Forget the zombie apocalypse, here's the real danger coming: DRONES!

[Onkel Neal]

Man, this is Hand of God stuff
http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/03/opinion/bergen-drones-taliban-pakistan/index.html


All told, the 307 drone strikes launched by the United States in Pakistan between June 2004 and June 2012 have killed an estimated 1,562 to 2,377 suspected militants, according to news accounts.


Can you imagine living like this? I mean, I support this President and his war on terror, just like I supported the last one (how many of you can say that? :arrgh!:). But, I know the Pakistanis can't like it, from a nationlist point of view, it must be brutal knowing a foreign power is trolling your land with drones you can't see or do anything about, launching fire from the sky. Stay away from militants!

Some day, in the near future, drone tech will be so available, we will probably have drones everywhere, run by the military, local law authorities, drug cartels, mafia, nerds with rage, and crazys. You'll be walking to work or driving to the store and you'll see small drones buzzing everywhere. Who owns them? What are they up to? Imagine one of these with a air gun (http://www.draganfly.com/uav-helicopter/draganflyer-x6/gallery/videos/video-3.php) firing poison darts...or an explosive :o This could be the big threat of the 21st century. Lawyers and ex-wives everywhere won't be safe.

[nikimcbee]

Yubba, what have you done to Neal?:haha:



Here's your drone repellent:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlfLwQEBU-I&feature=related

[magic452]

I have real deep concerns about this technology being used here at home.
There may be a real benefit to Boarder Patrol and Police but at what cost to privacy. This kind of thing opens a door that should not be opened.
I could see paroling the boarder in a very narrow corridor under strict regulation but not much more.

I even have issues with the military use, "suspected militants", they're killing people that they don't have any idea of who they are.
A "suspected militant" is any male of military age that happens to be in the area. If that quote said definite militants I would agree.

There is no doubt that these strikes put the fear of god into them but again at what cost? They don't seem to mind dieing (72 virgins) and there are plenty to take their place so are we really gaining anything? If we get the leaders yes, just average militants, not so much. Might be doing more harm than good?????

However it would be a real shame about those lawyers and ex-wives. :D

Magic

[Catfish]

You are right, this is acting like god, without any trial, in countries abroad. I have always wondered how this kind of "warfare" [sic!] can be allowed, in the US.
Let's not forget the "collateral damage". It is killing civilians, plain and simple.

" ... have killed an estimated 1,562 to 2,377 suspected militants"

So they were not really sure whether they really were militants, nor how much they really killed.
"Some room for improvement"

Also to consider:
- The cost for drones is getting down, and it is not that difficult to build. It is the chance for small countries. You do not even need national markings on it.
- This kind of "warfare" fuels terrorism. A child who loses his parents or just witnesses such a strike, may later consider to retaliate with the means at hand.

[Skybird]

Drone warfare is a double-sided thing.

You can monitor for very long time a suspect and an area, and if what you have seen, and gained also from other intel, makes you think you are dealing with an enemy,you can take the target out of play.

The easiness of operation lowers inhibitions, I can imagine.

However, "suspected militant" is a technicality in term only. As long as the other is not shooting at you, you can argue you never know for sure whether or not he/she is a real militant/enemy. But wars do not get fought out in courtrooms, not the shooting part of them at least.

Drones leave no resting areas and no timeout to the enemy. They also save own troop'S from taking risks. That is good. But still not easy: some may recall that over a year ago I linked an article I do not find again anymore, about the stress level for drone pilots. Surprisingly, it is as bgreat for them and sometimes greater than for fighter pilots coming from combat missions. That is because drone pilots see in detail anbd from close range (via camera) what is going on. They are with there troops when they get ambushed. They see what their pushing of a button does on the ground. They are closer to it than real pilots. And after their shift the leave the office, open their doors, and immediately are back in another world, a totally different world, they go home to their families and it is as if they were coming from an alternate reality. Some pilots said that this extreme changes from here to there, and back, also is stressful to their psychic wellbeing.

Anyway, if the place would not be so totally FUBAR, and if these regimes and people wouldn'T jhave breeded and tolerated these ideology-driven stoneage fanatics, we would not be there to fight a war. Mind you, Pakistan complained over the the chase for Bin Ladne in the end haviung been successfulk, and it took revenge against the informant giving the Amerians the needed info.

On drones in our own homes, well, we are all steering into a total surveillance society, and you all know that since long, and you do not react,m you just accept it since it promises to come with so much consummation candy, video gimmicks, and fun stuiff, as many of you see it. You know that your governments are your enemies, and that democracy for powerhungry people is nothing toi crave for, but is an unwanted annoyance. You let yourself getting trcked via your smartphones, you let others collect charcater profiles and consumer behavior profiles of yours, an d when oyu read that there are visions of iris-scanners in shopping malls that send you individualised adverts every 20 meters, you think it is cool technology and what good the future holds. Apple and Facebook and Google get you all used to letting all this happen, and make you allowing to be turned into a glas person that can be scanned and seen through in all detail. Government offices also will combine their computer networks and allow "officials" legally or illegally to access this database to learn more about you by their own random decision. The perfect computer world is the world where total surveillance not only is possible, but even unavoidably takes place. And since you have accepted before to let it come so far, and the young ones have been trained to even like it since they are uzsed to it by their living style from teen years on, even childhood on, it is no surporise that these things will come.

Drone traffic in our own home countries is just one small piece in the great puzzle.

Think of these things next time you applaud somebody wants to lower street crime or tax evasion by banning cash money and make it mandatory to use plastic money for every buy you do, from chewing gum to Ferraris. It means that every buy you ever do, will get recorded, will get saved and later can be tracked, even decades later. The big fishes of tax fraud, companies and the like, will find ways to beat the system, they can afford hackers and the like - you cannot. The ordinbary man will find himself living a life where he more and more gets strangled, supervised, and monitored.

And I do not even touch the issue of thought crime and political correctness here, the tyranny of the crowd sending you to the stake or criminalising you if you do not think ther way you should, in their opinion. I also do not mention the future riot control when life in the cities becomes grim and ressoruces became rare and the places will be overcrowded and street crime will skyrocket.

As you have learned to expect from me, I'm full of lovely expectations for our future. But what goes up, must come down again, and everything in life runs in cycles, it rises, it culminates, and then it falls again. What once was in your favour, later will turn against you, and the force you inflict, inevitably returns.

It seems this does not make us act with greater foresight and care. Not at all. Seen that way, we just fulfill our self-made karma, then. So what'S our complaint?

[Oberon]

It's all fun and games until someone hacks your drone:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18643134

[Jimbuna]

Like most weapons it's only a matter of time before 'the other side' acquires them by one means or another then the fun and games will really start.

[Onkel Neal]

Yah, no kidding, Jim! :timeout:

[Skybird]

It's all fun and games until someone hacks your drone:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18643134

Funny, I mentioned that risk in a thread two, three years ago, on drones, and half of the people were laughing about me, calling me somebody wanting to go back to the stoneage. That was even before the drone incident in Iran (whatever that incident really was...).

[Onkel Neal]

Will we ever learn? :know:

[Catfish]

I guess no.

And, of course, the germans were first:

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y174/penaeus/AS292.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argus_As_292

:know:

[AVGWarhawk]

Once the call is determined there is a answer.

Raytheon Missile Systems

Anti-drone systems have been studied and in the works for quite some time now.

[Bilge_Rat]

I am not really worried about the technology, after all we have all grown up in a world which could self destruct in 15 minutes of nuclear war.

What I find more worrying is the fact that the President now has the power of life and death over anyone, even American citizens, who he deems to be a threat to "national security", based on whatever secret information he deems acceptable. He also refuses to release the legal opinions/memo which sets out the legal basis for this power.

Yet everyone, Congress, the media, the public seems to be accepting this evolution without much debate.

We are way beyond Richard Nixon and his domestic break ins. What happened to Due Process?

To me, this is the real constitutional issue, not the Health Care Circus.

[AVGWarhawk]

Funny, I mentioned that risk in a thread two, three years ago, on drones, and half of the people were laughing about me, calling me somebody wanting to go back to the stoneage. That was even before the drone incident in Iran (whatever that incident really was...).


Very real threat as you stated Sky. You are not alone. Others have been studying the problem and backed by dollars to remedy the situation.

[Skybird]

Will we ever learn? :know:
Ask again the next time I say something unpopular, or something critical of technology. :O:

Imagine you would have listened to me when in a angry dispute with Subman back then I said that as an emergency treasure for hard times, solid gold beats stocks, paper and coins hands down, always, and since always. The value you would have invested in buying real gold back then (some years pre 2008), by now would have almost increased five-fold, the price since then went from 450 or so, to 2000. You would possibly be a rich man today. :D

[Skybird]

Once the call is determined there is a answer.

