SMALL WARS COUNCIL
Go Back   Small Wars Council > Conflicts -- Current & Future > Global & General > Global Issues & Threats

Global Issues & Threats Trans-national issues and actors. Culture and the Clash of Civilizations.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-07-2007   #1
SWJED
Small Wars Journal
 
SWJED's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Largo, Florida
Posts: 3,988
Default Using drones: principles, tactics and results (amended title)

Moderator's Note

This thread has several smaller threads merged in February 2013 and two in August 2013. On Xmas Eve 2013 two SWJ Blog and two small SWC threads were merged to here. The title was amended from 'The drone paradox' to 'Using drones: principles, tactics and results' (June 2011). November 2015 two SWJ Blog threads merged in.(ends)


7 March AP - Israel Unveils Newest Unmanned Aircraft.

Quote:
The Israeli air force unveiled its newest unmanned aircraft Wednesday, saying the plane can fly longer, faster and higher than any other surveillance aircraft.

The drone, called the Heron, already saw combat during last summer's war in Lebanon, where Israeli officials said a prototype performed well, seeking out Hezbollah arms and directing airstrikes.

The Heron has a 54-foot wingspan and can fly up to 30 hours at a speed of 140 mph and a height of 30,000 feet. That would give it a range of 4,200 miles and the potential to reach as far as Iran, considered Israel's most serious strategic threat because of its nuclear program and its president's calls to wipe Israel off the map.

Air force officers said the Heron was Israel's most advanced weapon in the booming field of drone technology...

Last edited by davidbfpo; 11-11-2015 at 09:27 PM. Reason: Mod's note
SWJED is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2007   #2
120mm
Council Member
 
120mm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Wonderland
Posts: 1,284
Default

Iran: PM sent, check your Inbox
-Israel
120mm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2009   #3
Entropy
Council Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,457
Default Predator C "Avenger" unveiled

Looks interesting. We should be doing more of this:

Quote:
Cassidy has earned a unique reputation by using company funds to develop what he believes the military needs rather than chasing Pentagon requirements that shift with disheartening regularity to produce cost increases and production delays. The result is a family of Gnat and Predator designs that are used by all the services and intelligence agencies.
Entropy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2009   #4
Stu-6
Council Member
 
Stu-6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Occupied Virginia
Posts: 243
Default Using drones: principles, tactics and results (amended title)

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?

Last edited by davidbfpo; 02-23-2013 at 11:57 AM. Reason: Mod's note moved
Stu-6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2009   #5
IntelTrooper
Council Member
 
IntelTrooper's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: RC-S, Afghanistan
Posts: 302
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stu-6 View Post
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...
IntelTrooper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2009   #6
Entropy
Council Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,457
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stu-6 View Post
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.
Entropy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2009   #7
Ron Humphrey
Council Member
 
Ron Humphrey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Kansas
Posts: 1,099
Default Look at the traditional

Quote:
Originally Posted by Entropy View Post
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
__________________
Quote:
Any man can destroy that which is around him, The rare man is he who can find beauty even in the darkest hours

Cogitationis poenam nemo patitur
Ron Humphrey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2009   #8
Stu-6
Council Member
 
Stu-6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Occupied Virginia
Posts: 243
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IntelTrooper View Post
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.
Stu-6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2009   #9
IntelTrooper
Council Member
 
IntelTrooper's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: RC-S, Afghanistan
Posts: 302
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stu-6 View Post
And there is the catch, locals only work as long as your interest overlap.
So true.
IntelTrooper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2009   #10
tequila
Council Member
 
tequila's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 1,665
Default

Quote:
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.
tequila is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2009   #11
carl
Council Member
 
carl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Denver on occasion
Posts: 2,459
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tequila View Post
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.
__________________
"We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene
carl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009   #12
davidbfpo
Council Member
 
davidbfpo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 11,095
Default Drone attacks: lengthy review article

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
davidbfpo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009   #13
William F. Owen
Council Member
 
William F. Owen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The State of Partachia, at the eastern end of the Mediterranean
Posts: 3,947
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by davidbfpo View Post
Conclusion: Tactically useful and strategically dangerous.
Makes you ask, as I often do, if something strategically dangerous, can be tactically useful.
Personally, I think the idea of "tactical success" but "operational/strategic failure" is not an intellectually or practically defensible position.
__________________
Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"

- The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
- If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition
William F. Owen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009   #14
Umar Al-Mokhtār
Council Member
 
Umar Al-Mokhtār's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Cirenaica
Posts: 374
Default Well said...

