One Drone Thread to Rule them ALL

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: One Drone Thread to Rule them ALL

Postby WakeUpAndLive » Mon Mar 28, 2011 7:52 pm

I know someone who works for Northrop Grumman coding the algorithms for the next generation drones. It is top secret and I really don't know much on it, other than it will be an unmanned, un-controlled (all of its actions will be based on algorithms), and be self propelled by some sort of solar power....in other words we will have less control over what these drones do as their actions will be determined upon algorithms, not planned strikes. False flags could result in more uncalled for bombings, killings, and more resentment towards the US in the Middle East.

I'm not sure where I read it either, but I think there was an article recently on these new drones, i'll try to find it.
User avatar
WakeUpAndLive
 
Posts: 271
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 7:49 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: One Drone Thread to Rule them ALL

Postby elfismiles » Mon Apr 11, 2011 9:35 pm


Pakistan Tells U.S. to Halt Drones
By ADAM ENTOUS And MATTHEW ROSENBERG


Image
Protesters in Peshawar, Pakistan in March condemned U.S. drone strikes.

Pakistan has privately demanded the Central Intelligence Agency suspend drone strikes against militants on its territory, one of the U.S.'s most effective weapons against al Qaeda and Taliban leaders, officials said.

Pakistan has also asked the U.S. to reduce the number of U.S. intelligence and Special Operations personnel in the country, according to U.S. and Pakistani officials.

The U.S. strategy in the war in Afghanistan hinges on going after militants taking refuge in Pakistan. The breakdown in intelligence cooperation has cast a pall over U.S.-Pakistani relations, with some officials in both countries saying intelligence ties are at their lowest point since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks spurred the alliance.

Beyond the Afghan battlefield, officials believe that without a robust counterterrorism relationship with Pakistan, al Qaeda and other groups can operate with far greater impunity when planning attacks on the U.S. and Europe. The vast majority of attacks against the West in the last decade originated in Pakistan.

Relations have been under heightened strain since Pakistan's arrest in January of CIA contractor Raymond Davis, who was jailed after killing two armed Pakistani men in Lahore on Jan. 27. Mr. Davis was released last month, but the case fueled Pakistani resentment over the presence of U.S. operatives in their country.

Pakistani officials complained that Mr. Davis and potentially dozens of other CIA operatives were working without Islamabad's full knowledge.

Drone strikes are opposed by an overwhelming majority of Pakistanis, and are widely seen as a violation of Pakistan's sovereignty.

The CIA's covert drone program has operated under an arrangement in which Pakistani officials deny involvement in the strikes and criticize them publicly, even as Pakistan's intelligence agency secretly relays targeting information to the CIA and allowed the agency to operate from its territory.


That arrangement appears to be unraveling. Pakistani civilian, military and intelligence officials have sent private messages in recent weeks objecting to the strikes, complaining they have gone too far and undercut the government's public standing.

Pakistani officials say the drones are responsible for hundreds of civilian deaths since the program was greatly expanded in the last half of 2008. Their U.S. counterparts say the number of civilians killed is at most a few dozen.

U.S. officials on Monday publicly sought to play down the tensions. CIA Director Leon Panetta met with the head of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency, Lt. Gen. Ahmed Shuja Pasha at CIA headquarters. After the meeting, CIA spokesman George Little said the intelligence relationship "remains on solid footing."

Some U.S. officials believe Pakistan is using the threat to cut off intelligence cooperation to get greater oversight of covert U.S. activities on its territory. Of special concern to Pakistanis are American efforts to gather intelligence on a number of militant groups with ties to Pakistan's intelligence agency, including Lashkar-e-Taiba and the Haqqani network. Lashkar was responsible for the 2008 attack on Mumbai; the Haqqani network is one of the pillars of the Taliban insurgency and is based in North Waziristan, a border tribal area frequently targeted by CIA drones.

"The Pakistanis have asked for more visibility into some things, and that request is being talked about," a U.S. official said. "The bottom line is that joint cooperation is essential to the security of the two nations. The stakes are too high."

The official added: "The United States expects to continue its aggressive counterterrorism operations in Pakistan, and it would be unfortunate if the Pakistanis somehow stepped back from counterterrorism efforts that protect Americans and their citizens alike."

Some U.S. officials say the breakdown in relations can be linked, in addition to the Davis case, to a civil court case brought in New York in November in which Lt. Gen. Pasha was named as a defendant. The case accuses the ISI of complicity in the assault on Mumbai. The ISI denies any involvement.

U.S. officials provided assurances to Lt. Gen. Pasha that he wouldn't be summoned for questioning in the case during his visit this week.

The CIA has been caught off guard by Islamabad's recent actions, including a rare public statement by Pakistan's Army chief, Gen. Ashfaq Kayani, condemning a March 17 U.S. drone strike that Pakistan said killed up to 40 people in North Waziristan. The strike came a day after Mr. Davis's release; some Pakistani officials saw the strike as a provocation.

Mr. Kayani said the U.S. had "carelessly and callously targeted" a peaceful meeting of elders in North Waziristan. U.S. officials say they believe the dead were militants and dispute the high death toll.

Officials say Gen. Kayani's public condemnation has been matched with a series of private messages from Islamabad asking the Obama administration to curtail the drone strikes, and demanding a fuller accounting of the March 17 incident.

The U.S. hasn't committed to adjusting the drone program in response to Pakistan's request. The CIA operates covertly, meaning the program doesn't require Islamabad's support, under U.S. law. Some officials say the CIA operates with relative autonomy in the tribal areas. They played down the level of support they now receive from Pakistani intelligence.