Raytheon Missile Systems

Anti-drone systems have been studied and in the works for quite some time now.

The future is cyber warfare. Target the powergrid of the target nation with virusses and malware like that. Hospitals. Traffic control system, air traffic. Hoover dam control centre. Nuclear powerplants.

Stuxnet, anyone? It was the first war strike of the new era.

I hate to say that Russia, China and especially India have very good programmers.

Next will be biological agents that can do ethnicity-depending target selection. Virusses that go after people with a certain mark or combination in their genes.

[AVGWarhawk]

The future is cyber warfare. Target the powergrid of the target nation with virusses and malware like that. Hospitals. Traffic control system, air traffic. Hoover dam control centre. Nuclear powerplants.

Stuxnet, anyone? It was the first war strike of the new era.

I hate to say that Russia, China and especially India have very good programmers.

Next will be biological agents that can do ethnicity-depending target selection. Virusses that go after people with a certain mark or combination in their genes.

If it is run with Windows it is sure to fail without or without the help of malware. This includes the drones. But you are correct in the sense that the dependency on computers that require electricity and cable/satellites to function do leave a open wound. Once salt is poured in that wound everything grinds to a halt. I'm willing to bet most here who utilize a computer at work will tell you that business stops when any one of the components that make up the system quits.

I do believe biological is more of a concern than electronic warfare.

[Herr-Berbunch]

The value you would have invested in buying real gold back then (some years pre 2008), by now would have almost increased five-fold, the price since then went from 450 or so, to 2000. You would possibly be a rich man today. :D

Oh, then! When our wonderful, sorry - woeful, Labour government sold all ours! :/\\!!

[TheDarkWraith]

:timeout: Drones are already being used in the US! Law enforcement and military use. Wake up people, it's time we stand up and say enough is enough :shifty:

[Spoon 11th]

:timeout: Drones are already being used in the US! Law enforcement and military use. Wake up people, it's time we stand up and say enough is enough :shifty:
NO !!!!! I demand there must be at least a dozen police drones buzzing over my head all the time. Otherwise some rage nerd could shoot a poison dart at me!

[Oberon]

NO !!!!! I demand there must be at least a dozen police drones buzzing over my head all the time. Otherwise some rage nerd could shoot a poison dart at me!

You have twenty seconds to comply

[TLAM Strike]

The real scary thing is that we have killed over 2000 Islamic terrorists with these drones and still there are more Islamic terrorists out there.

If the Brits killed 2000 members of the PIRA in 8 years it would have effectively wiped out the organization. Other well known non-Islamic terrorist groups (RAF, AD etc) would have been wiped out dozens of times over.

Just how many Islamic Terrorists are out there? That they can take 2000 casualties and be unaffected should be a sign we are fighting a much bigger war than we think. :03:

[Bilge_Rat]

The real scary thing is that we have killed over 2000 Islamic terrorists with these drones and still there are more Islamic terrorists out there.

If the Brits killed 2000 members of the PIRA in 8 years it would have effectively wiped out the organization. Other well known non-Islamic terrorist groups (RAF, AD etc) would have been wiped out dozens of times over.

Just how many Islamic Terrorists are out there? That they can take 2000 casualties and be unaffected should be a sign we are fighting a much bigger war than we think. :03:

First of all, you are assuming all 2,000 were terrorists, many may have been guilty of nothing more than mistaken identity, faulty intel or being in the wrong place at the wrong time. You also have the true "collaterals", many of these strikes take out the target's wife, children, relatives, employees, friends, neighbours, etc.

Second, the Israelis have be carrying out "targeted killings" of "terrorists" for over 40 years without substantially improving the situation, why should the U.S. approach be more effective?

[Skybird]

First of all, you are assuming all 2,000 were terrorists, many may have been guilty of nothing more than mistaken identity, faulty intel or being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
May have been this, may have been that. As long as you do not know that the rate of misidentifying is above that what needs to be expected as faults happening in war, there is just hear-say and wordings that aim atpainting the most negative image possible


You also have the true "collaterals", many of these strikes take out the target's wife, children, relatives, employees, friends, neighbours, etc. . The question is how many. It is war. War is injust, and part opf the grim truth about war is that it not only kills "combatants", but also civilians. It would be better, of course, if the enemy in thsi war would mobey the Hague Landwarfe Convention - loike Wetsern nations - and marks himself as combatants by wearing proper uniforms instead of hiding intentionally within the civilian population to make himself "invisible", or provoking civlian losse sin order to score in the propaganda war. War kills. War cannot be waged without killing. One can ask - and I do, as you know - whether this war is wise. But at least one effect cannot be denied, no matter how much stupidity we have shown in Afghanistan: every Taliban fanatic killed is a Taliban fanatic who will do us no harm anymore.


Second, the Israelis have be carrying out "targeted killings" of "terrorists" for over 40 years without substantially improving the situation, why should the U.S. approach be more effective?
What means "improving the situation"? They interfere seriously with their enemy's planned operations, and kill his leaders and fighters. Again, this is good. It is war. If they would have stopped to fight back, Israel maybe would no longer be existent today, or would seize to exist in the forseeable future.

It's war. That's not nice. But that's what it is. You can ask for ending the war. If you accept the conseqeunces, that at least would be honest. But please do not expect us to fight a war by saving the enemy and allowing him to get stronger than he would if we do not shoot at him.

I personally consider it to be absurd, and cynical, to ban certain weapons from usage in war, because they are considered to be "inhumane". War is inhumane. No matter whether your fight with bow and arrow, or neutron bombs. The tools of war do not make it any different: war is inhumane. So keep it short, as short as you can, and make certain you are sure about your motives and can defend them to your own conscience. If then you still decide for war, wage it with everything you have.

[Catfish]

No Skybird, war is thoroughly humane. Not to fight wars would make us animals. And i do not mean that in a funny way.

That this is a "war", has been declared by characters like Bush, Wolfowitz and Cheney. I will leave Powell out of there, for now. But it is interesting to see how this media propaganda bull**** still works, in the minds of some. This climate of fear is ridiculous.
Can you really wage "war" against people not wearing a uniform, not belonging to a nation, and committing assassinations ? This is police and intelligence work, imho, and not war.

The US have declared war to several nations in the last decades, some were called interventions (the middle and south Americas), some war, for all kinds of reasons. Now they have declared war not only to terrorists, but to a religion.

Now people are killed by US weapons, in countries not knowing or agreeing to this, all over the world, without trial, without asking their government, killing innocent civilians as "collateral damage" as they cynically say, without even knowing for sure whether the target is a criminal or not - not by the jurisdiction of the nation where it happens, and not even by their own jurisdiction.
We will see if the worldwide condition changes to the better, and a better international understanding, with that new approach.

[Skybird]

No Skybird, war is thoroughly humane.
Pardon...?

That this is a "war", has been declared by characters like Bush, Wolfowitz and Cheney. I will leave Powell out of there, for now. But it is fine to see how this media propaganda bull**** still works, in the minds of some.
"Some"? You mean me. I have nothing in common with the names you mentioned. These treacherous reptiles do not share my determined view on war - that's why they so easily and carelessly triggered them and foguht them with a light heart and did not care for there own troops being sacrificed for - well, essentially for nothing worth their sacrifices.

It is not only an offence you mention me in one sentence with these unscrupulous basterds. It also illustrates that you do not have the slightest clue on what I am about.


Can you really wage "war" against people not wearing a uniform, not belonging to a nation, and committing assassinations ? This is police and intelligence work, imho, and not war.
In parts it is. But mind you, Afghanistan is not Gaza or West Jordan. Anyway, we talk about asymmetrical wars, where the inferior tries to compensate for his inferiority by non-conventional tactics and means, which includes undiscriminating terror against civilian population, and a boycott of the Hague Land warfare Convention that necessarily works to the disadvantage of the one side obeying it if the other refuses to do so. To achieve this effect also is a strategy of asymmetrical warfare, like is hiding in hospitals, establishing ammo dumps in schools and build missile and mortar sites on civilian houses' roofs so that the enemy either does not shoot at them to prevent collaterla damage, or does, and then causes collateral damage that the targetted side then can use in public relation and propaganda scoring. During the Lebanon war, Hezbollah seized southern villages and forced the people by weapons to stay there instead of fleeing, in the hope that they would get killed by Israeli shelling or air strike, which would make good headlines Hezbollah than could make use of to win the propaganda war.


