Posted on Mar 25, 2014
Armed drones; are they making the world safer, making enemies more determined, or just the natural progression of modern warfare?
3.63K
17
22
2
2
0
I plan on spending the summer writing about the use of drones in combat and unconventional international operations in the domestic and international legal regime, specifically armed drones used in covert strikes.
I've talked to prolific writers and experts on the Law of Armed Conflict; some see it as practically damaging to anti-terror efforts, others see it simply as a new tool for an old process.
Is it changing the face of international influence, or just new tech?
Posted in these groups: 
Drones
Drones
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 8
2
2
0
I think they are changing the face of international influence. Think about Bill Clinton and how many times during the 90's he tried to get Saddam Hussein. Cruise missiles were the best technology at the time but we could never pin him down long enough to get a missile on target. With that being said a few drones can seriously alter the civilian and military command structures of a less developed country. (I'm not saying the U.S. would necessarily do this but I'm sure there are countries out there that could acquire the technology that wouldn't mind giving it a try) So, the way we use them currently is simply an evolution of military methods, "new tech" as you stated, but the potential is there to have serious international implications.
(2)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
Great point, SGT Elphick! At some level, the history of warfare is the history of negating advantages. In the long run, the field is always fairly level.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
Sir
Simply put, i feel drones are the result of our military evolving. Drones are possible due to technological advances. Drones also aid in the accomplishment of national security missions and do so without putting boots on the ground. What better achievement could we ask for then to neutralize a high value target and do it by not putting out Soldiers in harms way.
(2)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
A thoughtful response. Thank you MSG Morgan.
For the sake of discussion:
1. Do you think requiring "boots on the ground" has any positive effects (e.g. raising the political cost of warfare, reducing collateral damage, heightening the intelligence burden before committing troops)?
2. Is drone warfare (i.e. not mere surveillance) having the desired effect? What I mean is that, the tactical goal of target elimination is being achieved, albeit with collateral damage, but are we losing the strategic goal of building and maintaining peace? We deal with divergent cultures; honor-based societies (however misguided one might find them to be) may find drone warfare to be disgraceful.
(0)
(0)
SGT James Elphick
If you don't mind, I'm going to jump in on this one too. Boots on the ground has many positive impacts in a warzone or a peacekeeping operation. HUMINT is still an extremely valuable resource. So are soldiers who can be the "shield and sword" to a population under assault by aggressors. Drone warfare is achieving its goals but the costs are starting to add up. I think an integration of soldiers on the ground and drones in the sky could tighten up the collateral damage and could work as a force multiplier for forces engage in combat. Imagine the possibilities of a Forward Air Controller being able to take over a drone over target in a fire fight and deliver accurate and effective CAS.
(0)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
SGT E, another great post, but I particularly liked the "shield and sword" comment. It brought this well-known photo to mind. Drones are not capable of "winning hearts and minds," or whatever your preferred catchphrase might be. It may be cliche, but we need heroes, actual or abstract, and drones cannot fill this role.
That is not to say they can't fill other roles, and you summed up that point better than I could.
(3)
(0)
1
1
0
Actually you should be very afraid of "drones".
They are cheap to make, easy to fly, and potentially devastating weapons due to their accuracy.
Of course I'm not talking about a "drone" that you can use in Afghanistan while sitting in an air conditioned room in Albuquerque, I'm talking about a "drone" that you can control from a couple of miles away and guide using an on board video camera. Even if it can only carry ten pounds of HE it can do one hell of a lot of damage if it hits the right target - and even more if several of them hit interconnected "right targets" at, or about, the same time.
If some person in Australia can build a cruise missile in his garage - using "off the shelf" components and a home fabricated air frame 9and he did - then "the bad guys" can do the same thing and you'll never know that they weren't anything other than a "model airplane club" until they are ready to let you know.
They are cheap to make, easy to fly, and potentially devastating weapons due to their accuracy.
Of course I'm not talking about a "drone" that you can use in Afghanistan while sitting in an air conditioned room in Albuquerque, I'm talking about a "drone" that you can control from a couple of miles away and guide using an on board video camera. Even if it can only carry ten pounds of HE it can do one hell of a lot of damage if it hits the right target - and even more if several of them hit interconnected "right targets" at, or about, the same time.
If some person in Australia can build a cruise missile in his garage - using "off the shelf" components and a home fabricated air frame 9and he did - then "the bad guys" can do the same thing and you'll never know that they weren't anything other than a "model airplane club" until they are ready to let you know.
(1)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
COL Ted Mc, it appears I said something that bothered you, sir. I'm not sure what that was. I was not being sarcastic; explosive-laden drones are a legitimate domestic security risk. If someone can leave a pressure cooker bomb at the finish line of the Boston Marathon, then they at least have the motivation if not the means to load a drone with a bomb and use it against peaceful people.
(0)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
LTC (Join to see) - Major; Mia culpa - Insufficiento caffinus.
The sarcastic bit was aimed at the actual result of the actual revelation that "drone" technology wasn't out of reach of the average person and that lethal weaponry could be constructed dirt cheap.
The original announcement didn't even make it to the status of "Nine Day Wonder".
The sarcastic bit was aimed at the actual result of the actual revelation that "drone" technology wasn't out of reach of the average person and that lethal weaponry could be constructed dirt cheap.
The original announcement didn't even make it to the status of "Nine Day Wonder".
(1)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
COL Ted Mc, I too suffer from that, mostly before 0600.
I attended a panel discussion between the FAA, private drone industry, and a Fourth Amendment scholar a few months ago. The aviation industry obviously sees drone growth as a cash cow, making your concern all the more realistic and drone operation difficult to regulate.
I attended a panel discussion between the FAA, private drone industry, and a Fourth Amendment scholar a few months ago. The aviation industry obviously sees drone growth as a cash cow, making your concern all the more realistic and drone operation difficult to regulate.
(0)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
LTC (Join to see) - Major; I'm no longer professionally concerned with "unorthodox weaponry". In fact a concentration of it can seriously hamper the search for those who would use it.
6" black iron pipe, heavy grade mesh fencing, and concrete will build a really neat 150mm cannon. It won't be good for very many shots, but it will work for a minimum of one (and that may be all that you need).
$200 worth of industrial grade "sand blasting" medium can disable a lot of rail cars.
A pair of vice-grips, a pair of side cutters, a simple jig and a bunch of 4" nails will produce caltrops which you can toss out the window of your pickup truck as you travel the freeways (preferably just before rush hour).
PS - The rumour that there is any such time as "before 0600" is a base canard. I don't start to function with even 50% efficiency until 1000. I have friends who tell me that they get up at 0400 in order to go running before they go to work. I tell them that 0400 is NOT a time for "getting up" it's a time for "getting home".
6" black iron pipe, heavy grade mesh fencing, and concrete will build a really neat 150mm cannon. It won't be good for very many shots, but it will work for a minimum of one (and that may be all that you need).
$200 worth of industrial grade "sand blasting" medium can disable a lot of rail cars.
A pair of vice-grips, a pair of side cutters, a simple jig and a bunch of 4" nails will produce caltrops which you can toss out the window of your pickup truck as you travel the freeways (preferably just before rush hour).
PS - The rumour that there is any such time as "before 0600" is a base canard. I don't start to function with even 50% efficiency until 1000. I have friends who tell me that they get up at 0400 in order to go running before they go to work. I tell them that 0400 is NOT a time for "getting up" it's a time for "getting home".
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google