Pakistan has limited control over the tribal areas, and the region has in the past decade become a home base for myriad militant groups. Some are focused on fighting U.S. and allied forces in Afghanistan; others primarily hit targets inside Pakistan; and some operate on both sides of the frontier.

Yet without the cooperation of Pakistan, which has a far more extensive informant network in the tribal areas, U.S. and Pakistani officials say the effectiveness and accuracy of CIA strikes could suffer.

A senior Pakistani official said Pakistan's military had long been uncomfortable with the drone campaign. It now could no longer provide any "operational aid" to the campaign following a series of "intolerable outrages," the official said.

The Pakistani official cited the March 17 drone strike as a "catalyst" but said tensions had been mounting with the U.S. for some time. "Our people don't like it," the official said. "We don't like it."

U.S. officials overcame early Pakistani objections to the program by targeting leaders of the Tehrik-e-Taliban, or TTP, a group that has targeted the Pakistani government and security forces.

In August 2009, the TTP's founding leader, Baitullah Mehsud, was killed in a CIA drone strike. Officials from both countries said Pakistani intelligence had helped pinpoint Mr. Mehsud's location.


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 36418.html

User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8511
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

Re: One Drone Thread to Rule them ALL

Postby elfismiles » Tue Apr 12, 2011 9:25 am

Whoops, missed this drone thread in my original index:

Drones circa 2008
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=21589

Consolidation...

Ben D wrote:Oops!

Afghanistan: Drone missile 'killed two US soldiers'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-13046183

A drone missile strike is suspected of killing two US soldiers by mistake in southern Afghanistan last week, US military officials have said.

The apparent case of "friendly fire" is being investigated - if it is confirmed it would be a rare instance of pilotless aircraft killing US forces.

The incident took place in Helmand province where US-led troops are trying to push back Taliban insurgents.

US drones frequently target suspected militants in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Critics say hundreds of civilians have also been killed in such strikes in recent years.


AND

Peachtree Pam wrote:

Pakistan Tells U.S. to Halt Drones
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... lenews_wsj

By ADAM ENTOUS And MATTHEW ROSENBERG.
User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8511
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

Re: One Drone Thread to Rule them ALL

Postby WakeUpAndLive » Tue Apr 12, 2011 2:30 pm

Not the same original article I was discussing, but this is the drone I mentioned earlier:

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/04 ... sed-drone/
User avatar
WakeUpAndLive
 
Posts: 271
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 7:49 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: One Drone Thread to Rule them ALL

Postby Nordic » Tue Apr 12, 2011 3:39 pm

Pakistan has privately demanded the Central Intelligence Agency suspend drone strikes against militants on its territory, one of the U.S.'s most effective weapons against al Qaeda and Taliban leaders, officials said.


PURE PROPAGANDA, right in the first sentence.

But it is the WSJ.

They're not even trying to hide it any more.
"He who wounds the ecosphere literally wounds God" -- Philip K. Dick
Nordic
 
Posts: 14230
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 3:36 am
Location: California USA
Blog: View Blog (6)

Re: One Drone Thread to Rule them ALL

Postby Nordic » Tue Apr 12, 2011 3:39 pm

Pakistan has privately demanded the Central Intelligence Agency suspend drone strikes against militants on its territory, one of the U.S.'s most effective weapons against al Qaeda and Taliban leaders, officials said.


PURE PROPAGANDA, right in the first sentence.

But it is the WSJ.

They're not even trying to hide it any more.
"He who wounds the ecosphere literally wounds God" -- Philip K. Dick
Nordic
 
Posts: 14230
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 3:36 am
Location: California USA
Blog: View Blog (6)

Re: One Drone Thread to Rule them ALL

Postby elfismiles » Wed Apr 13, 2011 10:04 am


Predator drone may have killed US troops

BY PAULINE JELINEK and LOLITA C. BALDOR, Associated Press Pauline Jelinek And Lolita C. Baldor, Associated Press – Tue Apr 12, 3:31 pm ET

WASHINGTON – The military is investigating what appears to be the first case of American troops killed by a missile fired from a U.S. drone.

The investigation is looking into the deaths of a Marine and a Navy medic killed by a Hellfire missile fired from a Predator after they apparently were mistaken for insurgents in southern Afghanistan last week, two senior U.S. defense officials said Tuesday. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because the investigation is ongoing.

Unmanned aircraft have proven to be powerful weapons in Afghanistan and Iraq and their use have expanded to new areas and operations each year of those conflicts. Some drones are used for surveillance and some, such as the drone in this case, are armed and have been used to hunt and kill militants.

Officials said this is the first case they know of in which a drone may have been involved in a friendly fire incident in which U.S. troops were killed, and they are trying to determine how it happened.

Marine Staff Sgt. Jeremy Smith of Arlington, Tex., and Seaman Benjamin D. Rast of Niles, Mich., were hit while moving toward other Marines who were under fire in Helmand province.

Military officials in Afghanistan declined to provide any details, saying only that it was a friendly fire incident. "A formal investigation will determine the circumstances that led to the incident," the International Security Assistance Force said in a statement last week.

But reports from the field indicate that the Marines who were under attack mistook Smith and Rast for militants heading their way and called in a strike from a U.S. Air Force Predator, one official said.

Smith, 26, and Rast, 23, were with the 1st Battalion, 23rd Marine Regiment, a reserve unit in Houston.

