

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Multistory residential building damaged by shrapnel from a downed kamikaze drone of the Russian army. On the night of May 8, the Russian army attacked the Kyiv region with Iranian-made shock drones "Shahed." The Ukrainian military destroyed 35 out of 35 Russian drones fired at Kyiv. In the city, due to falling debris, houses, road surfaces, and cars were damaged. Five people were injured.
In reality, their use only prolongs war and piles up dead bodies.
As the Russian military intensifies its drone attacks on Kyiv and Ukraine’s troops increase usage of homemade drones to hit Russian targets, the region and the world acutely need a proposal calling on both sides to negotiate an end to the war. A first step could be for both sides to agree to stop using weaponized drones.
Current commentary discusses advantages—for one side or the other—of reliance on weaponized drones. But, the history of drone warfare in the Ukraine and in earlier wars, reveals two crucial points.
First, the notion that using killer drones will somehow provide the winning edge in combat is magical thinking. In reality, their use only prolongs war and piles up dead bodies. This has been true, in fact, wherever weaponized drones have been used, since the first modern-day drone attack was launched, unsuccessfully, by the United States on the first day of its Illegal invasion of Afghanistan, nearly 22 years ago.
The notion that using killer drones will somehow provide the winning edge in combat is magical thinking.
Second, the use of weaponized drones spreads war geographically and politically into areas in which generals, independent military leaders, and politicians would not dare to send ground forces. This, of course leads to extremely dangerous, illegal and irresponsible behavior, such as the failed bombing of the Kremlin on May 3, 2023.
As one reads the news of drone attacks, it is possible to think: “Well, today only X number of people died, I can accept the war grinding on”, unless one or more of those dead are people you love.
But the stakes of using drones to kill are extremely high, not only in terms of the consequences of attacking a target of huge political symbolic value, like the Kremlin.
On May 8, Russia announced that it was evacuating nearly 1,700 people, including 660 children, from the area surrounding the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power station, Europe’s largest nuclear plant, because the situation there is, according to the United Nations, “increasingly unpredictable and potentially dangerous.”
On April 5, Reuters reported that a Russian military officer said that a Ukrainian drone had crashed near the plant.
God willing, we have reached a moment in which Ukrainian and Russian leaders, and their wealthy supporters, will realize that weaponized drones are simply a manifestation of their fantastical thinking about achieving “victory” through technology.
The war will stop at some point, all sides will declare victory over a land sodden with the blood and tears of the politically powerless who were not drones, however much they were treated as such.
This country and this world are at a monumental crossroads. US voters have an opportunity to beat back the forces of fascism and confront the billionaires who are rigging the economy, our media system, and our democracy, making it increasingly impossible for ordinary people to get by. We’re not just talking about the election. We’re talking about what must be done once these fascist elements are vanquished from power. We need a bolder set of solutions than what either major party has so far been willing to offer and a working-class movement ready to fight like hell for it. Trump didn't emerge from nowhere. The conditions that fueled MAGA authoritarianism were created by decades of radical neoliberal economic policies and a corrupt political system dominated by corporate interests. They slashed taxes on the super-rich, promising that the benefits would trickle down. They said giveaways to the corporate titans would make life more affordable for the rest of us. It was all bullshit. And when a bitter, betrayed populace searches for someone to blame, right-wing demagogues have little trouble finding scapegoats. People know when they're being lied to, but you won't hear any of this from the corporate media. Only independent journalism—powered and funded by people who believe in building a better world—can deliver truly trustworthy daily news. If you share our vision, please contribute whatever you can to sustain our work. |
As the Russian military intensifies its drone attacks on Kyiv and Ukraine’s troops increase usage of homemade drones to hit Russian targets, the region and the world acutely need a proposal calling on both sides to negotiate an end to the war. A first step could be for both sides to agree to stop using weaponized drones.
Current commentary discusses advantages—for one side or the other—of reliance on weaponized drones. But, the history of drone warfare in the Ukraine and in earlier wars, reveals two crucial points.
First, the notion that using killer drones will somehow provide the winning edge in combat is magical thinking. In reality, their use only prolongs war and piles up dead bodies. This has been true, in fact, wherever weaponized drones have been used, since the first modern-day drone attack was launched, unsuccessfully, by the United States on the first day of its Illegal invasion of Afghanistan, nearly 22 years ago.
The notion that using killer drones will somehow provide the winning edge in combat is magical thinking.
Second, the use of weaponized drones spreads war geographically and politically into areas in which generals, independent military leaders, and politicians would not dare to send ground forces. This, of course leads to extremely dangerous, illegal and irresponsible behavior, such as the failed bombing of the Kremlin on May 3, 2023.
As one reads the news of drone attacks, it is possible to think: “Well, today only X number of people died, I can accept the war grinding on”, unless one or more of those dead are people you love.
But the stakes of using drones to kill are extremely high, not only in terms of the consequences of attacking a target of huge political symbolic value, like the Kremlin.
On May 8, Russia announced that it was evacuating nearly 1,700 people, including 660 children, from the area surrounding the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power station, Europe’s largest nuclear plant, because the situation there is, according to the United Nations, “increasingly unpredictable and potentially dangerous.”
On April 5, Reuters reported that a Russian military officer said that a Ukrainian drone had crashed near the plant.
God willing, we have reached a moment in which Ukrainian and Russian leaders, and their wealthy supporters, will realize that weaponized drones are simply a manifestation of their fantastical thinking about achieving “victory” through technology.
The war will stop at some point, all sides will declare victory over a land sodden with the blood and tears of the politically powerless who were not drones, however much they were treated as such.
As the Russian military intensifies its drone attacks on Kyiv and Ukraine’s troops increase usage of homemade drones to hit Russian targets, the region and the world acutely need a proposal calling on both sides to negotiate an end to the war. A first step could be for both sides to agree to stop using weaponized drones.
Current commentary discusses advantages—for one side or the other—of reliance on weaponized drones. But, the history of drone warfare in the Ukraine and in earlier wars, reveals two crucial points.
First, the notion that using killer drones will somehow provide the winning edge in combat is magical thinking. In reality, their use only prolongs war and piles up dead bodies. This has been true, in fact, wherever weaponized drones have been used, since the first modern-day drone attack was launched, unsuccessfully, by the United States on the first day of its Illegal invasion of Afghanistan, nearly 22 years ago.
The notion that using killer drones will somehow provide the winning edge in combat is magical thinking.
Second, the use of weaponized drones spreads war geographically and politically into areas in which generals, independent military leaders, and politicians would not dare to send ground forces. This, of course leads to extremely dangerous, illegal and irresponsible behavior, such as the failed bombing of the Kremlin on May 3, 2023.
As one reads the news of drone attacks, it is possible to think: “Well, today only X number of people died, I can accept the war grinding on”, unless one or more of those dead are people you love.
But the stakes of using drones to kill are extremely high, not only in terms of the consequences of attacking a target of huge political symbolic value, like the Kremlin.
On May 8, Russia announced that it was evacuating nearly 1,700 people, including 660 children, from the area surrounding the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power station, Europe’s largest nuclear plant, because the situation there is, according to the United Nations, “increasingly unpredictable and potentially dangerous.”
On April 5, Reuters reported that a Russian military officer said that a Ukrainian drone had crashed near the plant.
God willing, we have reached a moment in which Ukrainian and Russian leaders, and their wealthy supporters, will realize that weaponized drones are simply a manifestation of their fantastical thinking about achieving “victory” through technology.
The war will stop at some point, all sides will declare victory over a land sodden with the blood and tears of the politically powerless who were not drones, however much they were treated as such.