen. Solche werden in Abschnitt 3.3 zun?chst theoretisch entwickelt, um anschlie?end Fragen ihrer empirischen Umsetzbarkeit zu diskutieren. Ein potentielles Problem bei ihrer Umsetzung besteht darin, da? nicht alle ben?tigten Daten verfügbar sind. Deshalb hat man sich in der Literatur h?ufi作者: 討好美人 時間: 2025-3-28 01:28 作者: peak-flow 時間: 2025-3-28 04:20
8樓作者: BALK 時間: 2025-3-28 08:20
8樓作者: Eosinophils 時間: 2025-3-28 13:36
8樓作者: jagged 時間: 2025-3-28 18:22
9樓作者: Obstruction 時間: 2025-3-28 20:20
9樓作者: Epidural-Space 時間: 2025-3-28 22:55
9樓作者: Coma704 時間: 2025-3-29 05:33
9樓作者: 方舟 時間: 2025-3-29 08:26
10樓作者: 話 時間: 2025-3-29 12:21
10樓作者: Gene408 時間: 2025-3-29 16:41
10樓作者: 2否定 時間: 2025-3-29 22:14
10樓