The US have declared war to several nations in the last decades, some were called interventions (the middle and south Americas), some war, for all kinds of reasons. Now they have declared war not only to terrorists, but to a religion.
Formally they have not, instead the repeated over and over again that this were not a war against Islam - it is me in this forum saying since years and again that the war on terror is a stupid term and only makes sense when you understand that you must fight against the ideology motivating the enemy, which in this case is Islam, yes. There is no "war on terror", as there is no war on submarines, on tanks or on cruisers. You wage war against the nation, the people, the faction owning these weapons and using them. weapons and tactics are just this: weapons and tactics. Tools.

But that is academic formalities only. War is what war does - once the dying has began you do not care that much for polite formalities anymore. For the soldiers fighting it, once the shooting begins and it is either themselves or the enemy, all ideals and motivations quickstart right into Nirvana, and the whole thing comes down to the level of simple survival. If somebody starts to swing the barrel of a cannon at my direction, it'S time to stop talking and shoot at him. If somebody lobs grenades into the houses of my neighbourhood in an intended and deliberate attempt to kill families and "non-combatants", aiming at them indeed and not at military targets, this is terror as a tool of war by intention, and as such I react to it. I try to kill the terrorists. If he happens to hide inside his "civilian" family - well, fly with the crows, get shot with crows. If he would agree to separate himself from non-military targets by wearing uniform and not building an HQ below a hospital, collateral damages would dramatically drop.

Aiming at enemies and not always being able to prevent collateral damage is not the same as intentionally aiming at civilians in order to spread fear and terror.

I hope you see that it is dangerous to think you can defeat an enemy intentionally abusing and ignoring the Land Warfare Convention while you respect it yourself, one-sidely.


Now people are killed by US weapons, in countries not knowing or agreeing to this,

Would it better be Swedish weapons? Do you really think that terror regimes need to comply with their key figures getting eliminated? Do you argue for the same "method" when it comes to law-enforcement in Germany? The polie shall only do arrest when the suspect agrees?

all over the world,
All over the world? that was new to me.


without trial,
Thank God you do not design the rules of enaggement for combat forces. They are in parts already insane enough.

without asking their government,
YXes. There is no point in asking the patron of terrorists for his agreement to kill his staff. By that giving warnings to the target and allowing the patron to help him escape and find a new hideout.

killing innocent civilians as "collateral damage" as they cynically say, without even knowing for sure whether the target is a criminal
The air force does not drop bombs on somebody just because he is "criminal". when you steal a car, rob a bank or evade taxes - then you are criminal. the type of men thy drop bombs on, have some heavier marks in their records, I would say. War fighter, terrorist, guerilla - call it what you want. I do not rate these as categories of "crime".

not by the jurisdiction of the nation where it happens, and not even by their own jurisdiction.
In case of Pakistan, Gaza, and Iraq, I do not give much for their precious jurisdiction. I have a problem with the jurisdiction of the whole Arab world, to be honest, since it is highyl discrminating, arbitraily, corrupt, and in violation of basic human rights. Not to mention the general attitude towards women. I see little worth to be respected there. I could - but only by violating my own ethical values and moral standards. So you maybe see the problem I have there.

Targets of drone attacks get selected not for no reason. I expect that some results of accoridng evaluation processes or intel puzzles are false, but that is part of war, I'm sorry, ther eis no way top wage a perfect, error-free, clean, civilised, surgical war. That is not cancial. That is accepting the real nature of war. It is not civiuklised. Not peaceful. Not holy or just or fair. It is cahos, and considering that the ammount of efforty trying to bring order to it and not kill just anything that moves withiout discirmninating between bystander and target, is remarkable.

By your logic a nation can declare war against anothger n ation an declaer it illegal that that nation should firee and fight back. By that, it can fight against that nation, while the target nation is expected to sit still.

Reminds of what the eU usually epxects of Israel: sit still and do nothing when its people get attac ked by missiles and mortar rounds. That precious peace process, you know. In Vietnam, it was called "Paris negotiations", and these bound the American military'S hands on the back. The outcome was unacceptable.

Why the Israelis even go as far as to give 20 minute warnings to houses where supects live so that not only the people there but also the intended targets can escape, is beyond me, though. It makes the whole idea of shooting at target persons absurd. (They for example drop dud bombs by airplöane that just fall thro9uzgh the roof, but do not explode, then some time later the real bomb follows, usually 15-30 minutes later. The hous emenawhile got evacuated - the targets of course, too. Think they call it knock-knock-bombing or somehtign like that).


We will see if the worldwide condition changes to the better, and a better international understanding, with that new approach.
Yes, and maybe one day we all will sit together on the mmadow in the sunshine and sing andlaugh and dance together. Lovely.

And I am certain: hopelessly unrealistic. So I stay with these two pieces of wisdom:
1. It is better to have weapons and being able to fight, and not needing to, than to find out that one needs to, but not being able and niot having weapons.
2. From LOTR: Those refusing to pick up a sword still can get killed by a sword.

Since you are German, I recommend these two books to you:

LINK (http://www.amazon.de/Die-neuen-Kriege-Herfried-M%C3%BCnkler/dp/349961653X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1341524978&sr=8-1)

LINK2 (http://www.amazon.de/Die-Zukunft-Krieges-Martin-Creveld/dp/3938017147/ref=sr_1_8?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1341525137&sr=1-8)

[Skybird]

P.S. One thing. Some days ago, in some German newspaper, there was a lengthy article saying that all drone strikes in Pakistan - ALL - are decided on by Obama himself, no subordinate whatever. There is no automatism by lower military ranks for drone strikes in Pakistan. He gets a full briefing, he assesses it, and then decides for or against it. Personally, and in every individual case.

Take this as you want, as positive or negative.

[Tribesman]

If the Brits killed 2000 members of the PIRA in 8 years it would have effectively wiped out the organization.
If the brits had killed 2000 provos it would mean they had killed about 1500 of their own employees:03:

[Catfish]

@Skybird:
Well you completely misunderstood me, but it is fine you like that kind of total "war"fare so much.

With having no permission i certainly mean the head or parliament of a state or nation to allow other nations to kill terrorists in their country, not asking the warlord or a criminal. Does the US ask the countries it kills people in ?
And is it really the criminal you are looking for, judged by some hushhush camera pictures, and grainy films ? So he's at a wedding ? Kill them all.

The "West" has itself driven, financed and built up the very terrorism it now encounters, warlords, Islam and all, against "communism", and Muenzler has not mentioned it once. There was no responsability back then, and there is none now.

And killing without trial is exactly that - you suspect something, and this is enough for you to kill him, via a pushed button, from your room. And then you go downstairs and have breakfast with your family. This is not only cowardly, this is atrocious, against all treaties that ever were. There are no words for this kind of "asymmetric warfare" indeed.

If you do it that way you are not much better than the others you fight against - which certainly seems to suit you, it is total war, Sun-Tzu in "Reinkultur", winning is all and to hell with democracy, jurisdiction and human rights. I would love to see you in a war that is being led by the very methods you so seem to love, out of your comfy chair.

[Catfish]

If the brits had killed 2000 provos it would mean they had killed about 1500 of their own employees:03:

Just like the german Verfassungsschutz, with the NeoNazis.
B.t.w. this german Verfassungsschutz was founded by the OSS, to look for and warn of communist actions in Germany. No wonder they are blind on the right-wing Nazi eye. Our retired (yesterday) latest head of the VS had to learn it the hard way.

[Skybird]

@Skybird:
Well you completely misunderstood me, but it is fine you like that kind of total "war"fare so much.
Thanks for the misled irony. But I do not like war and "total warfare" at all. I just have no illusions about what war is. That'S why you would see much fewer wars with me, and those fewer wars that still are there, would be fought differently, and with much more uncompromised determination.


With having no permission i certainly mean the head or parliament of a state or nation to allow other nations to kill terrorists in their country, not asking the warlord or a criminal.
The government in Pakistan that openly hosts and supports and protzects the Taliban and triues to destabilise Afghanistan, and that has harboured Osama Bin Laden and called it treachery that somebody has betrayed Bin Laden, so that afterwards they caught that doctor and sentenced him to prison in an act of revenge? Or is it the government in Gaza that declares time and again that it is at war with Israel and that is formed by murderers who are criminal, as you would call it, themselves, who act in betrayal of their people'S interest and bring bloodshed and misery and Shria-oriented tyranny above them while plannign the next missile attack against Israeli residential areas where there are no military targets, but they do not want these anyway? Or is it the regime in Iraq that continues with the ethnic hostility and has fielded assassination groups again and of which many observers and insiders say that they torture and discriminate ehtnicities at least as intense as Saddam did?