Smith's father, Jerry, said he didn't want to place blame for what happened.

"Whoever that young man or woman was, they didn't send that drone over there to kill my son or Doc Rast," Jerry Smith told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. "If it was a royal screw up, it was a royal screw up. Make corrections because I don't want another family to have to go through this."

He said "trying to put a bigger burden on that person who fired the missile is not something I would do."

"I guarantee you if he was standing in front of me, he'd be asking for forgiveness, and I would give it to him," Jerry Smith said.

The Marines have been in a fierce fight in the south, battling insurgents in key Taliban sanctuaries such as Sangin, a militant stronghold.

Currently, Air Force Predators and Reapers, the high-flying hunter-killer drones, are logging 48 of the 24-hour air patrols a day, moving toward a goal of 65 in 2013. The aircraft are prized for their intelligence gathering proficiency and ability to pinpoint targets, reducing the risk to U.S. pilots and other personnel.

Under pressure from Defense Secretary Robert Gates, the Air Force has dramatically increased the number of armed and unarmed drones in the war zones over the past three years.

Other military services have their own drones, ranging from the Army's smaller shoulder-launched Ravens to the sophisticated, high-altitude Global Hawks, which are used for surveillance missions and do not carry weapons.

The military's use of armed drones in Afghanistan has become a flashpoint for Afghan anger over civilian deaths in the nearly 10-year-old war.

Drones are an even more contentious weapon in Pakistan, where they are largely operated by the CIA to strike insurgents hiding along the border. Pakistan tacitly allows the drone strikes within limited areas but denies in public that it permits the Americans such leeway.

The Pentagon plans to add another $2.6 billion in drone targeting and surveillance equipment for the Afghan campaign this year, according to a senior intelligence official in Afghanistan. The boost is an acknowledgement of the new focus on intelligence, for a mission that previously was last in line for assets and personnel after the war in Iraq, the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss matters of intelligence.

• AP Intelligence Writer Kimberly Dozier contributed to this report.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110412/ap_ ... endly_fire

User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8511
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

Re: One Drone Thread to Rule them ALL

Postby elfismiles » Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:54 am


Nobel peace drones by Glenn Greenwald

Image

A U.S. drone attack in Pakistan killed 23 people this morning, and this is how The New York Times described that event in its headline and first paragraph:

Image

When I saw that, I was going to ask how the NYT could possibly know that the people whose lives the U.S. just ended were "militants," but then I read further in the article and it said this: "A government official in North Waziristan told Pakistani reporters that five children and four women were among the 23 who were killed." So at least 9 of the 23 people we killed -- at least -- were presumably not "militants" at all, but rather innocent civilians (contrast how the NYT characterizes Libya’s attacks in its headlines: "Qaddafi Troops Fire Cluster Bombs Into Civilian Areas").

Can someone who defends these drone attacks please identify the purpose? Is the idea that we're going to keep dropping them until we kill all the "militants" in that area? We've been killing people in that area at a rapid clip for many, many years now, and we don't seem to be much closer to extinguishing them. How many more do we have to kill before the eradication is complete?

Beyond that, isn't it painfully obvious that however many “militants” we're killing, we're creating more and more all the time? How many family members, friends, neighbors and villagers of the "five children and four women" we just killed are now consumed with new levels of anti-American hatred? How many Pakistani adolescents who hear about these latest killings are now filled with an eagerness to become "militants"?

The NYT article dryly noted: "Friday’s attack could further fuel antidrone sentiment among the Pakistani public"; really, it could? It's likely to fuel far more than mere "antidrone sentiment"; it's certain to fuel more anti-American hatred: the primary driver of anti-American Terrorism. Isn't that how you would react if a foreign country were sending flying robots over your town and continuously wiping out the lives of innocent women, children and men who are your fellow citizens? What conceivable rational purpose does this endless slaughter serve? Isn't it obvious that the stated goal of all of this – to reduce the threat of Terrorism – is subverted rather than promoted by these actions?

Regarding the announcement yesterday that the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize winner was now deploying these same flying death robots to Libya, both The Washington Post's David Ignatius and The Atlantic's James Fallows make the case against that decision. In particular, Ignatius writes that "surely it's likely that the goal was to kill Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi or other members of his inner circle."

I don't know if that is actually the purpose, though if Ignatius is good at anything , it's faithfully conveying what military and intelligence officials tell him. If that is the goal, doesn't that rather directly contradict Obama's vow when explaining the reasons for our involvement in the war (after it started): "broadening our military mission to include regime change would be a mistake." It already seemed clear from the joint Op-Ed by Obama and the leaders of France and Britain -- in which they pledged to continue "operations" until Gadaffi was gone -- that this vow had been abandoned. But if we're sending drones to target Libyan regime leaders for death, doesn’t it make it indisputably clear that the assurances Obama gave when involving the U.S. in this war have now been violated. And does that matter?

Finally, when the OLC released its rationale for why the President was permitted to involve the U.S in Libya without Congressional approval, its central claim was that -- due the very limited nature of our involvement and the short duration -- this does not "constitute[] a 'war' within the meaning of the Declaration of War Clause" (Adam Serwer has more on this reasoning). Now that our involvement has broadened to include drone attacks weeks into this conflict, with no end in sight, can we agree that the U.S. is now fighting a "war" and that this therefore requires Congressional approval?

