Any Freeper military analysts care to comment? Does America need such a huge defense budget considering drone warfare?
I dont know but it seems like the MIC expect to milk it for a few years yet..
“I dont know but it seems like the MIC expect to milk it for a few years yet.. “
Milk it? They are actively doing everything they can to make it never end. More the better.
I don’t think the club will ever go out of style.
Drones aren’t the end of history like gun powder was, and the machine gun was, and the airplane was, and the submarine was?
Consider the following: An American fleet centered around a carrier crewed by 5,000 young Americans is a thousand miles out at sea during a major conflict. Its location is defined by satelites and it is tracked. A hostile submarine a thosand miles away from that fleet fires four stealthy crusise missiles that slash in the ocean 100 miles away from the fleet. But before they splash they release hundreds of Small “seagull” drones each packed with a pound of plastiqus explosive. Those drones swarm the fleet and enter any open door ,porthole, stack or anything on the deck. It is all controlled by a geek sitting in a deep bunker over two thousand miles away. Farfetched or are naval surface combatants in the age of the silicon chip obsolete?
I’m certainly no military expert, just posting observations, the war between Israel and Iran is interesting because the two sides are fighting without conventional ground force armies.
Iran has basically nothing to fight with other than drones and missiles, they have no credible ground force that could engage with Israel, they have no air force to engage with and their navy would get destroyed in minutes if they tried to block the strait of Hormuz.
Israel has a credible ground force, but it would be nearly impossible for them to attack Iran, what they do have besides drones, missiles is a great air force and an intelligence service that appears to be second to none in attacking the enemy.
Today, I hear that the Mossad has cut off the sewage and water to Tehran and people are streaming out of the city. It won’t take long before Tehran is unlivable with no running water or sewage it truly is a SHTF fan for that city..
Ask those who’ve been on the receiving end of drone attacks what they think...
And I suppose you should hold onto your blunderbuss stock too.
The biggest problem is the Army, which is the source of resistance to Elbridge Colby’s shift to China strategy. The shift to China is a shift to a maritime strategy which means Space, Long range air attack [Air Force] and naval forces. Probably lots of Submarines, but carriers are expensive and high value targets. There are the advanced technology defense reform companies and then there are the traditional “primes” who just want their grift.
Just one more toy, to considering in offense and defense.
The present employment of drones, elsewhere, should be part blueprint and experimentation lab. At least we can use those models for information to that same end
At least not until the weapons manufacturers contracts run out.
During those same years, the same people were saying days of mass armor battles were a thing of the past, and tanks were obsolete. Then came Desert Storm.
We do need people to wargame, and to try to anticipate what future battlefields will look like, and how emerging technologies will develop; I would never say that those are wasted efforts. There is an age-old axiom that generals are prone to fight the next war using the last war's tactics, and there is some truth to that. All that said, we need to be cautious about throwing the baby out with the bathwater when abandoning proven techniques for new technology.
As we saw in the 20th century, airpower, which was deemed the way of the future, is necessary, but then we found out it does not hold territory, and the same applies for drones, which is only the latest incarnation of airpower in a 3-dimensional battlefield.
You can deny and render territory unusable to an enemy with minefields, persistent chemical weapons, or coverage with indirect fire, but if you want to acquire, hold and use that terrain, it ultimately comes down to a 19 year old infantryman with a rifle.
Cyberspace opens up a whole new dimension to things, and in the end, old concepts of terrain, like holding a hilltop, critical road junctions, air and seaports, etc. may at some point be significantly diminished in the importance they once held, with battles being largely fought over digital domains.
We face the entire spectrum of warfare: https://ecampusontario.pressbooks.pub/app/uploads/sites/342/2018/08/figure26_1.jpg
In various ways (threats that will execute things differently), around the world in all it’s various terrain and climate, and possibly multiple threats concurrently.
There is no magic pill solution for us.
In fact, that is one of the dangers we face. Some new technology and or the last conflict we were in tends to define things to much, causing a disaster down the road.
Example: When all you do is counter insurgency type operations for many years as has been the case, it tends to define the equipment, training, and even structure of the organization. But the next conflict might not be a counter insurgency type operation.
Wanna guess who paid for this guy’s writing?
People who whine about the "military industrial complex" have no credibility.
Drones and robotics et al. will play a bigger role in the future of warfare at a lower level whereas before they were used primarily at the higher echelons.
That said, you still need someone that can physically search a person, talk to a person, use their hands to manipulate something... Drones have their limits and can’t replace the other tools in the toolbox (at least not yet, but who knows if in 30-50 years we have robots that can?), it’s just a new and really cool tool that gets added to the toolbox.
But at least today, the tech isn’t there yet for a robotic army: https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/robotsupremacy/images/e/ef/T800metal.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20110917082752
The drones we see today are primitive, short ranged, and require a human controller in the loop. In the near future, we will much greater range, faster approach speed, greater payloads and AI independent ability to detect targets and eliminate them. Besides aerial drones - which will provide target interdiction, Close Air Support, Air-to-Air combat, logistic support and medical evacuation - we will have subsurface drones to interdict surface and subsurface vessels (including loitering drones that will provide far better effects and flexibility than traditional sea mines)- and surface drones to provide logistic support. Land drones will provide most of the same roles and they will also supplant ground infantry for close combat, recon, mine clearance and flank support. Infantry robots need not me humanoid - we looked at spiders as a potential direction of study.
In short, whoever gets there first has a pronounced advantage in our future- in AI development and in drone design.
ALL “ new technology “ weapons are eventually countered or defeated….from the Panzers ( bazookas and hand held AT weapons) to fast, high flying aircraft ( AA proximity fuzes).
Ukie drones are already being jammed by Russian ECMs….and Russia itself has now developed wire guided, unjammable drones ( like our TOW’s)….hypersonic missiles will eventually be defeated.
Wilson Beaver is a Senior Policy Advisor for defense budgeting in The Heritage Foundation’s Allison Center for National Security. In this role, he conducts research, writes and engages audiences on the adequacy, composition, and character of the U.S. defense budget and associated policies, and supports the center’s mission to promote a strong U.S. national defense.
If a drone carrying ordnance costing $100 can take out an M1 Abrams tank costing 4.3 million (12 million for export), maybe it’s time to rethink military budgeting and tactics.
“The tactical nuclear hand grenade can take out an entire city block, maybe two!”
But the blast radius is greater than Chuck Norris can throw it?
“Maybe if we ... wire a Silver Star to the pin?”