You have plenty of respect for these, do you?


Does the US ask the countries it kills people in ?
Should it?


And is it really the criminal you are looking for, judged by some hushhush camera pictures, and grainy films ? So he's at a wedding ? Kill them all.
It is not about criminals. This is no law enforcement operation.


The "West" has itself driven, financed and built up the very terrorism it now encounters, warlords, Islam and all, against "communism", and Muenzler has not mentioned it once. There was no responsability back then, and there is none now.
Ah, yes it is all ourt own fault that Saudi regime is corrupt, that Islam claims world supremsacy and wants a caliphate in Spain, it is our mistake that Bin Laden decided to kill 3000 civilians while you do not mention that but worry about the Americans shooting in a war. I assume those 3000 killed just got what they deserved, they really have asked for, didn'T they? Oh wir ruchlosen Westler, oh die armen edlen Wilden, die keine Schuld trifft? Quran and Shariah - it is all our own fault!?

No clue who Muenzler is. Some historic politician, since you link him to some old times? Google did not help me.


And killing without trial is exactly that - you suspect something, and this is enough for you to kill him, via a pushed button, from your room. And then you go downstairs and have breakfast with your family. Well, in war battle, oyu do not hold trials over enemioes about to get targetted, yes. It proved to be inpracticle.


This is not only cowardly, this is atrocious, against all treaties that ever were.
Aaginst all treaties, yes. The taliban and others disregard the Geneva convention. They disregard the Hague Land Warfare convention. The disregard all those precious humanitarian ROEs that we allow our armies to get bounded by. It is cowardly to fight them with the smallest risk to our own troops? You favour allied soldiers dead instead of enemy terrorists and murderers dead, eh? This is no Basketball, you false philantropist. In spüorts, there may be sportsmanship and fairness, in war it is not. Yoiu do not be satisfied by winning 82 to 76, becasue you then have a lot od funerals in your own army. You want to win 100 to 0, if you can manage that. If that means to stab the enemy in his back while he is sleepiong, very well. If it means to shpoot him from a distance where he cannot return fire, very well. If that means to kill him without him even realsiing you are around, very well. If that means to kill him by drone instead of putting a nfioghter and pilot at risk, very well.

There are no words for this kind of "asymmetric warfare" indeed.
Well, the Amerinas certainly would love if the enemy would not fgall back to asymmetrical warfare, but would just face them in an open field battle like any ordinary army of the past, so that they could kick the hell out of him. Unfortunately, the enemy does not cooperate.


If you do it that way you are not much better than the others you fight against - which certainly seems to suit you, it is total war, Sun-Tzu in "Reinkultur", winning is all and to hell with democracy, jurisdiction and human rights. I would love to see you in a war that is being led by the very methods you so seem to love, out of your comfy chair.
Tell that Bin Laden, he started it when he committed intended mass murder against civilians. Tell that Islam, it has turned these oriental countries and places into stagnating barbaric hellholes all by itself. Without this inhumane ideology, Europe of the past centuries probably would have been culturally, economically and scientifically inferior to the Arab world.

And none of the places you are about, not Iraq not Pkistan, not the Palestinian territories, are democracies. They are theocratic and militant oligarchies.

You are much more dangerous than you imply I am, because you have dangeorus illusions about how these things can be settled, and what war is. You mistake romantic idealism with reality, so that you necessarily fail to adress it on realistic terms. Needless to say that you also are heavily biased, anti-Western, anti-American anyway. You allow barbaric cruelty of our enemies - Islamic terror, that is - while thinking not to challenge them over that shows your own moral and civilizational superiority. You think leading your own army the path to defeat makes you a kind and sensible being that will be liked, and that war can be fought nice and clean and sterile and fair.

You will not be liked. You will get eaten. Happens to prey all the time.

[TLAM Strike]

If the brits had killed 2000 provos it would mean they had killed about 1500 of their own employees:03:

Man if that was the case I wish I could do someone of the things the PIRA did to my employer... :O:


The US have declared war to several nations in the last decades, some were called interventions (the middle and south Americas), some war, for all kinds of reasons. Now they have declared war not only to terrorists, but to a religion. Oh if only that was the case....

Things would be soooo much simpler if it was a declared war on a specific religion.

We could arrest every member of that religion and make them an EPW. They would get a nice camp with the Geneva required Red Cross Packages until such time as they surrendered too us, signing an official document to that effect on the deck of the USS Cole. At which time we could dictate whatever terms we wanted; like say they all had to attend mandatory Deislamification Programs, they would have to surrender all their arms and disband their military and their leadership (the latter who would face War Crimes charges). We could even make it part of their laws that it would be illegal to display a crescent moon or distribute Korans then they would also have to pay reparations and have their boarders redrawn to compensate for their aggression.

Ohhh if only it was a proper war. Those wars have rules...

But then its normally the attacker who chooses the method of combat...

[HollywoodBob]

few month ago Iran hacked and capture the most sofisticate drone
read this http://www.rt.com/news/iran-us-drone-toy-965/

what make me laugh so much it when the iran president said wen we finish to study the super stealth american drone we will sell it on ebay < LoL
first time i heard about military technology stolen and sold on ebay

[Catfish]

Hi Skybird,
i can understand this and i cannot even propose anything better, i just say it is still wrong. I have not much respect for the iranian or pakistani leadership, but for the people who have to live under those regimes. They cannot choose.

"It is not about criminals. This is no law enforcement operation"
Says who - you ? It is exactly about criminals. Terrorists are criminals per definitionem. Otherwise they would be soldiers - and they are not.
So this is not a war, other than described by Cheney, Wolfowitz et al.
Also the law of the US is thus enforced in countries obviously not underlying their jurisdiction.

I prefer US law to the Shariah anytime lol, however if you want US jurisdiction worldwide what do you propose ? A big war to end all wars ? Islam against western values ? The problem is that you fuel terrorism with that kind of "warfare", and it will once more fall back on us sooner or later.
No, i do not have a better idea of what to do, however the current course of action looks like an elephant in a porcelain store.

The problem also is that drones are useless without having spies and intelligence, about where the terrorists and their leaders are. You cannot do all by satellite and drones.

Greetings,
Catfish

P.S. it was Muenkler (sry for the typo) and i read some of his texts. Imho he is wrong in more than "a few" aspects.

[MH]

The targeted killing policy has its weakness and merits.
It should be one of policies but not the only one.
It does not prevent terrorism but may keep the flames on manageable levels.

[krashkart]

The targeted killing policy has its weakness and merits.
It should be one of policies but not the only one.
It does not prevent terrorism but may keep the flames on manageable levels.

And at least it's a bit more clean than a Linebacker style bombing campaign. Not hard to imagine how big of a mess that would be. :yep:

[Skybird]

Hi Skybird,
i can understand this and i cannot even propose anything better, i just say it is still wrong.
And you arev right, war always is "wrong" in that it is against our moral rules and values we live by in peacetimes. We may make it a desirable goal, we may excel in niot seeking for war actively, and not causing a war carelessly. Still, war can find us, because there is no consensus amongst those 7 billion people living on this planet that war always is unacceptable and should be avopided. There people who find war desirable to achcieve their goals, perfectly honourable, or perfectly legal and okay. And these people are the problem.

You might be surprised, but I see myself as a pacifist. But that does not mean for me that I always and under all circumstances rule out war, no matter what. It means that I prefer peaceful solutions to important conflicts where we have stakes to lose, and that I do not like war at all. But that is where my pacifism ends - I do not allow to let pacifism being turned into weakness. Nor does pacifism mean that I porefer choosing the wrong, over war. Sometimes, war is inevitable. That'S whow life is. This world is not perfect, so isn'T man. I do not invite war, but I am prepared for it in case it finds me. I don'T call it a welcome guest, but when it appears on my doorstep, I am willing to deal with it. Weakness - is no option. Ignoring reality just because one feels emotionally sensible about peace and war, is no option.


I have not much respect for the iranian or pakistani leadership, but for the people who have to live under those regimes. They cannot choose.
That is not true, many had made their choice in elections, also, as long as you accept the consequences, nothing can stop you to decide for this or for that. Whether you are successful, is somethign different, but the choice you always have. Even in most extreme circumstances - I think of Sophie Scholl. Extreme, I know, but I refuse people beign seen as the total victims of their rulers or cultures only. A Chinese saying says: "people have the government that they deserve".