Quote:
Originally Posted by tequila View Post
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.
__________________
"What is best in life?" "To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of the women."
Umar Al-Mokhtār is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009   #15
slapout9
Council Member
 
slapout9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,809
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by William F. Owen View Post
Personally, I think the idea of "tactical success" but "operational/strategic failure" is not an intellectually or practically defensible position.
You old systems thinker you that is exactly right, it all has to align together or it you will just create another/bigger problem.
slapout9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2009   #16
SethB
Council Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: CenTex
Posts: 222
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by William F. Owen View Post
I think the idea of "tactical success" but "operational/strategic failure" is not an intellectually or practically defensible position.
I'd be interested to hear you expand on this, if you don't mind.
SethB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2009   #17
davidbfpo
Council Member
 
davidbfpo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 11,095
Default Upside / Downside to drones

A non-SWJ member's response to my viewpoint was:

1) Armed UAV (drone) attacks can only be of tactical significance and are unlikely to lead to strategic gain.

2) The downstream effects of Damadola far outweighed any possible gain (and there was none). A few days after the strike, a Pakistani Taliban leader called a meeting and asked for volunteers for suicide missions. Sixty-five young men put their hands up; a bit later a young soldier in the Frontier Corps shot an American officer at a bi-lateral border meeting. His family came from Damadola. He had no option under the code of revenge in Pushtun lore. (Damadola: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damadola_airstrike )

3) In the beginning the use of UAVs in Pakistan was a one-sided (US) attempt to decapitate the al-Qaeda leadership taking no account of the downstream effects mentioned above and breaking a US law of no targeted assassination except in time of war (the author is not a lawyer).

4) That said a Predator over the Yemeni desert targeting a verifiable target with no risk to civilians can be justified. In fact the mission in 2002 that killed an AQ operative also impressed the Yemenis with its precision and careful targeting. So the downstream effect in this case was positive.

5) Finally when in Peshawar in 2008 perfectly sane, educated and reasonable Pakistanis living under Taliban threat spared no air in rejecting the use of combat UAVs on the grounds that they helped a then growing Pakistani Taliban to become more radical and to recruit.


davidbfpo
davidbfpo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2009   #18
davidbfpo
Council Member
 
davidbfpo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 11,095
Default A poor answer I fear

Quote:
Originally Posted by William F. Owen View Post
Makes you ask, as I often do, if something strategically dangerous, can be tactically useful.
Personally, I think the idea of "tactical success" but "operational/strategic failure" is not an intellectually or practically defensible position.
Wilf,

I think those who have a short-term view would see drone attacks as a tactical success and meeting the imperative for taking action (shared by many actors). With their limited strategic horizon, or situational awareness, such actors do not consider the fuller picture and risks of operational or strategic failure.

Staying with the Pakistani historical example; given the frustration with Pakistani in-action drone attacks appear an option and who say in 2006 would have objected to the impact on radicalising the FATA tribes? Striking the No.2 in AQ would be too tempting.

All from my armchair faraway.

davidbfpo

Last edited by davidbfpo; 06-04-2009 at 10:12 PM.
davidbfpo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2009   #19
M Payson
Council Member
 
M Payson's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Pakistan
Posts: 20
Default The drones of war

IISS has an interesting article on drones that I saw referenced at Abu Muqawama. It provides some technical detail as well as insight into operational roles and operators.
M Payson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2009   #20
slapout9
Council Member
 
slapout9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,809
Default

New issue of Air and Space Power Journal...whole bunch of stuff about Drones in it. Also article about the Army and there expanding use of aircraft,link is below.


http://www.au.af.mil/au/cadre/aspj/a...cles/apje.html
slapout9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
afghanistan, al qaeda, bramlist, counter terrorism, counter-terrorism, decision-making, drone, drones, ethics, pakistan, strategy, strike, terrorism, usa

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
War is War is Clausewitz Michael C Futurists & Theorists 421 07-25-2012 12:41 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:07 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9. ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Registered Users are solely responsible for their messages.
Operated by, and site design 2005-2009, Small Wars Foundation