Use of Drones: Obama Speaks

Post by **LilRed** » July 29, 2013, 7:24 pm

The CIWS vid is very good... There are other reports that quote senior officers as saying the CIWS will stop aircraft and anti ship rockets... And, can be used similarly to Naval ships' big guns, for shelling(?) inland.

Could it be "black" propaganda?

The H. Sec. test using da Texans is a great and useful effort, particularly in defending ourselves internally.

ATB

Post by **FrazeeDK** » July 29, 2013, 8:12 pm

wha??? a Laser CIWS used for bombardment?? Since light goes in a straight line how do you do that?

Post by **LilRed** » July 30, 2013, 8:57 am

FDK:

Noooo... note the paranthetical...

Used like the OLD Navy big guns, to devastate areas ON LAND...

LOS only for sure.

ATB

Post by **FrazeeDK** » July 30, 2013, 12:58 pm

the U.S. Navy like the Army is moving towards extended range enhanced precision projectiles that can hit targets 80-120km away. see the link http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htsurf ... 30727.aspx

Post by **LilRed** » August 30, 2013, 7:58 pm

I do so love a good drone strike in the mornin...

Notably, after President Obama's "course correction" in tactics, the numbers of "innocent civilian" casualties is way down...

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/08/30/world ... hpt=hp_t4

: DRONES 1.jpg (16.46 KiB) Viewed 1340 times

ATB

Post by **leterry60614** » September 26, 2013, 10:51 am

Boeing releases its latest drones deluxe made of rehabed F16s. Very handy to operate in contaminated areas ( due to chemicals or radioactivity)... Another strong argument in UN negotiations with Russians.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-24231077

Post by **LilRed** » September 27, 2013, 7:05 am

Lt:

It is the future of warfare. It'll save soldiers, for a while. But, it will also make war "easier", for a while... Wonder what the long term consequences will be?

Another one bites da dust!:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-23983388

Yeah...

ATB

Post by **LilRed** » October 27, 2013, 8:24 am

And, again... Another major credit for President Obama. No wonder the Islamists hate his... uh, guts...

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/10/24/polit ... hpt=ias_c2

ATB

Post by **merchant seaman** » October 27, 2013, 8:53 am

Just might be why they just got a very large aid package. More tax $ well spent.

Post by **papafarang** » October 27, 2013, 9:03 am

war with no risk...mmm,will lead to more war,then next the chinese,russians will use them,great war war war.heres a question,have they ever been used in war or are the only used to kill local populations so far

Post by **FrazeeDK** » October 27, 2013, 9:11 am

F-16's being rebuilt as target drones?? Old old news.. They've been depleting their F-4 target drones for 30 years and have a huge amount of older F-16's sitting at Davis Monthan AB in Tuscon Arizona that are ripe for conversion. They don't plan to use them as attack drones although using the word "drone" seems to be newsworthy... They're old model high flight hour F-16A's...

Post by **Bonanza** » October 27, 2013, 11:12 am

The problem with drones is that the'pilot' effectively becomes a front line soldier. The fact that he is in Washington or some such place is irrelevant. He, and anyone at his location (ie. the same as his drone target) are now legitimate targets for the other side - and the 'collateral damage' could be substantial. Therefore, to kill the pilot as he drives home now becomes legitimate. And if fifty innocent other highway users are killed then these become 'collateral damage'. USA, you are bringing the war home like you have never done before.

Post by **Shado** » October 27, 2013, 12:23 pm

"As drone technology keeps improving, the expansion of drones' role in combat is likely to continue, as well as controversy over their use for both war-related and nonmilitary purposes."

Many countries have drones and those that don't have drones are developing or purchasing them. Effective warfare tools won't be ignored by countries around the world. The attached link shows who has them and who is developing them.

http://www.ibtimes.com/drones-which-cou ... ap-1264271

Post by **parrot** » October 27, 2013, 3:54 pm

I'd guess if the troops had access to internet back in the days of the Battle of Heiligerlee (1568), those without guns would have sent a tweet to the enemy saying........'@Lewuisofnassau, woah, no fair using guns in battle, #yousuck'.

I'm not a big fan of cruise missiles, drones, and Seal Team units......but if there's no alternative to doing battle with an enemy, I'd rather be on the side with the advantage.