"It is not about criminals. This is no law enforcement operation"
Says who - you ? It is exactly about criminals. Terrorists are criminals per definitionem. Otherwise they would be soldiers - and they are not.
So this is not a war, other than described by Cheney, Wolfowitz et al.
Also the law of the US is thus enforced in countries obviously not underlying their jurisdiction.[
There was an old debate ten years ago about this so-called "illegal fighters", the temr goes back to the Napoleonic era and tries to categorize this type of "soldiers" that fight wars, but do not wear uniforms. Inm WWII, such people, if beign caught, would be put against the wall immediately. The taliban is an army of asymmetrical war, but they are not just criminals. Criminals do engage ina cts of war, attack with weapons of war, fire mortars and artillery and HMGs and ATGMs against tanks and SAMs against aircraft. When you call these "criminal", you need to send the Bundespolizei and the BKA facing them. I doubt they would hold out long. Also, acts of war and ideologic crusade done in war fashion, are no categories of crime, but of - war.


I prefer US law to the Shariah anytime lol, however if you want US jurisdiction worldwide what do you propose ?
Neiother did I say I want US global jurisdiction, noir is this the issue here. The iossue is asymmetrical wars beign fought in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, plus drione strikes taking place occasionally in african coutnries like Somalia, Sudan, and some more. These countries do not represent the global order. They represent war zones, some represent zones run by anarchy and without strong legitimate and potent national governments


A big war to end all wars ? Islam against western values ?

No, Islam against al non-Muslim world. Just today Die welt again qupotes a speaker of the TTB, one of the major organsiations of the Tlaiban, saying that indeed they are fighting for bringing the rule of Islam back to Afghanistan - and the whole world. The problem with Wetserners is that they find this claim so surreal that they simply cannot imagine that other, fporeign people may be serious when they say that.

The problem is that you fuel terrorism with that kind of "warfare", and it will once more fall back on us sooner or later.
No, the problem is Islamic ideology motivating people to waste their lives by turning the world into a bigger hellhole. If we resist to this, you say we fuel terrorism. Should we surrender? What this do, then? Isd the victim of rape fueling the aggression of her attacker when she tries tio fight him/her back? Is the victim of a robber or of an assault fueling the gangster'S aggression when not giving up and surrender, but fights back?


No, i do not have a better idea of what to do, however the current course of action looks like an elephant in a porcelain store.
I have never said anything else but that I consider both wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as strategic defeats for the West, and that the war against Iraq was stupid and misled and that I would not have started it. Afghanistan was a reaction to 9/11, but later turned into a totally mismanaged- selfmade mess.

But aslong as the troops are kept thewre, for whatever stupid poltiicans sthink about the reasons, they are in a warzone, so let them fight the war as a war. Since ten years this is not beign done, and that'S why we are where we are.


The problem also is that drones are useless without having spies and intelligence, about where the terrorists and their leaders are. You cannot do all by satellite and drones.
That is correct, and it is my understanding that right this is being done: intel of various sources, amongst that ELINT, HUMINT and drones life footage, get combined for the bigger picture.

[em2nought]

Mark my words, Merica will use these things to bust hookers - the most dangerous threat to our puritanical way of life. :up:

[Onkel Neal]

Ask again the next time I say something unpopular, or something critical of technology. :O:



I think you misunderstood what I meant ;)



Imagine you would have listened to me when in a angry dispute with Subman back then I said that as an emergency treasure for hard times, solid gold beats stocks, paper and coins hands down, always, and since always. The value you would have invested in buying real gold back then (some years pre 2008), by now would have almost increased five-fold, the price since then went from 450 or so, to 2000. You would possibly be a rich man today. :D

Way ahead of you, buddy. :shucks:



That this is a "war", has been declared by characters like Bush, Wolfowitz and Cheney. I will leave Powell out of there, for now. But it is interesting to see how this media propaganda bull**** still works, in the minds of some. This climate of fear is ridiculous.
Can you really wage "war" against people not wearing a uniform, not belonging to a nation, and committing assassinations ? This is police and intelligence work, imho, and not war.

The US have declared war to several nations in the last decades, some were called interventions (the middle and south Americas), some war, for all kinds of reasons. Now they have declared war not only to terrorists, but to a religion.


Wait, you seem to have forgotten, the war has been processed by Obama and his administration for the last 4 years, and very briskly I might add. Why omit them? Come on, Catfish, you can do it. Say characters like Bush and Obama. :ping:

Declared war on a religon? I think if you use the word "declared", there has to be a declaration somewhere. I haven't seen it.

[krashkart]

Declared war on a religon? I think if you use the word "declared", there has to be a declaration somewhere. I haven't seen it.

But but but... the Americans never stated anything to the opposite!!! Shame on you, Neal! America declared war upon a religion and that is a verifiable fact. :stare:


Oh wait... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygTbwGrTELc) :hmm2: Gawd! I am such a d-bag now (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKacGTJ6-W4)! :oops:

[Codz]

If we declared war on the religion of Islam itself I doubt we'd currently have well over a million actively Muslim citizens. To call it a "War on Terror" is erroneous too though. It's more along the lines of "declaring war" on a specific type of Islam-motivated violent extremism in response to 9/11.

[Skybird]

Islam is a fundamentalist and aggressive ideology by core. The mainstream Islam is not the often so perceived "moderate" "peaceful" Islam - this is only a minority worldwide. The hardcore Islam, based on sharia and enforcing it'S law in all world - that is the mainstrema Islam if you ask people and poipulations in Muslim countries: they form the majority, and right so (in the menaing of that this is what Quran and Sharia are about). The abberation from Islam are not the so-called fundamenmtalists or "Islamists" (that is diölomats word invention based on an attempt by Saudi Arabia to gloiss over its own barbaric extremism), the abberation is that minority of Muslims that may indeed (or not) talk on behalf of moderation, tolerance and peace. And a huge part of them her ein the West still dop nto openly take a stance against those in their middle that are "radical", but silenty tolerate them and thus help them by indirectly supporting their cause).

The war in afghanistan and Iraq took place without a formal declaration of war, their governments did not recieve such a docuem,nt, or am I wrong? But by what is being done, they are/were wars - undeclared wars, if you want to be picky, but still: wars. The war on terror is a stupid phrase, since it seem to express that one wages war against a tool (terror). But you don'T. Yiou wage war against those using the tool. Which are those people being motivated by the message of Quran and the demand for Shariah law everywhere. Thus the ideology that motivates them to do so, is the enemy. And that's why I said the war on terror better should be understood as a war on Islam.

Whether you agree to that or not, is not important anymore, since facts already have been created by Islam itself: it is waging war against all non-Muslim mankind since the days of Muhammad. There is no peace where there is no Islamic rule, that's the logic by which it operates. Both peace and freedom, civil rights anyway, are subordinate to Shariah law, and Quran. What freedom and what peace is, gets defined by Shariah and Quran. That'S why Islam does not accept and is incompatible with Western law coders and constitutions plus the values expressed in them.

If you do not believe me that the understanding of terms is totally different in Islam and non-Islam, compare, paragraph by paragraph, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights , and the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam. An abyss will open before your eyes. They are LIGHTYEARS apart, and totally incompatible. The Islamic Human Rights Declaration can only be had at the price of totally destroying the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

[Codz]

There is no peace where there is no Islamic rule, that's the logic by which it operates.


The same could be said about any religion. Christian theocracies have also been brutal and unjust. Just look at the Crusades. Any nation ruled by religion will not end well for its people.

[Skybird]

The same could be said about any religion. Christian theocracies have also been brutal and unjust. Just look at the Crusades. Any nation ruled by religion will not end well for its people.
Yes, but since a logner time now the West has moved beyond that relgious dictatorship. Islam still is deeply stuck in it. That' why you see more violence of Muslim religious nutheads committed against Jews andChristians, than the other way around. Terror bombs, street attacks, prograoms, legal discrkination, assualt, rape - the number goes into the thousands or even tens of thoussands every year, the size of Jewish and Christian communities in Muslim countries still decreases dramatically, they get sysytemtically discriminated and cleansed out. In the West: mosques pop up everywhere like mushrooms in autumn. The numbers of Isamic crimes of violence reach into the high tens of thousands and hundreds of thousands if you add local milita action and wars like Sudan or Nigeria to it. The record fills books.

Now consider the misery of the uncountable number of case of home-grown violence practiced in the name of Islam.
Globally, I think it is safe to say you here talk about millions.

Consider the status of females in Islam.

