They Already Have Their Own Association-AUVSI
Quote:
Originally Posted by
carl
Slap:
A culinary artist is a cook, a corrections officer is a prison guard, a maintenance technician is a mechanic and a drone is still a drone.
They will take over the world in 10 years or so...It started with Satellites....link to a video on what Drones are?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1wgV9DPQV8
Granade Launching Drones In Houston,Texas Police Depertment
link to a FOX new relaeae about a granade launching,baton shooting,taser firing drone in Houston, Texas :eek:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yfr14...eature=related
Selective and grander thinking
Thanks Fuchs for the pointer to 'How extremism is normalized', which prompted me to think.
The traditional political argument underpinning Western CT strategy, policies and actions is that they are to create or gain time by curtailing violence and so enable political changes – when those who use violence desist.
Drones in their selective assassination mode (hat tip to Fuchs for that) do gain time by decapitation - by disrupting enemy leadership, but require to be reviewed in the light of their impact and actual / potential downsides.
With the core AQ and their strongest affiliates I see no prospect of their campaign based on hatred and more reaching a point where the traditional strategic assumption that political changes can occur will happen. This is a point IMO in the West that is understood by the public, but is rarely articulated outside government and instead we just have the slanging match over "Is Islam an enemy". Illustrated by many of the comments made on the two Daily Telegraph articles.
What is needed is a clear, repeated explanation why each drone strike was used – akin to “These people plotted murder in a place where law enforcement was not available, nor local action available and the risk was too high to let them continue”.
This may not suit lawyers, with due process, oversight and much more.
Alongside when a mistake is made, accept it was so and enable compensation or what works locally.
On a far wider point we face the apparently increasing ability to kill more people, which may range up to mass killings, at a cheaper cost and by smaller minorities than seen before, plus by individuals and groups. For a long time the nation-state has been able to prevent such killings, so maintaining credible public safety and national security. Telling the public the nation-state is struggling to maintain security is not something politicians are going to admit. Politicians must be seen to "do something" and so we invariably retain 'emergency' legislation and whatever follows.
Drones Revolutionize US Warfare
Drones Revolutionize US Warfare
Entry Excerpt:
--------
Read the full post and make any comments at the SWJ Blog.
This forum is a feed only and is closed to user comments.
CT 2012: No Drones, No Detention, No Intervention?
I am aware that for a few weeks now the issue of drones has been a "hot" topic within 'The Beltway', possibly inspired by the NYT reporting. Incidentally very little of this public policy debate appears on my "radar" here, even if Italy is acquiring drones with weapons - which comes up in the linked podcast.
Thanks again to CWOT and his article, which ends with:
Quote:
Counterterrorism remains a challenge and no perfect blend of tools, policy and options can be outlined – for in all scenarios there will be risks, costs and unintended casualties. But I encourage those critics to ask two questions as they rightfully critique U.S. counterterrorism options:
If you advocate the end of counterterrorism policy, option or tool (drones being only one example), what are the consequences and resulting effects of your objections?
The U.S. should and will pursue terrorists around the world. The U.S. should protect its values while protecting its citizens. If you are not comfortable with how the U.S. conducts its counterterrorism, what counterterrorism strategy would you be comfortable with? And would that strategy protect U.S. citizens while suiting your values?
Link:http://selectedwisdom.com/?p=685
What Drones? Philippines is Not Afghanistan
What Drones? Philippines is Not Afghanistan
Entry Excerpt:
--------
Read the full post and make any comments at the SWJ Blog.
This forum is a feed only and is closed to user comments.
Why There's Nothing Illegal about CIA Drone Pilots
Why There's Nothing Illegal about CIA Drone Pilots
Entry Excerpt:
--------
Read the full post and make any comments at the SWJ Blog.
This forum is a feed only and is closed to user comments.
Necessary (Perhaps) But Not Sufficient: Assessing Drone Strikes Through A Counterins
Killing remotely: burnout & distressed pilots
Hat tip to FP Blog's article 'What's Not Wrong With Drones? The wildly overblown case against remote-controlled war, for this statistic and the quote is slightly edited:
Quote:
If anything, drone operators may be far more keenly aware of the suffering they help inflict than any distant sniper or bomber pilot could be.....a former Air Force pilot: "I used to fly my own air missions.... I dropped bombs, hit my target load, but had no idea who I hit. [With drones], I can look at their faces... see these guys playing with their kids and wives.... After the strike, I see the bodies being carried out of the house. I see the women weeping and in positions of mourning. That's not PlayStation; that's real."
Increasingly, there's evidence that drone pilots, just like combat troops, can suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder....A recent Air Force study found that 29 percent of drone pilots suffered from "burnout," with 17 percent "clinically distressed."
Link:http://www.foreignpolicy.com/article...ones?page=full and to a report on the cited USAF study:http://www.npr.org/2011/12/19/143926...s-drone-pilots
The article raises other matters, just that the statistics had more impact.
RAF drones in Afg, Nevada and at home
A longer article than most I've seen in the UK press on the RAF's drones, nothing spectacular, but two points of note:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...e-control.html
Quote:
The RAF is moving some pilots from three years in Nevada back to three more years on operations in a new Reaper control centre in Britain, where they will also pilot Reapers over Afghanistan.....
However, there are practical difficulties to overcome first. It remains unclear where the UK Reapers will be legally able to take off and land when combat operations end in Afghanistan in 2014. Civil Aviation Regulations prevent them from flying in British airspace since reaction times might not be fast enough to avoid collisions.