Quote Originally Posted by MikeF View Post
Technology may complement reconnaissance, but it will not replace it. The sterile videos footage cannot replace those that creep through the night.

Although the article and technology you cite is new to those stykers, the reporter, and yourself, it is not new. Under the blessing of then MG William Caldwell, my squadron tested the same technology in 2005 and employed it in 2006 and 2007 in Iraq.

The technology provided us enhanced capabilities, but it could not replace the paratrooper burrowed deep in an observation post. For example,

- we observed that when UAVs flew overhead, everyone hid. We could HEAR the UAVs from a mile or two away. The picture shown in the videos did not reflect the picture on the ground. The enemy was smart enough to counter this notion of alternative coverage.

- Video footage and UAVs could not pick up the difference in Arabaic dialogue that we could. In one instance, one of my scouts managed to get close enough to a stronghold to determine that the dialogue spoken was not Iraqi but Egyptian. This intel helped confirm the presence of foreign fighters.

- Video footage is deceiving. I cannot tell you the amount of hours that I spent trying to explain to CAS, NTISR, and the command group that the footage they were watching was dogs running around and not insurgents.



v/r

Mike
Precisely! In an operation of recent vintage we flew a UAV for two days over an area and got zilch. That very night we had a contact and killed two in the same area at close range. Basic skills and hunch never fail an Infantarian.