Now compare to how many Muslims get assassinated and become victims of progroms in Western coutnries, or get legally discriminated and denied human rights, or get betrayed at courts? Congrats if you fill even one leaf of paper. When somebody eats a pork sandwich in the presence of a Muslim who take soffence from the sight, it probbaly makes it into the headline sof next day'S papers. But if Christains get thrown urine and bood bags at, or get massacred inside a church and get slauhgtered by the hundreds and thousands by "Islamists" - then there is a revealing silence in the media. Mind you, in the EU, criticising Islam and religion now is a crime of discrimination which can bring you to court. We even have started to turn churches into mosques. Propose that the other way around - and you will have immediate hysteric outcry by the ummah world-wide. Show a cartoon, and good ol ummah explodes and threatens terror and violence.

Lovely.

So save me about the sins our ancestors did many centuries ago. Start to care for the same bloody sins Islam still commits on this very present day. It does so without feeling any remorse and without haviung a bad conscience or a feeling of guilt, instead it celebrates that it acts accpordsing to its holy scvriptures. While we feel endlessly sorry and have still a bad conscience for bad things of the distant past.

We now know where our history shows mistakes, and where things went bad. Islam does not, and continues to oush such things.

And just for the record: in the bgeining,m the crusades were a miliztary defencise repsonse in an attempt to take back own land that before was taken ab an aggressive invader who wages wars of attack agaiunst Byzantine (amongst man other places), and later Jerusalem and the masochistically so-called "Holy Land". Mind you, these lands were not Islamic at all, and were coinqwuered by Islamic armies. The early crusades tried to take them back. Not before later, they degenerated into greedy adventures of noble men trying to win welath and land and power for their own well-being, bypassing the original cause that launched the first crusades. - Islam was the original attacker, the agressor. Not the crusaders. It had conquered the North of Africa in maretial cionquest. It took Persia and destroyed it in maretial cionquest. It invaded India in martial conquest.

And later, it initiated trade slaving as well, which again is no North-American invention. North America only made use of the offer, later banned slavery. But certain Islamic countries practice slave trading and slavery until today.

I say again: compare the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, with the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam. And then read a bit about Shariah law, so to be able to see what barbarism that Cairo declaration indeed wants to declare as obligatory for all mankind, Muslim and dhimmis, harbis and mustamins alike.

[Codz]

I know that religion can be used to commit the most brutal of crimes against humanity. It has been used to suppress science, technology, and basic human rights. Believe me, I know how horrendous religion can be when it's in a position of power. In particular Christianity and Islam. However, I am not going to hate an entire group of millions of people because of it. I will fight for their right to believe what they want, just like I'd fight to protect my right to atheism or a Christian's right to his beliefs. I draw the line when their beliefs try to trample other people's rights and impede social and scientific progress though. Secularism is the way to go in all politics.

[Skybird]

I know that religion can be used to commit the most brutal of crimes against humanity. It has been used to suppress science, technology, and basic human rights. Believe me, I know how horrendous religion can be when it's in a position of power. In particular Christianity and Islam. However, I am not going to hate an entire group of millions of people because of it. I will fight for their right to believe what they want, just like I'd fight to protect my right to atheism or a Christian's right to his beliefs. I draw the line when their beliefs try to trample other people's rights and impede social and scientific progress though. Secularism is the way to go in all politics.
I noticed that although your forefathers have suffered hundreds of thousands of losses in the war against nationalsocialism and fascism which are responsible for the slaughtering of so many more, you today still want these to have the freedom to spread their ideologies, to influence people and to infest their minbds until today, calling that freedom of speech. Well, When the negative nature of something is beyond doubt and has been clearly demonstrated and provenm by history, I have a problem with that. To me it then is not an honourable goal, thnat freedom for the evil, but it is the refusal of learning from history, and dancing on the graves of one's own forefathers.

Religions are ideologies. Ideologies influence the mind, that's what they are there for. Even when aking into account that chiuldren are helpless regharding to what they get exposed to in ideological in fluence when they cannot independently think and choose themselves, I still in general hold people responsible for their choices, and I hold the cultural sphere influenced by an ideology as responsible for that. In other words, I call said ideology by its name and by its content and features. It is possible that I end with results that make me concluding that I cannot tolerate these ideologies without violating my own moral values and ethical principles - or where myself or my liberal free society cannot tolerate these ideolgies without submission and/or self-destruction (which in Islamic history shows to be the same, its denial of history and destruction of according evidence and manfestations, is monumental and one of the biggest problems - it nevertheless is a wanted design feature, for it results in totalitarian unity, control and power).

The empirical record of relgiuously motivated "misdeeds" by Islam against infidels, and accordings misdeeds by Jews or Christains again st Muslims, speaks volumnes. It ridicules every intention to seriousl compare it.

We have leanbred from the relgious tyranny we once had, and we show insight enough to demosntrate a bad conscienc eover past sins of pout forefathers. We do not do like back then anymore. But Islam did not follow that path, but acts and is motivated as if this still were the darkest medieval.

Be careful with what you tolerate. Even tolerance should know limits. Else it destroys you, the intolerant consumes you - and with you your precious tolerance as well.

You said it yourself at the end: secularism. Ther eis just one problem: the very design of Islam is absolutely and totally against secularism. The hand that holds the relgious authority is the same hand that weilds poltical power, you cannot separate the two in islam, it is impossible. Some authors call it the "monolithic" nature of Islam, they mean right this. It is not two things being separated. It is just one.

[Catfish]

Hello,

@ Neal: "Bush and Obama"
(Well it was't so hard indeed :hmmm: )
:salute::D

We had that discussion before, if in another forum worlds apart. The jewish approach was that jewish religion, just like christianity, has sooner or later drawn a line on how to interprete their holy scripts, and have then had some kind of reformation - something Islam does not seem to have done yet (?) - i may be wrong though.
Even then jewish extremists may well live under their explanation of the Thora, rejecting any progress that has been made by the official Rabbis, just like some christians ..

Anyway, the separation between religion and state is the only way to go. You need religion-independent law, otherwise the religious sub-groups in a state will never stop to harass each other. Even in India with its larger groups of muslims and Hindi, there are clashes all the time, also against christian minorities.

WHat i consider to be starnge is that jews and christians did live well under the reign of some Saladin long ago, even if the foregone fights for Jerusalem were hard to say at least.

[Skybird]

WHat i consider to be starnge is that jews and christians did live well under the reign of some Saladin long ago, even if the foregone fights for Jerusalem were hard to say at least.
Christians and Jews are living , as people of the book, as people of second class under Islamic rule, they have no equal rights, but - by Quranic demand and Sharia rule! - must be discriminated and persecuted, to make them feel infeiror to Muslims (so the demand!) and make them feel sorry for not converting to Islam, which is the final goal anyway. All other people, atheists, believers of others faiths, MUST BE KILLED. Saladin was a ruler with iron fist, eh is repsomnsoible for having death-senbtenced several of the most promising mystiocs and possible reformistic minds of his times. His grave has an inscripture, saying "He cleaned Earth from the dirt of the infidel". You also may want to check his record during the conquest of the city Tiberias, where he raised a bounty after having captured the city, a bounty for every Chgristian brpought to him. The city got almost emptied, and the prisoners got executed by Saldin'S followers, in his presence. And before Richard arriovbed in the holy land, and Saladsin still was in service of a local king, he defated a French army and took many noble men and princes as prisoners. But he refused to follow the habit of that time to trade them for a ransom. He executed them all, sending a message of terror back to Europe. That was before Jerusalem fell to the Muslims. Later, when Richard Lionheart moved to Jerusalem, he also took a huge number of prisoners, I think that was at Akkon. And he also executed them. But there is a difference. Richard had extremely short supllies and extremely long supply lines (to Europe), and he was pushing on the offmnse against Saladin in Jeruslem. Leaving priopsner behind would have needed knights of his to guard them, it would have limited if resources in food and water even more, and it would have left him with a poential enemy amry in his rear if the prisoners mamanged to break out and overwhelm the guards. Richard had a military reason. Saladin had not. He was superior in numbers, had full supply and short supply lines, and was just one or two days on horse away from the kingdom in the North for whose king he had commended that battle.

In Islam, tough rulers are not only forgiven when ruling with iron fists and supressing the people, they are also admired. As long as they can make the people beleive thgat they do it on behalf of Allah and Islam, it is okay. You see that pattern being reapeted throughout history.

It is also a form of Islamic interpretation of Darwinistic selection that should help to keep Islam and Muslims strong.

So, there are many romanticisng myths about Saladin her ein the West, just think of Lessing'S Nathan der Weise. boltaire also once admired Islam and Saladion, Goethe also had a transfugured image of Islam. But Voltaire at least was smart enough to finally realise that he was wring and what a minster this islam really is. He then turned into a bitter critic and enemy of Islam. Goethe and Lessing died in blindness over it.

