Spork Boards

WAR!

Robert Taylor – December 12, 2007 10:15AM Reply Quote
Well, at least B?K! got a head start.

El Jeffe – March 07, 2016 02:22PM Reply Quote
What a journey.

ARL (Moderator) – March 07, 2016 02:48PM Reply Quote
I whinge therefore I am!
I noticed in that video refutations to various assumptions or myths were along the lines of subsequent enquiries "found no evidence" to prove wrongdoing etc

You US folks have heard of Sir Humphrey?

(Hint: start at bottom half of page 178 of that link)



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/07/2016 02:53PM by ARL.

Jeff Cooper – March 07, 2016 04:48PM Reply Quote
Judith Miller has no credibility.

El Jeffe – March 09, 2016 05:13AM Reply Quote
What a journey.

James DeBenedetti – March 09, 2016 08:07AM Reply Quote
I don't get the whole anti-drone thing. Aside from nostalgia, why do people prefer the use of older, less accurate, more expensive alternatives (cruise missiles, stealth bombers, etc.)?

johnny k – March 09, 2016 08:53AM Reply Quote
I'm not anti-drone. I'm anti-indiscriminate killing, and anti-domestic surveillance. Happens to be done mostly with drones these days.

El Jeffe – March 09, 2016 09:02AM Reply Quote
What a journey.
I believe drones will be a far easier weapon to use against us. just regular old us here. And the collective 'defense' of such will not be effective.
So, these things are far more readily developed and used than say nuclear weapons.

ARL (Moderator) – March 09, 2016 02:06PM Reply Quote
I whinge therefore I am!
Quote
johnny k
I'm not anti-drone. I'm anti-indiscriminate killing, and anti-domestic surveillance. Happens to be done mostly with drones these days.

Agreed, particularly on the surveillance bit (hence my shiny new sig)

James DeBenedetti – March 10, 2016 01:54PM Reply Quote
Ok – it makes more sense to me for people to be against military strikes in general, not those performed by drones in particular – hence my confusion about terminology that focuses on the platform rather than the act (e.g., why not call them air strikes or military strikes instead).

Bill – virtually every weapon is far more readily developed and used than nuclear weapons. I don't see why a platform's effectiveness against us is a reason to not use it. I'm certainly glad we didn't cancel our development, deployment, and use of aircraft carriers for WW II out of fear that enemy use of the platform would be more effective against us than traditional battleships.

El Jeffe – March 10, 2016 05:00PM Reply Quote
What a journey.
i see drones as much easier to deploy against us with far lesser consequences for rogue states and general bad guys.
remote pilot even smallish drones could be done on a cartels budget, and be untraceable and at this moment beyond capabilities of our defenses in some aspects.
An aircraft carrier has not been remotely pilot-able that can penetrate our borders and not be defended against. I think it'd be quite easy to remotely pilot even a cessna, loaded with chemical or explosive agents, to about anywhere.
just does not bode well.

John Willoughby – March 11, 2016 07:14AM Reply Quote
Save us, Lord, from the furries of the Norsemen!
Iran recently flew a drone across the deck of one of our aircraft carriers in the Persian Gulf. That's a big bottle of aviation fuel, bombs, and nuclear material to allow anything potentially carrying explosives over. (Granted, not much of a chance that a single drone would do significant damage. But it could. And next time there could be a couple of dozen.) I think that the days of our being able to bring supercarriers into third world coastal waters with impunity may be ending.

ddt – March 11, 2016 07:27AM Reply Quote
Yes, the modality of/option for drones is significantly different from, say, manned mission, in terms of policy, of public tolerance, of threshold, of deniability in international law. Even if the exact same payload was delivered, even if the same destruction occurred. It's also been shown to have a different effect on the pilots (whether they're there or remotely manning a UAV). So there needs to be some serious thinking around this and consequences, intentional and unintentional. Not considering consequences -- we've seen that before, and it wasn't good.

ddt

John Willoughby – March 11, 2016 07:31AM Reply Quote
Save us, Lord, from the furries of the Norsemen!
I do like that drones do not allow American pilots to be captured/executed/or ransomed. I think that the desire to keep American casualties low was one of the driving forces behind their development.

James DeBenedetti – March 11, 2016 08:54AM Reply Quote
Quote
El Jeffe
i see drones as much easier to deploy against us with far lesser consequences for rogue states and general bad guys.

I'm not sure how us not using drones makes that problem go away. Or why it's a greater risk than old-fashioned suicide bombers.

Quote
John Willoughby
I think that the days of our being able to bring supercarriers into third world coastal waters with impunity may be ending.

I'm not sure third world drones are a problem, but I'm sure China is working on much cheaper solutions to our hugely expensive carrier problem. It's well past time for us to stop spending $13+ billion/carrier (+ more $ on aircraft, escorts, etc.) for solutions to the last war rather than solutions for the next.

I find this kind of thing much more concerning than what's being done with drones now, but don't really see how you put the genie back in the bottle with IBM and Google open sourcing their machine learning and neural network algorithms, multiple groups developing autonomous vehicles, etc.

James DeBenedetti – March 11, 2016 09:17AM Reply Quote
On a related note, take a look at what college students are playing around with these days using off-the-shelf components and open source software.

ddt – March 11, 2016 09:18AM Reply Quote
Quote
John Willoughby
I do like that drones do not allow American pilots to be captured/executed/or ransomed. I think that the desire to keep American casualties low was one of the driving forces behind their development.

Yes, that's a big part of my point. The use of drones for X mission/X payload involves different political thresholds than a manned mission, which makes the use of drones a different algebra. I think they call this "disruptive" in Silicon Valley.

ddt

El Jeffe – March 11, 2016 02:25PM Reply Quote
What a journey.
Just read some of the entries the ACLU has on drones. Lots of policy considerations in these links.
This link will start with older entries; click year on left
https://www.aclu.org/search/drone?show=10&show_aff=1

John Willoughby – July 15, 2016 12:11PM Reply Quote
Save us, Lord, from the furries of the Norsemen!
Military coup ongoing in Turkey. Potentially a very big deal if new leadership takes office and steers a less Western course.

Ron Burns – July 15, 2016 01:37PM Reply Quote
"We look to Scotland for all our ideas of civilisation." Voltaire
..or a more democratic and secular one..

ddt – July 15, 2016 01:46PM Reply Quote
What's the track record of military coups transitioning to more humane, democratic governments?

ddt

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login