The Drone News and Discussion Thread

I imagine, given the "Pacific Pivot", that the USA would prefer that. America's future best friends, the Indians^note Who, incidentally, I think are far more likely to rule the world than the Chinese, won't like it if the USA gives Pakistan anything properly warry.

Hey, remember that one time 3 years ago in a White House dinner when Obama joked about killing The Jonas Brothers with predator drones?

A little harsher in hindsight (or is it simply a case of Dude, Not Funny!?) considering how much he's coming under fire (no pun intended) for civilian casualties as a result of these attacks.

On UAVs:

• Launch This New 9-Hour Solar-Powered Drone from Your Shoulder
• Northwest American scientists using drones to spy on nature: We shouldn't spy on innocent animals! What have they done!!

I believe some people thought it was Dude, Not Funny! at the time. IIRC Glenn Greenwald or David Sirota wrote a somewhat desperate article saying it proved Obama was a sociopath then complained about people using personal attacks against Noam Chomsky.

edited 15th Aug '13 11:33:01 AM by Achaemenid

I guess I already know the answer to this, but...well, is he a sociopath based on this alone?

Seems weird to pair that with a defense of Noam Chomsky. Chomsky's been getting personal attacks for decades, he hasn't let them slow him down any.

No, it's a hysterical and unfounded accusation based on a joke he probably didn't even write.

It wasn't in the exact same article, but it closely followed it, the point being it is an interesting double standard. As for Chomsky, meh, he's done a lot to earn them, but that's another thread.

edited 15th Aug '13 3:12:07 PM by Achaemenid

Unfounded? Maybe back then. But as time went on and the drone incidents involving innocent casualties continued to increase, all it did was give the activists more ammo to condemn Obama for his words and actions.

Still unfounded. That one incident does not make him a socio path. That is called grasping at straws.

Then those activists need to have better material to protest. A one off joke that was no serious statement on that policy; to call Obama a sociopath for that is jumping the gun to put it politely.

I said "as time went on," which means the various incidents that happened after this event made this joke far less funny for a lot of people in context. And he did say "you think I'm joking," which only makes the people even more paranoid as they think it's an admission passed off as a joke.

Okay, I can sort of agree with that. The joke alone doesn't make him a sociopath. But it can be argued that the various times the US ended up killing innocent civilians with drones before, during, and after that event might have added an extra Harsher in Hindsight element to that joke.

Its still unfounded as he was clearly joking. Big hint. When you say something like "You think I am joking?" when making a joke, guess what. They are joking. That is part of the gag.

Regardless of events that have progressed it is still grasping at straws to even suggest that makes him a sociopath. It takes a lot more then that to make someone a sociopath.

There are a number of events and circumstances that happened later that did not exist at that point. You can't use that one point as anything resembling proof that he is sociopath.

This is heading off into both nonsense territory and further off topic.

Alright, I guess you have a point. In fact, I agree with you.

My question then becomes: what do you think about accounts from people behind the monitors like this one? This describes one American drone pilot and how one particular incident involving an innocent child being shot to death and someone sitting in a military command center somewhere in the world who had observed their attack saying "No, that's a dog" made him quit the job. Is this a valid story? Is the presence of apathetic military personnel who apparently consider innocent casualties as "dogs" enough for you to believe that people who are anti-drone have a point?

(On another note, has this been covered before in the thread? If so, I'm sorry for bringing it up again if it turned out to be a fluke.)

edited 16th Aug '13 7:13:14 PM by Nettacki

I know that drone pilots do take a heavier emotional toll than folks give them credit for. Our mental health expert for the base told me that at the last post she was at, the predator pilots were some of her most frequent visitors. I started looking at them in a different light after that.

Still doesn't make me any more for or against Drones themselves though. Incidents like that don't highlight drones as being bad, it highlights how not having enough on-the-ground HUMINT(Human Intelligence, informants and actual eyes on the target from the ground) is bad. It's the same as a hellfire from an apache being fired from miles away at a kid. And this was in Afghanistan, not in Pakistan, we very well could have used something like an apache and the same situation would have occurred.

Intel is the issue here. We're relying far too much on intel that doesn't give us the whole picture. Satellite Feeds and SIGINT(Signals Intelligence, intercepting radio transmissions, phone calls, tests, and email) are not enough by themselves. They are great additions to seeing the bigger picture, but HUMINT is by far the most effective.

I think we covered it in the military thread.

The operators of the drones get the close up gritty details of what is happening something that can only be matched by being there in person.

The difference is they get to go home at the end of the day. However it is suggested that is not a positive thing.

They sit watching in detail these gruesome and gory events in detail then go home to normal. Now being out there in person is a damn heavy burden but most of those guys have the advantage of at least a draw down and time to process everything they have seen.

The Operator goes straight home still carrying that. It was described as dropping a hot lightbulb into a bucket of cold water. Ie a sudden and sometimes violent shock.

US drone pilot demand outstrips supply

So now they can't get enough Pilots. Although, with the way the US Military is appearing right now, that's not a surprise.

Double Post: German terror plot involved remote control planes — reminds me of past conversations on here...

Not that hard really, larger R/C aircraft could lift a bomb like the one that hit the Atlanta Olympic games in 1996.

Seems to confirm the conclusion in our thread that RC planes are not as feasible as conventional attacks for causing death or mayhem. They're also not much cop for escaping detection afterwards. Hopefully, many more would-be terrorists will continue to think otherwise though!

That said, you possibly _could_ use such a plane to attack somewhere sensitive that has a lot of security on the ground, such as a nuclear power station, though even then you'd probably only temporarily shut the place down for an hour or two in return for your life sentence. I doubt it'd even cause any power cuts.

Not related to drone strikes, but...

edited 23rd Aug '13 12:17:59 PM by betaalpha

Speaking from a physical security perspective, I don't see how that would be so hard to get away with if you had the right vantage point.

Just a frag grenade sized explosion in the stands at a crowded sporting event would really be something, especially if the perpetrator wasn't caught, that'd really stew on the media for a while.

The Atlantic bomb wasn't exactly a small device despite being a "pipe bomb" and was found in a gym bag.

Yemen asks US for Armed Drones

Here's the answer to my question about whether terrorist hotspot countries should operate their own drones in order to take the heat from the US. Well, at least to the point where one of them is asking the same thing.

It's not happening. We haven't sold armed drones to any other countries at present, because we're specifically deciding not to.

We sold the UAE and Saudi unarmed predators, which have alterations made to their center of gravity so that hardpoints for weapons cannot be added without making the UAV crash. Both countries(and several others) asked us for armed drones, and we told them no.

It's only a matter of time before such measures are defeated. They'll have to stop selling even the unarmed versions eventually, if they wanna continue that policy.

Of course, I imagine that policy will also go by the wayside as armed drones from other countries become more commonplace, if only to make a buck...

edited 25th Aug '13 10:34:27 AM by FFShinra

Couldn't the recipient countries just cut bits off the front and stick 'em onto the back? Not that hard at all! :)