* * * * *

A new NYT/CBS poll today finds that only 39% approve of Obama's handling of Libya, while 45% disapprove (see p. 17). That's what happens when a President starts a new war without any pretense of democratic debate, let alone citizenry consent through the Congress.


http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn ... /22/drone/

User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8511
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

Re: One Drone Thread to Rule them ALL

Postby elfismiles » Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:57 am


NATO supplies halted ahead of Pakistan protest

PESHAWAR -

Pakistan suspended delivery of supplies Saturday to NATO troops in Afghanistan via its land border for three days as campaigners began a sit-in on the supply route over US drone attacks.
Supporters of cricket hero-turned-politician Imran Khan’s Tehreek-e-Insaf (Movement for Justice) party were gathering on the Peshawar ring road Saturday for the planned two-day sit-in aiming to block the route used by supply trucks.
The party called the demonstration to protest over US missile attacks from unmanned aircraft in Pakistan’s lawless tribal areas, which many feel infringe on Pakistani sovereignty and which locals say sometimes kill civilians.
“They (the US) are losing the war — they can never win it,” Khan told a gathering in the northwestern town of Akora Khattak on his way to the protest site in the Bagh-e-Naran neighbourhood.
“The sit-in will start today and will end tomorrow,” he added.
The administration in Peshawar said the NATO trucking service had been halted for three days, and the vehicles ordered to park in other cities on the route from Friday.
Organisers said they expected more than 20,000 people to gather locally for the protest, and many more to arrive in the caravan accompanying Khan.
In an article in Pakistan’s The News, Khan said that “today we Pakistanis of all shades and convictions need to come together to support our FATA (Federally Administered Tribal Areas) brethren and protest their killing and displacement.
“It is not enough to simply issue statements against US policies and drone killings; we need to act so that the voice of the people becomes a force for the rulers to reckon with,” he said.
Banners on Peshawar’s main road bore the message “Stop drone attacks on innocent tribal people,” and images of crossed-out drone aircraft, while posters of Khan and his party dotted the city.
Covert missile strikes targeting militants in Pakistan’s lawless border regions, believed to operate with the tacit consent of Islamabad, stoke rampant anti-American sentiment throughout the South Asian nation.
Public anger rose amid a diplomatic furore between the two nations over a drone attack on March 17, which killed 39 people including civilians.
US officials said Friday that the global superpower was considering providing unmanned drones to Pakistan for aerial surveillance, despite tensions between the two countries over measures to combat terrorist activity.
NATO supply trucks and oil tankers are the targets of frequent attacks blamed on insurgents attempting to disrupt supplies for more than 130,000 international troops fighting in Afghanistan.
Most supplies and equipment required by coalition troops in Afghanistan are shipped through Pakistan, although US troops increasingly use alternative routes through central Asia.
Two truck drivers have been killed this week by militants in revenge for transporting goods for NATO.

http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2011/04 ... n-protest/

User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8511
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

If you repeat a lie often enough...

Postby MinM » Fri Jun 17, 2011 10:27 pm

Nordic wrote:
Pakistan has privately demanded the Central Intelligence Agency suspend drone strikes against militants on its territory, one of the U.S.'s most effective weapons against al Qaeda and Taliban leaders, officials said.


PURE PROPAGANDA, right in the first sentence.

But it is the WSJ.

They're not even trying to hide it any more.

Top Al-Qaida Operative Killed In Pakistan : NPR

by NPR Staff
June 4, 2011


High-level al-Qaida militant Ilyas Kashmiri reportedly has been killed in a U.S. drone strike in Pakistan. Host Scott Simon talks to NPR's Steve Inskeep in Islamabad.
...
SIMON: Many of our listeners have heard your fine reporting over the past week out of Pakistan. They've heard a lot of Pakistanis talk about how upset they are with U.S. policy and many give the drone strikes as a reason. They believe they kill innocent people.

INSKEEP: Yeah. There's huge criticism of this on the street. The drone strikes are hugely unpopular. Politicians raise a lot of rhetoric against them. The drone are often described as causing many civilian deaths and a violation of Pakistan's sovereignty. This is the United States striking on another country's soil, even if they are striking militants. But as with many things in Pakistan, even though there's fierce criticism here, the picture is a little more complicated than it seems at first.

SIMON: And complicated how?

INSKEEP: Well, a Pakistani army general earlier this year gave a news conference, at which he said the drone strikes were successful and helpful, and that mostly killed terrorists rather than civilians. So, now and again you get a suggestion that the Pakistani government is more satisfied with these strikes than they let on.

SIMON: NPR's Steve Inskeep in Islamabad. Thanks so much.

INSKEEP: You're welcome, Scott...
http://www.npr.org/2011/06/04/136949138 ... n-pakistan
Earth-704509
User avatar
MinM
 
Posts: 3286
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:16 pm
Location: Mont Saint-Michel
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: One Drone Thread to Rule them ALL

Postby Bruce Dazzling » Mon Jun 20, 2011 12:05 pm

War Evolves With Drones, Some Tiny as Bugs
By ELISABETH BUMILLER and THOM SHANKER
Published: June 19, 2011

Image
A microdrone during a demo flight at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. More Photos »

WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Ohio — Two miles from the cow pasture where the Wright Brothers learned to fly the first airplanes, military researchers are at work on another revolution in the air: shrinking unmanned drones, the kind that fire missiles into Pakistan and spy on insurgents in Afghanistan, to the size of insects and birds.

