- Chief Political Correspondent at Slate
- Pro to the question "Should the United States Continue Its Use of Drone Strikes Abroad?"
“Drones kill fewer civilians, as a percentage of total fatalities, than any other military weapon. They’re the worst form of warfare in the history of the world, except for all the others…
Drones kill a lower ratio of civilians to combatants than we’ve seen in any recent war. Granted, many civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other such wars were killed by our enemies rather than by us. But that’s part of the equation. One reason to prefer drones is that when you send troops, fighting breaks out, and the longer the fighting goes on, the more innocent people die. Drones are like laparoscopic surgery: They minimize the entry wound and the risk of infection.”
“In Defense of Drones,” slate.com, Feb. 19, 2013
- Theoretical Expertise Ranking:
Individuals and organizations that do not fit into the other star categories.
- Involvement and Affiliations:
- Chief Political Correspondent, Slate, 1996-present
- Co-founder and former editor, the Hotline, 1987-1991
- Former Reporter, New Republic and The Washingtonian
- Templeton-Cambridge Journalism Fellow in Science & Religion, 2006
- BA, Philosophy, Swarthmore College, 1987
- Contact Info:
- 202-261-1310, Slate DC Office
- None found
- Slate profile
- Twitter handle: @saletan
- Has written for the New Republic, the Wall Street Journal, the Boston Globe, the Village Voice, Los Angeles Times, Mother Jones, and the Washingtonian.
- Quoted in:
- Pro & Con Quotes: Should the United States Continue Its Use of Drone Strikes Abroad?