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

[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.

[slapout9]

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

[slapout9]

link to a FOX new relaeae about a granade launching,baton shooting,taser firing drone in Houston, Texas


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yfr14...eature=related

[davidbfpo]

Hat tip to Leah Farrell for the pointer to this Harper's Magazine article, based on interviews and statements collected in North Waziristan.

The tribal elders are afraid to gather together in jirgas, as had been our custom for more than a century. The mothers and wives plead with the men not to congregate together. They do not want to lose any more of their husbands, sons, brothers, and nephews. People in the same family now sleep apart because they do not want their togetherness to be viewed suspiciously through the eye of the drone. They do not want to become the next target.

Link:http://harpers.org/archive/2012/06/0083923

[davidbfpo]

Two comments in The Daily Telegraph on drone strikes, after the revelations in the NYT on the procedures involved:http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/wo...-al-qaeda.html

In Peter Oborne's article 'It may seem painless, but drone war in Afghanistan is destroying the West's reputation' he writes:

We need a serious public debate on drones. They are still in their infancy, but have already changed the nature of warfare. The new technology points the way, within just a few decades, to a battlefield where soldiers never die or even risk their lives, and only alleged enemies of the state, their family members, and civilians die in combat – a world straight out of the mouse’s tale in Alice in Wonderland: “ 'I’ll be judge, I’ll be jury’, said cunning old Fury. 'I’ll try the whole cause and condemn you to death.’ ” Justice as dealt out by drones cannot be reconciled with the rule of law which we say we wish to defend.

Link:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...eputation.html

From 'Choosing who lives and who dies', which is a strange article IMO, but the following quote does accurately describe that parts of the world have moved on:

Whenever Israel assassinated a Hamas leader, the world would voice its outrage. Pretty much every country – including America – would issue a statement of condemnation. The US would say that it disapproved of extra-judicial killings. Meanwhile, Britain would get quite worked up. I remember Jack Straw, then Foreign Secretary, expressing great indignation when Rantissi was dispatched by an Israeli missile within weeks of succeeding Yassin as Hamas leader in 2004.

The fact that targeted assassinations are now happening on a far wider scale – with a fraction of the protest – shows how much the world has changed.

Link:http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/da...mas-kill-list/

[Fuchs]

Yes, but this salami slicing towards extremism and away from long-established cultural (and constitutional) norms can be stopped, though.

Germany made a full stop when with the last federal election the (European-style) liberals joined the government. There was only one thing good about them joining the government; the new minister of justice.
She had voluntarily resigned the same post more than a decade ago in protest against a new wiretapping law. She appears to be a predictable, reliable and effective person and was just the right person to get the job of stopping the stupidity done.



On a related note:
How extremism is normalized

[davidbfpo]

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.

[Fuchs]

Terror movements seem to cease being a problem when their supporters lose confidence, interest or become too scared. I have yet to read about a terror movement that failed due to management incompetence or elimination of its hard core.

All the Americans are doing is the opposite of what they should be doing if they agreed on the above.

[davidbfpo]

Fuchs:

I have yet to read about a terror movement that failed due to management incompetence or elimination of its hard core.

Many would argue that the Provisional IRA eventually failed due to infiltration by informers, would that count as management incompetence?

[Fuchs]

Dunno remember that, but I'd count it as lack of availability of a good enough base of supporters as reason.

With cells of 4-6 and a good enough base of supporters, you won't have too many cells fail like that.

[SWJ Blog]

Drone Worrier

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 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.

[davidbfpo]

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:

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

[SWJ Blog]

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.

[davidbfpo]

Steve Coll adds his views, the catalyst appears to be a new book:

Kill or Capture....by Daniel Klaidman, a former deputy editor of Newsweek.

The more recent addition of Klaidman’s reporting, however, calls attention to one area... that 'capture is not feasible'.

(later) Even more disturbing is the evidence in Klaidman’s narrative suggesting that the Obama Administration leans toward killing terrorism suspects because it does not believe it has a politically attractive way to put them on trial.

He ends with the really hard question, a political one:

Is “kill or capture” a policy, or are the words just a screen for politically convenient targeted killings?

Link:http://www.newyorker.com/online/blog...r-capture.html

[SWJ Blog]

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.

[bourbon]

Originally Posted by bourbon

Ultralight aircraft are used on the US-Mexico border to smuggle drugs.....

Feds Drop $100 Million to Spot Flying, Homebrew Cocaine Mules, by Robert Beckhusen. Wired Danger Room, August 20, 2012.

That’s why the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is spending $100 million on new sensors that can detect ultralight aircraft. The giant contract — awarded to New York defense company SRCTec earlier this month — comes as the cartels have been using more of the planes to elude Border Patrol agents. The cartels also seem to have become pretty good at it. The Air Force has chased them with jets, and the Border Patrol has pursued them with Black Hawk helicopters.

Closer to gliders than complete planes; ultralight planes are small, cheap and their engines are relatively quiet. They move slowly, but are flown low to blend in with the southwest border’s rugged and hilly terrain, which the smugglers use to hide from radar. The last available data on ultralight incursions is from 2011, when the CBP detected 223 flights, double from two years prior. It stands to reason the real number is much higher, owing to the diminutive aircraft’s sneakiness.

You could outfit some CBP trucks with DshKs for a fraction of that $100 million.

[davidbfpo]

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:

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.

[davidbfpo]

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

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.

[davidbfpo]

A new report by Stanford & NYU, so its own website and much to read.

This not an impartial report from the BBC:

London-based human rights group Reprieve, which commissioned the report, said it was taking legal action in an attempt to force the UK government to clarify its policy of sharing intelligence in support of the CIA's drone-strikes.

A very short account:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-19704981

This probably gives an introduction:

In the United States, the dominant narrative about the use of drones in Pakistan is of a surgically precise and effective tool that makes the US safer by enabling “targeted killing” of terrorists, with minimal downsides or collateral impacts. This narrative is false.

Four points and a recommendation:

First, while civilian casualties are rarely acknowledged by the US government, there is significant evidence that US drone strikes have injured and killed civilians.

Second, US drone strike policies cause considerable and under-accounted-for harm to the daily lives of ordinary civilians, beyond death and physical injury.

Third, publicly available evidence that the strikes have made the US safer overall is ambiguous at best.

Fourth, current US targeted killings and drone strike practices undermine respect for the rule of law and international legal protections and may set dangerous precedents.

In light of these concerns, this report recommends that the US conduct a fundamental re-evaluation of current targeted killing practices, taking into account all available evidence, the concerns of various stakeholders, and the short and long-term costs and benefits.

Link:http://livingunderdrones.org/