Using drones: principles, tactics and results (amended title)

[Stu-6]

Ok it has been awhile so I will reintroduce my self in the appropriate thread but right now I have question that has been bugging me for a awhile now.

Conducting missile strikes in Pakistan undermines the Paki government therefore it is, to put it mildly, strategically undesirable. But to allow al-Qa'ida sanctuary in Pakistan is also undesirable. So the question is: is one really better than the other or is there a third way?

[IntelTrooper]

But to allow al-Qa'ida sanctuary in Pakistan is also undesirable. So the question is: is one really better than the other or is there a third way?

Give me the money it cost for the drone flight and rocket(s) and I will raise a platoon of indigenous troops and wreak havoc with any Taliban or al-Qaeda trying to cross into Afghanistan without ticking off the locals. Give me money and discretion to commission construction projects and I'll make the population permanently hostile to the Taliban. Eventually word will get out across the border and we'll be invited to do the same thing in their neighborhood.

Of course, the locals could always just figure out that I have money, kill me, and take the money...

[Stu-6]

Of course, the locals could always just figure out that I have money, kill me, and take the money...

And there is the catch, locals only work as long as your interest overlap.

[IntelTrooper]

And there is the catch, locals only work as long as your interest overlap.

So true.

[tequila]

If that were true, then why does the Pakistani government allow it? The drones, as was recently revealed, operated from a Pakistani military base.

Because the Pakistani government and its military understand that allowing the drone attacks represents a critical element of its relationship with the U.S., especially the CIA and the U.S. military. For now the government is willing to take the hit that its public image suffers because of the drone strikes, knowing that the far greater damage is to the U.S.' reputation inside Pakistan, which could actually come in handy for itself in the future.

[carl]

Because the Pakistani government and its military understand that allowing the drone attacks represents a critical element of its relationship with the U.S., especially the CIA and the U.S. military. For now the government is willing to take the hit that its public image suffers because of the drone strikes, knowing that the far greater damage is to the U.S.' reputation inside Pakistan, which could actually come in handy for itself in the future.

That is about the most astute and cogent thing I've ever read on this subject.

[davidbfpo]

Forwarded by an observer: http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.ht...3d&k=40024&p=1

It is very well written and full of facts, although I note it slid over the fact the drones fly from a Pakistani airfield.

Yes, drones are an option and on reflection IMHO useful when successful and the local political impact is minimal. Now maybe the time to reduce their use, as David Kilcullen mooted.

Have they changed the Pakistani Army's stance on confronting the Taliban plus? Or, assisted the Pakistani government in creating the conditions to make decisions?

I think not. Conclusion: Tactically useful and strategically dangerous.

davidbfpo

[Umar Al-Mokhtār]

Because the Pakistani government and its military understand that allowing the drone attacks represents a critical element of its relationship with the U.S., especially the CIA and the U.S. military. For now the government is willing to take the hit that its public image suffers because of the drone strikes, knowing that the far greater damage is to the U.S.' reputation inside Pakistan, which could actually come in handy for itself in the future.

it allows the Pakistanis to leverage on our capability yet have plausible deniability in the political dialogue of being the actual operators. This is also a bit of a cunundrum given that the government is accused in some circles of being merely a lackey of the United States.

[Stu-6]

it allows the Pakistanis to leverage on our capability yet have plausible deniability in the political dialogue of being the actual operators. . .

I am not sure there is plausible deniablity here, it seems to me that some/many/most of the population doesn't find their denial plausible at all. Which compounds the problem since now the Paki government can appear to be accidentally killing civilians, a lackey of the US and still wishy washy when it comes to AQ, Taliban, etc, all.

I can see the use of drones like this (sparingly) but the situation with the Paki government's denials seem to be the worst of all solutions. I understand that the government thinks it is protecting itself but long term I have major doubts.

[Entropy]

Conducting missile strikes in Pakistan undermines the Paki government....

If that were true, then why does the Pakistani government allow it? The drones, as was recently revealed, operated from a Pakistani military base.

[Ron Humphrey]

If that were true, then why does the Pakistani government allow it? The drones, as was recently revealed, operated from a Pakistani military base.

They fight and you might have part of your answer

[SWJ Blog]

Do Drones Make Warfare Too Easy?

Entry Excerpt:

Are Drones a Technological Tipping Point in Warfare? by Walter Pincus, Washington Post.

"Debates are growing at home and abroad over the increasing use of remotely piloted, armed drones, with a new study by the British Defense Ministry questioning whether advances in their capabilities will lead future decision-makers to 'resort to war as a policy option far sooner than previously.'"

Are Drones a Technological Tipping Point in Warfare?.



--------
Read the full post and make any comments at the SWJ Blog.
This forum is a feed only and is closed to user comments.

[SWJ Blog]

Addicted to Drones

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.

[SWJ Blog]

Drones help Washington win a war of perceptions

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.

[SWJ Blog]

Why COIN Principles Don't Fly with Drones

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.

[Hoplite99]

It depends how you do it. If you accompany your Drone strike with a "Courteous by your leave Sir!" - then sure you can conduct your strikes at will. Which is in essence what we are doing. By providing foreign aid to the tune of $2B USD per year, the US has essentially "purchased" the requisite permissions for its occasional transgressions. The Proof? Merely the acquiesence of the Paki's...

[Bill Moore]

Posted by slapout

Link from John Robb's Global Guerrila's on the new small drone weapons system...about 11 pounds

We will only determine the rules and tactics for how we employ UAVs our UASs, as this technology continues to proliferate to both state and non-state actors they will employ them in unique ways to achieve their objectives. Imagine the challenges for protecting the homeland, our troops, our civilian leaders, our industries, and so forth. The fence, the wall, the counter sniper ops, etc. will provide little protection. Traditional air defense will also become obsolete, but air defense against these small to mini armed UAVs will take on a new importance.

We developed the atom bomb and that gave us a strategic edge for how many years? Now it is existential threat. We celebrate advances in UAV technology, but perhaps we're celebrating prematurely?

[carl]

I don't see the difference between this thing and the Pred/Hellfire combination except the Shadow Hawk munition will have a smaller explosive payload. The article doesn't say what that is. It is a pretty complicated way to deliver a bang that may not be so big.

The article was quite breathless about this but imagine employing it against the kind of camoflauged (sic) bunkers the VC and the Japanese made. You probably couldn't see them and even a direct hit by a munition that weighed 11 pounds total might not do anything at at all.

Drones like this are great big RC airplanes. If you interrupt the radio signal it wanders where it will. Taking advantage of that would be a way to defend against it.

Also if you took small, cheap, manned airplane like this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassutt_Special), put in a 12 gauge shotgun in a schrage music installation, you could shoot down Shadows and Preds and there wouldn't be a thing they could do to defend themselves. It would cost just a small fraction of the price of those drones.

Everybody gets excited about drones but something like a GPS guided 120 mm mortar shell is a lot scarier, at least to a civilian like me.

[slapout9]

I don't see the difference between this thing and the Pred/Hellfire combination except the Shadow Hawk munition will have a smaller explosive payload. The article doesn't say what that is. It is a pretty complicated way to deliver a bang that may not be so big.

carl, they are trying to get small on purpose. Hand Grenade small from 30,000 feet with close to zero margin of error at the strike point.

[Bill Moore]

Carl, you making assumptions off dated information, and based on the rate of technological evolution, we all risk being outdated from week to week, which is why we face an ever greater risk of strategic surprise.

Check out Do It Yourself Drones

http://diydrones.com/profiles/blogs/...search-copters