Not much question in my mind, the day will come when a drone will overfly US airspace.....perhaps even by a US citizen....that will inflict casualties on the country. It's just a matter of time. But before it happens, there'll be thousands of drones in the hands of private citizens.....farmers, surveyors, geologists, and little 10-year old kids with their new Christmas present. And just like my brothers and I who tied firecracks to helium balloons, that little kid will figure out a way to make a weapon delivery system using his drone. It's what kids do.

Post by **tigerryan** » October 28, 2013, 12:23 am

Parrot I'm not a big fan of the SEAL teams either because they never get enough press and movies made of them.

I am a big fan of the 75th Ranger regiment and they will continue to do the heavy lifting as they always have. I would not put to much in to the "civilian death" claims when you get right down to it and look at those dirty faces your going to be looking at a lot more villain than the civilian. Don't let your kids hang out with trash has always been a good rule.. I wonder if Israel could send those surplussed F-16 on a one way trip to the reactor and ease the refueling problem with the big upcoming raid?

Post by **LilRed** » November 2, 2013, 7:48 pm

President Obama continues his winning streak...

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/11/01/world ... ?hpt=hp_t1

Long may he run!

ATB

Post by **parrot** » November 2, 2013, 8:24 pm

Bonanza wrote:The problem with drones is that the'pilot' effectively becomes a front line soldier. The fact that he is in Washington or some such place is irrelevant. He, and anyone at his location (ie. the same as his drone target) are now legitimate targets for the other side - and the 'collateral damage' could be substantial. Therefore, to kill the pilot as he drives home now becomes legitimate. And if fifty innocent other highway users are killed then these become 'collateral damage'. USA, you are bringing the war home like you have never done before.

Given the choice of endangering the lives of 79 commandos (as we did in the OBL raid) or using a drone (as done with Hakimullah Mehsud).....both were wanted men.....both raids resulted in civilian casualties.....both raids were protested by the Pakistani government.....both raids were successful.

Given a choice, I'd vote for the drone.....any day!

Post by **akwoodworker** » November 2, 2013, 10:28 pm

One report suggests that 50 civilians die for every 'terrorist' we kill, at least they are not Americans. To me the drone war is a sick way to increase the number of terrorists and keep the military machine running. This video pretty much sums it up http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2AeQ1YFm5o In the US perspective it is all about profit the down side to this economic endeavor is that sooner or later US civilians will be paying the price, be it at the hands of 'enemies' or our own government.

Post by **rick** » November 3, 2013, 11:40 am

A very thought provoking piece there AK. Terrorism is a growing problem, and killing a few terrorists seems to have little effect on stopping it; indeed perhaps the reverse. We need to get to the root causes, and also not pander to allies wishes by branding every freedom movement as a terrorist organisation (Hamas, Hezbollah etc. have rarely attacked anyone except Israel and israelis, so are not global terror movements, but local issues).

Nearly all the terrorism currently taking place is inspired by Islamic fundamentalists; the question is should we target this itself. Drone attacks in other countries we are not actually at war with can only be termed as illegal. But we could pass laws which would allow us to take sanctions against organisations and countries which we feel are encouraging terrorism or at least failing to control it - if you want to use drones fine if it is done with the co-operation of that government (open co-operation - not private acceptance and public denial). Ban or severely restrict all travel from countries failing to control it; sanctions or just refuse to do all business with them.

Fundamentalist Islam is probably the worlds biggest barrier to peace and development, and is often backed by those who themselves only pay lip service to it.

Unfortunately along the way fairness and equality will be lost, but there is a price for everything.

Post by **parrot** » December 2, 2013, 6:48 pm

I changed the title a bit....as Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon, may be delivering your deliveries in 30 minutes......sort of like Pizza Hut or KFC.
For those who have been away for a few years, ordering things on-line is a booming business (back in the US, at least). And for those who 'gotta have it and gotta have it now' (more and more people) one-day delivery is the latest rage. Amazon, Target, Wal-Mart are all getting in on the action.
Drone delivery of your newest pair of jeans may seem far-fetched.....but drone delivery of an donated organ to a hospital not so far away doesn't seem so far-fetched. And, at least one groom had a friend deliver the wedding rings to the ceremony by drone.
All those privacy concerns? Makes me think of the late 80's when portable (not mobile) home phones were all the rage. Then someone piped up and said that a neighbor could easily listen in to your conversations. People predicted the demise of portable phones.......well, they're almost dead, but certainly not because of the privacy concerns!
Technology.....gotta love it!
http://www.deadline.com/2013/12/video-a ... eff-bezos/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/per ... story.html