The base’s indoor flight lab is called the “microaviary,” and for good reason. The drones in development here are designed to replicate the flight mechanics of moths, hawks and other inhabitants of the natural world. “We’re looking at how you hide in plain sight,” said Greg Parker, an aerospace engineer, as he held up a prototype of a mechanical hawk that in the future might carry out espionage or kill.

Half a world away in Afghanistan, Marines marvel at one of the new blimplike spy balloons that float from a tether 15,000 feet above one of the bloodiest outposts of the war, Sangin in Helmand Province. The balloon, called an aerostat, can transmit live video — from as far as 20 miles away — of insurgents planting homemade bombs. “It’s been a game-changer for me,” Capt. Nickoli Johnson said in Sangin this spring. “I want a bunch more put in.”

From blimps to bugs, an explosion in aerial drones is transforming the way America fights and thinks about its wars. Predator drones, the Cessna-sized workhorses that have dominated unmanned flight since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, are by now a brand name, known and feared around the world. But far less widely known are the sheer size, variety and audaciousness of a rapidly expanding drone universe, along with the dilemmas that come with it.

The Pentagon now has some 7,000 aerial drones, compared with fewer than 50 a decade ago. Within the next decade the Air Force anticipates a decrease in manned aircraft but expects its number of “multirole” aerial drones like the Reaper — the ones that spy as well as strike — to nearly quadruple, to 536. Already the Air Force is training more remote pilots, 350 this year alone, than fighter and bomber pilots combined.

“It’s a growth market,” said Ashton B. Carter, the Pentagon’s chief weapons buyer. :barf:

The Pentagon has asked Congress for nearly $5 billion for drones next year, and by 2030 envisions ever more stuff of science fiction: “spy flies” equipped with sensors and microcameras to detect enemies, nuclear weapons or victims in rubble. Peter W. Singer, a scholar at the Brookings Institution and the author of “Wired for War,” a book about military robotics, calls them “bugs with bugs.”

In recent months drones have been more crucial than ever in fighting wars and terrorism. The Central Intelligence Agency spied on Osama bin Laden’s compound in Pakistan by video transmitted from a new bat-winged stealth drone, the RQ-170 Sentinel, otherwise known as the “Beast of Kandahar,” named after it was first spotted on a runway in Afghanistan. One of Pakistan’s most wanted militants, Ilyas Kashmiri, was reported dead this month in a C.I.A. drone strike, part of an aggressive drone campaign that administration officials say has helped paralyze Al Qaeda in the region — and has become a possible rationale for an accelerated withdrawal of American forces from Afghanistan. More than 1,900 insurgents in Pakistan’s tribal areas have been killed by American drones since 2006, according to the Web site http://www.longwarjournal.com.

In April the United States began using armed Predator drones against Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi’s forces in Libya. Last month a C.I.A.-armed Predator aimed a missile at Anwar al-Awlaki, the radical American-born cleric believed to be hiding in Yemen. The Predator missed, but American drones continue to patrol Yemen’s skies.

Large or small, drones raise questions about the growing disconnect between the American public and its wars. Military ethicists concede that drones can turn war into a video game, inflict civilian casualties and, with no Americans directly at risk, more easily draw the United States into conflicts. Drones have also created a crisis of information for analysts on the end of a daily video deluge. Not least, the Federal Aviation Administration has qualms about expanding their test flights at home, as the Pentagon would like. Last summer, fighter jets were almost scrambled after a rogue Fire Scout drone, the size of a small helicopter, wandered into Washington’s restricted airspace.

Within the military, no one disputes that drones save American lives. Many see them as advanced versions of “stand-off weapons systems,” like tanks or bombs dropped from aircraft, that the United States has used for decades. “There’s a kind of nostalgia for the way wars used to be,” said Deane-Peter Baker, an ethics professor at the United States Naval Academy, referring to noble notions of knight-on-knight conflict. Drones are part of a post-heroic age, he said, and in his view it is not always a problem if they lower the threshold for war. “It is a bad thing if we didn’t have a just cause in the first place,” Mr. Baker said. “But if we did have a just cause, we should celebrate anything that allows us to pursue that just cause.”

To Mr. Singer of Brookings, the debate over drones is like debating the merits of computers in 1979: They are here to stay, and the boom has barely begun. “We are at the Wright Brothers Flier stage of this,” he said.

Mimicking Insect Flight

A tiny helicopter is buzzing menacingly as it prepares to lift off in the Wright-Patterson aviary, a warehouse-like room lined with 60 motion-capture cameras to track the little drone’s every move. The helicopter, a footlong hobbyists’ model, has been programmed by a computer to fly itself. Soon it is up in the air making purposeful figure eights.

“What it’s doing out here is nothing special,” said Dr. Parker, the aerospace engineer. The researchers are using the helicopter to test technology that would make it possible for a computer to fly, say, a drone that looks like a dragonfly. “To have a computer do it 100 percent of the time, and to do it with winds, and to do it when it doesn’t really know where the vehicle is, those are the kinds of technologies that we’re trying to develop,” Dr. Parker said.

The push right now is developing “flapping wing” technology, or recreating the physics of natural flight, but with a focus on insects rather than birds. Birds have complex muscles that move their wings, making it difficult to copy their aerodynamics. Designing insects is hard, too, but their wing motions are simpler. “It’s a lot easier problem,” Dr. Parker said.

In February, researchers unveiled a hummingbird drone, built by the firm AeroVironment for the secretive Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, which can fly at 11 miles per hour and perch on a windowsill. But it is still a prototype. One of the smallest drones in use on the battlefield is the three-foot-long Raven, which troops in Afghanistan toss by hand like a model airplane to peer over the next hill.