Well, I know wait that somebody tries to transfigure islam again by painting the picture of the so-called bright times in Grenada during the Caliphate. We then can have a closer look at the repressions and discrimination Jews and Christians were object of. Grenada , beside Saladin, also is one of these massively distorted propaganda stories being told.

Islam knows no equals to itself, and no equal rights for others. That si somethign that many Wetserners - and also some well-meaning socalled Muslims - do not want to understand and although it is in their very basic fundament of scripture itself. And Saladin? Was a tyrant with an iron fist. That simple. Ridley Scott painted him quite heroic in his movie because he wanted to avoid assassination threats agaiunst the project and his staff, and becasue he needed the permission by the king of Marocco to film on location in his country. I like the director's cut of Kingdom of Heaven. But I keep in mind that the Saladin as depicted in that movie has little in common with the historcial figure of Saladin.

[MH]

WHat i consider to be starnge is that jews and christians did live well under the reign of some Saladin long ago, even if the foregone fights for Jerusalem were hard to say at least.

The western liberal culture is much more of a threat to Islam than other religions.
Jews or Christians under Muslims possibly tolerating each other is irrelevant but i can easily imagine orthodox Jews flourish in Islamastan.
Yet i would have to be careful about this assumption due to years of political indoctrination ME went through.
Again it is irrelevant because that is not the issue the issue is who dominates the holly places and incompatibility of western way of life.

[Codz]

I would never want to try and limit another person's freedom of speech and expression. It isn't what the United States stands for and it isn't what I stand for. Like I said, a line can be drawn when they start infringing on other's freedoms and rights.

[19Herr_Rapp86]

Hmmmm..... I think I'm gonna puke... This entire thread misses the point... I'm an Iraq vet. A U.S. Marine. (Those who hate, go ahead and spit, say your insults, etc. You won't break me. I promise. I'm a gruff, grumpy, tough SOB that eats petroleum jelly for breakfast and craps napalm. I'm the most Oohrah, patriotic, Ultra Right Winged conservative Jeffersonian American I know. Give me your worst, America haters...) All this argument over war and what-not. All the bad things being done. Collateral damages, etc. etc. Not a single person in this thread has mentioned something I witnessed firsthand in Iraq.. That I was part of. That I participated in. Were there WMD's in Iraq? Don't know... Don't care.. Was there oil in Iraq? Sure. Lots. But for a war for oil as the left proclaimed it, me being an infantryman on the frontline during the height of the war, never saw a single oil well, never saw trucks of barrels being sent for shipping to the Homeland, never saw any of the crap the American-hating leftist said was going on. Never had to stand guard on an oil well one. I'll tell you a little bit about what I did have to do though. We're a humanitarian nation. Yeah, hard to believe with all the law breaking anti geneva drone strikes going on. For those who didn't catch the sarcasm on that comment forgive me. I guess my aggressive don't give a crap about your whining and complaining in your face attitude got in my way. What I did in Iraq was kind of an odd job for infantry. I guarded hospitals so that medical supplies coming from America, much more advanced than what the Iraqi's had, would get to the sick, wounded, and dying, not Americans, but Iraqi citizens, unmolested. My unit helped build schools. We built like 10 new schools in my 18 months of being deployed. Didn't take oil as payment either. America covered it all. Liberals, here's where you whine about American tax dollars... that's your cue. I guarded schools so the children could get there education without fear. My unit killed/captured 120 KNOWN, not SUSPECTED terrorists, including a man that frequently visited Bin Laden himself. We trucked in food and water by the tons. Built water purification plants by the Euphrates river. Guarded farms and businesses vital to the economy of Iraq. I can't count off the top of my head the number of Iraqi citizens who came up to us to give us hugs, kiss our hands, thank us for coming to "Iraq's Rescue" as they called. Had soccer games with the local children. That was fun stuff. I love how all you see is the negatives. And how willing people are to point them out, especially if it's my America on the subject. Nobody takes the time to think about all the good we do in the world. We're hated by most and criticized and cussed by all. I just love it... All the billions in aide we give out... All the work we do to set people free. All the work we do to try, not successfully all the time, but try to make peoples lives better. How we've integrated our powerful economy into the world by sending our businesses abroad to try and boost the economies of other nations. All the good gets overlooked and it all comes down to whether or not some unmanned radio controlled aircraft bombing some poor sucker who is working with/harboring people that threaten the stability of the world is right or wrong, or legal or whatever. I also lost brothers over there to this 'asymmetrical' war or whatever you want to call it. And they weren't lost to a worthless cause as some of you would put it. Its the cause of freedom. I guess in our lives of luxury though, we've forgotten about that word. Where people are being trampled on (Saddam gassed the Kurds, tried to exterminate them, and invaded Kuwait, along with all the other crap on his rap sheet that's forgotten about) America is there. Ask most of Europe about it. Better yet, don't. Not like they remember, or care. If it weren't for us half the world would be speaking German. Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq, Lybia, and in Lady Liberties crosshairs right now, Iran, China, and Syria. Where tyranny runs rampant... Believe me, America always has, and will always be there. All this "undeclared war", "War on Terror was wrong" stuff makes me sick to my stomach.

[Codz]

We get most of our oil from ourselves, Canada, and South America. That's essentially where the "War for Oil" argument falls apart.

[Skybird]

Hmmmm..... I think I'm gonna puke... This entire thread misses the point... I'm an Iraq vet. A U.S. Marine. (Those who hate, go ahead and spit, say your insults, etc. You won't break me. I promise. I'm a gruff, grumpy, tough SOB that eats petroleum jelly for breakfast and craps napalm. I'm the most Oohrah, patriotic, Ultra Right Winged conservative Jeffersonian American I know. Give me your worst, America haters...) All this argument over war and what-not. All the bad things being done. Collateral damages, etc. etc. Not a single person in this thread has mentioned something I witnessed firsthand in Iraq.. That I was part of. That I participated in. Were there WMD's in Iraq? Don't know... Don't care.. Was there oil in Iraq? Sure. Lots. But for a war for oil as the left proclaimed it, me being an infantryman on the frontline during the height of the war, never saw a single oil well, never saw trucks of barrels being sent for shipping to the Homeland, never saw any of the crap the American-hating leftist said was going on. Never had to stand guard on an oil well one. I'll tell you a little bit about what I did have to do though. We're a humanitarian nation. Yeah, hard to believe with all the law breaking anti geneva drone strikes going on. For those who didn't catch the sarcasm on that comment forgive me. I guess my aggressive don't give a crap about your whining and complaining in your face attitude got in my way. What I did in Iraq was kind of an odd job for infantry. I guarded hospitals so that medical supplies coming from America, much more advanced than what the Iraqi's had, would get to the sick, wounded, and dying, not Americans, but Iraqi citizens, unmolested. My unit helped build schools. We built like 10 new schools in my 18 months of being deployed. Didn't take oil as payment either. America covered it all. Liberals, here's where you whine about American tax dollars... that's your cue. I guarded schools so the children could get there education without fear. My unit killed/captured 120 KNOWN, not SUSPECTED terrorists, including a man that frequently visited Bin Laden himself. We trucked in food and water by the tons. Built water purification plants by the Euphrates river. Guarded farms and businesses vital to the economy of Iraq. I can't count off the top of my head the number of Iraqi citizens who came up to us to give us hugs, kiss our hands, thank us for coming to "Iraq's Rescue" as they called. Had soccer games with the local children. That was fun stuff. I love how all you see is the negatives. And how willing people are to point them out, especially if it's my America on the subject. Nobody takes the time to think about all the good we do in the world. We're hated by most and criticized and cussed by all. I just love it... All the billions in aide we give out... All the work we do to set people free. All the work we do to try, not successfully all the time, but try to make peoples lives better. How we've integrated our powerful economy into the world by sending our businesses abroad to try and boost the economies of other nations. All the good gets overlooked and it all comes down to whether or not some unmanned radio controlled aircraft bombing some poor sucker who is working with/harboring people that threaten the stability of the world is right or wrong, or legal or whatever. I also lost brothers over there to this 'asymmetrical' war or whatever you want to call it. And they weren't lost to a worthless cause as some of you would put it. Its the cause of freedom. I guess in our lives of luxury though, we've forgotten about that word. Where people are being trampled on (Saddam gassed the Kurds, tried to exterminate them, and invaded Kuwait, along with all the other crap on his rap sheet that's forgotten about) America is there. Ask most of Europe about it. Better yet, don't. Not like they remember, or care. If it weren't for us half the world would be speaking German. Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq, Lybia, and in Lady Liberties crosshairs right now, Iran, China, and Syria. Where tyranny runs rampant... Believe me, America always has, and will always be there. All this "undeclared war", "War on Terror was wrong" stuff makes me sick to my stomach.
It seems we do not really disagree that much, but see some thinmgs, some longterm perspectives differently. I do not want to fight with you over your post, for it does not really "trigger" me. It is okay what you say. But two things I want to remakr, even if that makes you thinking I am one of those left America-haters. You mentioned oil, and not having seen it being dsriven out of the country in bottles and barrells. Well, I do not even fall back to the obvious joke that today there are pipeleines, but I tell you this: that you see no cash money rolling on the desk when you pay by credit card, does not mean that there is no financial value changing hands. The Iraq war was about gaining control over the opil business, the adminsitration, the contract singing, the stratgeic partnering with customer. It was not about filling oil in bottles and silkently brining it out of the country. It was about gaining in fluence ion the business management, so that one is able to influence the oil flow patterns of ther world. That is how the "theft" was done - or was intended to be done, for it is obvious that something went wrong. And you are right, this is something that yiu indeed do not see when patrolling in the streets or laying at the frontline.

