The Beast of Kandahar

User avatar
Saint_
Posts: 3326
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:05 pm
Location: The Four Corners

The Beast of Kandahar

Post by Saint_ »

The Air Force has revealed that the unidentified new "stealth" drone seen recently is real.

The Beast of Kandahar

that makes me think that future wars may all be fought robotically. Is that a good thing? On one hand, fewer soldiers will be killed, on the other hand.... would that make war more attractive?
User avatar
spot
Posts: 40066
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

The Beast of Kandahar

Post by spot »

Saint_;1271313 wrote: that makes me think that future wars may all be fought robotically. Is that a good thing? On one hand, fewer soldiers will be killed, on the other hand.... would that make war more attractive?Perhaps you'd like to define bravery in the context of these machines. Is the remote operator being brave? How does he differ, in this respect, from a pilot doing the same thing from a B-1 five miles up?

Here's the underlying reality to the deployment of similar indiscriminate killing machines. Please note the overwhelming preponderance of civilian deaths, at an approximate rate of forty to one when compared to potentially legitimate military targets:60 drone hits kill 14 al-Qaeda men, 687 civilians

Would you dispute the figures?
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.

Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
My other operating system is Slackware
User avatar
Saint_
Posts: 3326
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:05 pm
Location: The Four Corners

The Beast of Kandahar

Post by Saint_ »

spot;1271336 wrote: Perhaps you'd like to define bravery in the context of these machines. Is the remote operator being brave? How does he differ, in this respect, from a pilot doing the same thing from a B2 five miles up?


And that's pretty much what I was thinking. The bomber pilot, is a little brave, since there is a very slim chance his aircraft could malfunction and crash, or he could take a hit from an anti-aircraft missile, but a remote operator on the other side of the globe has absolutely no fear of death on the battlefield. Does that take the element of danger out of war and make it an easier answer for problems?

Here's the underlying reality to the deployment of similar indiscriminate killing machines. Please note the overwhelming preponderance of civilian deaths, at an approximate rate of forty to one when compared to potentially legitimate military targets:60 drone hits kill 14 al-Qaeda men, 687 civilians

Would you dispute the figures?


Nope, I wouldn't dispute that at all. As a matter of fact, I think that's indicative of an emerging military attitude that "Hey, just send a Predator drone if you think there's a terrorist meeting, it's no big deal if it's not because there's no witnesses and no danger of the loss of a pilot. We can always buy more drones!"

That kind of thinking is new, strange, and possibly dangerous. (Especially if you are on the ground!)

I was actually thinking, "Why couldn't a terrorist group with enough money or even a country like North Korea use that exact tactic to attack the American mainland? A drone could easily sweep in low over Canada or from the coast and hit a nice football stadium!"

Do we really want to open a can of worms like that? Or is the can already open and this is the way war will be in the future?

Return to “Electronic Gadgets Galore”