There are some 4,800 Ravens in operation in the Army, although plenty get lost. One American service member in Germany recalled how five soldiers and officers spent six hours tramping through a dark Bavarian forest — and then sent a helicopter — on a fruitless search for a Raven that failed to return home from a training exercise. The next month a Raven went AWOL again, this time because of a programming error that sent it south. “The initial call I got was that the Raven was going to Africa,” said the service member, who asked for anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss drone glitches.

In the midsize range: The Predator, the larger Reaper and the smaller Shadow, all flown by remote pilots using joysticks and computer screens, many from military bases in the United States. A Navy entry is the X-47B, a prototype designed to take off and land from aircraft carriers automatically and, when commanded, drop bombs. The X-47B had a maiden 29-minute flight over land in February. A larger drone is the Global Hawk, which is used for keeping an eye on North Korea’s nuclear weapons activities. In March, the Pentagon sent a Global Hawk over the stricken Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant in Japan to assess the damage.

A Tsunami of Data

The future world of drones is here inside the Air Force headquarters at Joint Base Langley-Eustis, Va., where hundreds of flat-screen TVs hang from industrial metal skeletons in a cavernous room, a scene vaguely reminiscent of a rave club. In fact, this is one of the most sensitive installations for processing, exploiting and disseminating a tsunami of information from a global network of flying sensors.

The numbers are overwhelming: Since the Sept. 11 attacks, the hours the Air Force devotes to flying missions for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance have gone up 3,100 percent, most of that from increased operations of drones. Every day, the Air Force must process almost 1,500 hours of full-motion video and another 1,500 still images, much of it from Predators and Reapers on around-the-clock combat air patrols.

The pressures on humans will only increase as the military moves from the limited “soda straw” views of today’s sensors to new “Gorgon Stare” technology that can capture live video of an entire city — but that requires 2,000 analysts to process the data feeds from a single drone, compared with 19 analysts per drone today.

At Wright-Patterson, Maj. Michael L. Anderson, a doctoral student at the base’s advanced navigation technology center, is focused on another part of the future: building wings for a drone that might replicate the flight of the hawk moth, known for its hovering skills. “It’s impressive what they can do,” Major Anderson said, “compared to what our clumsy aircraft can do.”
"Arrogance is experiential and environmental in cause. Human experience can make and unmake arrogance. Ours is about to get unmade."

~ Joe Bageant R.I.P.

OWS Photo Essay

OWS Photo Essay - Part 2
User avatar
Bruce Dazzling
 
Posts: 2306
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2007 2:25 pm
Location: Yes
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: One Drone Thread to Rule them ALL

Postby elfismiles » Tue Jun 21, 2011 11:23 am


NATO loses contact with drone chopper over Libya
By ADAM SCHRECK
Associated Press / Jun 21, 10:54 AM EDT


TRIPOLI, Libya (AP) -- NATO said one of its unmanned drones disappeared over Libya on Tuesday, refuting reports that forces loyal to leader Moammar Gadhafi had shot down an alliance attack helicopter.

Libyan state television repeatedly broadcast images of what appeared to be aircraft wreckage, including shots of a red rotor and close-ups of markings in English.

It quoted an unnamed Libyan military official saying a NATO Apache attack helicopter crashed in Zlitan, about 85 miles (135 kilometers) east of the capital Tripoli. The report claimed it was the fifth Apache that had been downed - a charge NATO denied.

Wing Cmdr. Mike Bracken, an alliance spokesman, said NATO instead lost radar contact with an unmanned helicopter drone Tuesday morning along the coast in central Libya, and is investigating the incident. He said the drone was performing an intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance mission.

"This is the first piece of hardware that I am aware of that has been lost" since NATO's air campaign began, Bracken said. A U.S. F-15E jet crashed near the rebel stronghold of Benghazi in March before NATO assumed command of the international intervention in Libya.

READ MORE: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/ ... 1-06-49-21

User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8511
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

Re: One Drone Thread to Rule them ALL

Postby elfismiles » Thu Jun 30, 2011 11:01 am


U.S. drone targets two leaders of Somali group allied with al-Qaeda, official says

By Greg Jaffe and Karen DeYoung, Published: June 29
A U.S. drone aircraft fired on two leaders of a militant Somali organization tied to al-Qaeda, apparently wounding them, a senior U.S. military official familiar with the operation said Wednesday.

The strike last week against senior members of al-Shabab comes amid growing concern within the U.S. government that some leaders of the Islamist group are collaborating more closely with al-Qaeda to strike targets beyond Somalia, the military official said.

The airstrike makes Somalia at least the sixth country where the United States is using drone aircraft to conduct lethal attacks, joining Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, Iraq and Yemen. And it comes as the CIA is expected to begin flying armed drones over Yemen in its hunt for al-Qaeda operatives.

Al-Shabab has battled Somalia’s tenuous government for several years. In recent months, U.S. officials have picked up intelligence that senior members of the group have expanded their ambitions beyond attacks in Somalia.

“They have become somewhat emboldened of late, and, as a result, we have become more focused on inhibiting their activities,” the official said.“They were planning operations outside of Somalia.”

Both of the al-Shabab leaders targeted in the attack had “direct ties” to American-born cleric Anwar al-Aulaqi, the military official said. Aulaqi escaped a U.S. drone strike in Yemen in May.

The White House declined Wednesday night to respond to questions about the attack.

But Obama administration officials have made repeated references to al-Shabab in recent weeks, indicating that the group has expanded its aims and its operations. In a speech Wednesday unveiling the administration’s new counterterrorism strategy, senior White House aide John O. Brennan included Somalia among the countries where the administration has placed a new focus on al-Qaeda affiliates.

“As the al-Qaeda core has weakened under our unyielding pressure, it has looked increasingly to these other groups and individuals to take up its cause, including its goal of striking the United States,” said Brennan, Obama’s chief counterterrorism adviser. “From the territory it controls in Somalia,” he said, “al-Shabab continues to call for strikes against the United States.”

And earlier this month, in a hearing to confirm him as Obama’s new defense secretary, CIA Director Leon Panetta told senators that the agency had intelligence on al-Shabab “that indicates that they, too, are looking at targets beyond Somalia.” Panetta said al-Qaeda had moved some of its operations to “nodes” in Yemen, Somalia and North Africa. The CIA, he said, was working with the U.S. Joint Special Operations Command in those areas “to try to develop counterterrorism.”

The Special Operations Command carried out last week’s Somalia strike, the military official said, and it has been flying remotely piloted planes over Yemen for much of the past year. It has taken the lead in operations in Yemen, where Aulaqi, a senior figure in al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, is based.

U.S. aircraft and Special Operations commandos have carried out other attacks in Somalia against militants linked to al-Qaeda, but the strike last week appears to have been one of the first U.S. drone attacks in Somalia.

It was not immediately clear what kind of unmanned aircraft was used in the attack or where the drone originated.

The airstrike appears to be one piece of a larger effort to step up offensive action against al-Shabab militants with ties to al-Qaeda in Somalia. Somali media have reported numerous rumors in recent months of U.S. airstrikes on militant camps.

On April 6, an al-Shabab commander was reported to have been killed by an airstrike in Dhobley, a border town in southern Somalia, according to the Web site Long War Journal.

This month, Fazul Abdullah Mohammed, the alleged architect of the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings in East Africa, was killed in a shootout in the Somali capital, Mogadishu, Somali officials said. Mohammed was a founder of al-Shabab and was considered the most-wanted man in East Africa.

The United States conducted a DNA analysis to confirm Mohammed’s demise, a U.S. official said. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton described it as “a significant blow to al-Qaeda, its extremist allies and its operations in East Africa.”

In last week’s attack, local officials told the Associated Press that military aircraft struck a convoy carrying the militants as they drove along the coastline of the southern port city of Kismaayo late Thursday. Other local residents told journalists that an air attack had taken place on a militant camp near Kismaayo, an insurgent stronghold. Several residents were quoted as saying that more than one explosion had occurred over a period of several hours and that they thought that at least helicopters had taken part in the attack.

An al-Shabab leader confirmed the airstrike and said two militants were wounded. Abdirashid Mohamed Hidig, Somalia’s deputy defense minister, said the attack was a coordinated operation that killed “many” foreign fighters.

“I have their names, but I don’t want to release them,” he told the AP.

In the early days of the Obama administration, officials became concerned about Somali extremists and debated whether al-Shabab, despite some ties to al-Qaeda,posed a threat to the United States or was primarily focused on Somalia. Some administration and intelligence officials said the group’s objectives remained domestic and argued against any preemptive strike on its camps.

Over the past year, al-Shabab has focused more openly outside Somalia in its statements and targets. In July, the group carried out suicide bombings in Kampala, Uganda, that killed 76 people, including one American. Uganda is one of the countries providing troops to a peacekeeping force that protects the U.S.-backed government in Somalia.

In August, the Justice Department charged 14 people in this country with providing support to al-Shabab. Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said that the indictments “shed further light on a deadly pipeline that has routed funding and fighters to al-Shabab from cities across the United States.”


Staff researcher Julie Tate contributed to this report.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ ... story.html





Pakistan to US: No more drone strikes from base
Defense minister says Americans have been asked to vacate remote site


Facing domestic political pressure, Pakistan's government escalated the war of words with the United States, with its defense minister repeating calls for the U.S. to stop using a remote air base for drone strikes and to vacate the base.

Relations between the two uneasy allies have been on a downward slide for months, but deteriorated after the May 2 raid by U.S. Navy SEALs in Abbottabad that killed Osama bin Laden.

Bin Laden's presence in a military town less than a mile from Pakistan's version of West Point reinforced suspicion in the U.S. that elements of Pakistan's security establishment may have helped hide him.

Wednesday's remarks by Defense Minister Ahmed Mukhtar that the U.S. had been asked to vacate Shamsi Air Base, in the remote southwest part of the country, was the latest salvo as the two countries tussle over their interests in an Afghanistan settlement and the Pakistani government seeks to publicly distance itself from Washington.

"We have been talking to them (on the issue) for some time, but after May 2, we told them again," Mukhtar told Reuters on Thursday. "When they (U.S. forces) will not operate from there (Shamsi base), no drone attacks will be carried out."

Story: New plan to defeat al-Qaida: 'Surgical' strikes, not costly wars
Earlier, the Financial Times quoted him as saying that Pakistan had already stopped U.S. drone flights from the air base.

"No U.S. flights are taking place from Shamsi any longer. If there have to be flights from the base, it will only be Pakistani flights," Mukhtar told the newspaper.

Advertise | AdChoicesAdvertise | AdChoices
Advertise | AdChoices
.Despite Mukhtar's statements, it is unclear what the situation at Shamsi is, with the United States, the Pakistani military and local officials giving conflicting statements on whether drones and U.S. personnel were still based there.

According to NBC News, the Shamsi air base is actually owned by the United Arab Emirates and Pakistan reportedly has little control over it. It only provides security at the outer perimeter of the base.

Slideshow: Pakistan: A nation in turmoil (on this page)
A U.S. military official, meanwhile, said no American military personnel had ever been stationed at the base, but the drone program in Pakistan is run by the CIA, and the official declined to comment on that.

Pakistan has long opposed the Central Intelligence Agency's unacknowledged drone campaign against militants based in Pakistan's tribal badlands on the Afghan border as a violation of its sovereignty.

'We have told them to leave'
But in private the government and the military have offered a degree of support for the strikes, including giving intelligence to help target members of al-Qaida and the Taliban.

Pakistani military officials confirmed that the United States had been asked to vacate the base, but wouldn't comment on when the request had been made or whether the Americans had complied.

"We have told them to leave, vacate our base. We cannot provide security to their people," a senior air force official, who declined to be identified, told Reuters.

But a member of parliament who represents the area, retired lieutenant general Abdul Qadir Baluch, told Reuters that U.S. officials were still in the base.

Strained relations
Pakistan has been at pains to distance itself from the United States since the May 2 raid that killed bin Laden.

Its military has come under almost unprecedented criticism for not detecting the American forces until they had left, and the civilian government is increasing unpopular because of austerity measures, rising prices and a general perception of corruption and incompetence.

Story: Kerry: US-Pakistan alliance at 'critical moment'
A major ally of the ruling Pakistan People's Party also quit the governing coalition on Monday, increasing the pressure on the government, although it maintains its majority in parliament and is in no danger of falling.

Pakistan's army has drastically cut down the number of U.S. troops allowed in the country and set clear limits on intelligence sharing with the United States, reflecting its anger over what it sees as continuing U.S. interference in its affairs.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43587402/

User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8511
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

Re: One Drone Thread to Rule them ALL

Postby JackRiddler » Thu Jun 30, 2011 1:16 pm

.

A graphics-rich presentation of all known US drone strikes in Pakistan, 2004-early 2011.

Note the use of "Militants killed" (as though they'd know, and whatever a "militant" may be) and the frequent, "Others killed: Unknown."

The Year of the Drone
An Analysis of U.S. Drone Strikes in Pakistan, 2004-2011

Go to http://counterterrorism.newamerica.net/drones

Image

Image

NEWS:
8bitagent wrote:Pakistan cut off its bases for CIA drone use
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43587402/
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15988
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: One Drone Thread to Rule them ALL

Postby elfismiles » Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:34 pm


Arlington PD Testing Unmanned Aircraft
Department hopes to use drones in emergency situations by January

By Susy Solis | Thursday, Jun 30, 2011 | Updated 2:27 PM CDT

The Arlington Police Department is in the first part of its experiment in using unmanned aircraft to assist in law enforcement.

The department has been testing and evaluating two battery-operated, remote-controlled aircraft over a small, restricted airspace near Lake Arlington Dam, away from populated areas.

The aircraft are flown only for daylight operations and within a small, restricted airspace. The aircraft have to remain within the pilot's line of sight and fly 400 feet above the ground level.

Pilots obtain the same license as a commercial aircraft pilot.

Arlington hopes to demonstrate the aircraft's potential law enforcement uses. All flight data is recorded and sent to the Federal Aviation Administration for evaluation.

"All of the U.S. and the FAA is depending on our testing and experiment, our experimentation to create a model for law enforcement usage of these vehicles," Police Chief Theron Bowman said.

Arlington was the first agency in a densely populated urban area approved by the FAA to fly unmanned aircraft.

The drones look like nothing more than model helicopters. But at 11 pounds and 20 inches long, the unmanned aircraft would be a powerful asset to the city, Bowman said.

In a City Council briefing Tuesday, Bowman said the aircraft are capable of carrying cameras that shoot high-quality still pictures and video and have night-vision capability. The aircraft also have heat-sensing technology the fire department can use.

"Obviously, Texas is prone to a lot of dry weather and large fires," said Deputy Chief Lauretta Hill, who oversees homeland security and special events for the department. "Being able to send a vehicle up and sense the origin of the fire will give them the the tools in order to determine where they'll deploy their resources."

Bowman said police hope to move into Phase 1A by September, which, with FAA approval, would expand the airspace in which the unmanned aircraft can fly.

Bowman said he hopes the department can get into Phase 2, the mission-ready phase, by January. With FAA approval, police could use the unmanned aircraft in emergency situations.

He said the unmanned aircraft could be useful for accident reconstruction, to identify hot spots in a fire and could have been used to evaluate the Cowboys Stadium's ice-covered roof during Super Bowl week.

But not everyone is happy to see the new eyes in the sky.

"Personally, I'm opposed, here in Arlington, to the drones," Kimberly Frankland said. "There is definitely an invasion of privacy factor with drones flying over and filming or recording whatever is going on down below."

Police say they would operate the aircraft using standard operating procedure for any law-enforcement mission. The unmanned aircraft would not do anything more than a regular helicopter would, they say.

"We are just looking at a vehicle that is a fraction of the cost, that is smaller, that will allow us -- in an urban area, where we can't use the bigger helicopter -- to assist with better, more efficient police operations," Hill said.

The aircraft come in various sizes and can be worth $2,500 to $300,000.


http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Arling ... 80969.html

User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8511
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 29 guests