Second, the good thing sbeing done. Well, yes, no doubt about that. Question is - did it last? Will it last? Can it last? Or was it just a one fata morgana that disappears once the sun set? After the Taliban initially were driven out of Afghanistan, there was much reporting about the women now wearing no headscarfs and veils in Kabul'S street anymore, and schools and wells and all that. Not even two years latere, women again moved around in burkhas. News from today: a women that got raped got shot by Taliban in the streets, an execution in front of 150 men who were cheering and celebrating the event. Most schools in afghanistan today have been closed again, the fear or Taliban revenge is too high. And Iraq: the giovenrment is as corrupt as was Saddam. There are secret police and assassination squads again, almost as intense as under Saddam. There is plenty of torturing going on. The ethnic tensions and discriminations lead to much violence. Crime rate is higher than under Saddam.

This you did not mention.

So I wonder how much of what you described in imporvements is to live beyond the end of the day. Or is it for you the motto of "Even if hope lived for just one day, it nevertheless has lived"?

I'm asking you this not becasue you were or are a marine and American (? are you?), but becasue I always ask this -. also regarding the Germn soldiers sending from afghanistan the same kind of reprtts as you just gave: that so much wellmeaning good things got done, and thgat one just needs more time, and that the mission is not completed, and more good things got done this day, and... and... and... To me, that is avoiding acceptance of a mission failed, sorry. Maybe for Afghanistan that is more obvious a mission result than in Iraq. But to be honest, I rate Iraq also as a mission failed. Okay, Saddam is dead. Nice. With Saddam, Iraq was more predictable, more stable, Iran was weaker in influence, and we were better off. Tarik Aziz said after his arrest that there would come a day when Western strategists would miss Saddam. Well, I missed him already on the day when Aziz said that. He was right.

I assume for a vet having fought in said wars, having seen sacrifces by comrades and efforts being done, this must be hard to accept, and that may be the reason why so many soldiers find it difficult to see the bad longterm consequences and stay fixiated on the good subjective personal experience of theirs. But I cannot help it: to me it is a form of reality denial.

Again, no personal attack intended, no fight desired.

[Skybird]

We get most of our oil from ourselves, Canada, and South America. That's essentially where the "War for Oil" argument falls apart.
Yopu still make money by global oil sales, no matter where in the worlkd, and the dollar still is the currency of oil. And you can gain more money by it when influencing trafficking schemes and contracts accordingly. You can also imporve yoiur global strategic position - against those buying poil from Iraq - by being able to have influence in Iraqi opil business. That is what it was about. Not stealing oil in bottles and smuggling it out of the country.

Don'T dare to imagine what it means to your already disastrous finances when oil producers refuse to do their deals in dollars anymore. OPEC has a formidable Ace in its deck there.

[Skybird]

I would never want to try and limit another person's freedom of speech and expression. It isn't what the United States stands for and it isn't what I stand for. Like I said, a line can be drawn when they start infringing on other's freedoms and rights.

Well, shall it be now? Both statements are mutually exclusive.

And I still cannot see any argument why an ideology that has been proven by history beyond any doubt to be evil and wicked, inhumane, brutal and murderous, why that ideology again is being given space to unfold, grow strong, and cause another giant massacre maybe. Was 60 million dead the last time not enough? Is there still the benefit of doubt for the perpetrator?

Well, not for me. Ban Nazis, smack Nazi, crack down on them and leave them no room to move and no air to breath. But today, America is home to the biggest and richest and most influential Nazi organizations in the world. Not Germany. Not Europe.

America.

300,000 killed GIs turn in their graves.

[Tribesman]

Well, not for me. Ban Nazis, smack Nazi, crack down on them and leave them no room to move and no air to breath.
I take the other view give them plenty of room and publicity and let themselves show very openly what they are so no one can have any doubt about the nature of the scum.



Two small things 19Herr, that crap rap sheet you think people have forgotten about, you seem to forget that he was your buddy back then when he was piling the crap on his sheet.
But thank you for enlightening me, I had never realised that handing Iraq over to the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution and its Iranian friends from the theocracy was striking a blow for freedom, I humbly thank you for showing me the truth of your speading freedom as until I read your words I had thought you just handed the country to some fundamentalist nuts of the shia persuation.

All this "undeclared war", "War on Terror was wrong" stuff makes me sick to my stomach.
That is not surprising, your stomach must really churn so you can still keep down the rubbish you swallowed.
Perhaps it would be easier for you to avoid the sickness feeling if you finally seperated Iraq from the "war on terror".

[Catfish]

Hello,
i think your post, MrRapp, was a a good one. It just needs to be talked about more often. I am sure the civilians you met and the schools you built along with helping wounded in hospitals gave a good and shining example (no joke meant), and the people were indeed thankful.
This is unfortunately NOT what we usually see and hear about in the media, including Fox News.

It is not about left or right now.
But it was during the US interventions in middle and south America, especially 9/11 1973 in Argentina, and it is from this time the USA still has its image. "Lest we forget" is also a motto in other nations, worldwide.

I do not doubt the good intentions and what you and others did there - also Iraqis were not quite so badly misled by religious and anti-american propaganda under Saddam, like it was and is done in other countries being ruled by dictatorships being disguised as religious leaders. Saddam with his own dictatorship had been supported with money and weapons for decades, by the US and others, indeed by almost all western nations.

Iraq was attacked because Saddam had turned against the Saudis, and while all western nations agreed with Saddam to attack all his other neighbours (especially Iran) all the time, the milk turned sour with his attacks against the Saudis and their oil. I still do not know what he had in mind, did he think he could remove the Saudi regime and help so the US ?
And let's not talk about Halliburton and influential lobbies seeing their investments in danger.

However it always depends on the people doing the field work, and if your detachment impressed the locals in a positive way, this will probably do more for a better relationship than any political dodge, in the long run. Good will is always being remembered.
And you did something there, which is more than most people here can probably say.


What do you think went wrong in Iraq, or in Afghanistan now ? Should we have stayed after all, for the population, or for resources ?
Imho we cannot beat decades of indoctrination and propaganda by some few years of presence. If we leave too early we let them have their way, again.

[Codz]

Well, shall it be now? Both statements are mutually exclusive.

And I still cannot see any argument why an ideology that has been proven by history beyond any doubt to be evil and wicked, inhumane, brutal and murderous, why that ideology again is being given space to unfold, grow strong, and cause another giant massacre maybe. Was 60 million dead the last time not enough? Is there still the benefit of doubt for the perpetrator?

Your ignorance groups millions of people as murderous psychopaths so easily. I refuse to limit millions of people's religious rights for your paranoia. I am an atheist, yet I can find room to be tolerant of Muslims, Christians, Jews, etc. Being tolerant doesn't mean letting extremists impose their beliefs and practices on the unwilling, however. You wanting to censor their religious beliefs is no different than them being allowed to impose their will on us. You act like if they are allowed to freely practice their religion, then they are free to also practice their laws and suppresion. This would not happen because the Federal law of the US surpasses any other authority, religious or otherwise. The Federal law of the US is also, by definition, secular. If they try to break US law in some way, then throw them in prison for that, not for what deity they choose to worship.

Well, not for me. Ban Nazis, smack Nazi, crack down on them and leave them no room to move and no air to breath. But today, America is home to the biggest and richest and most influential Nazi organizations in the world. Not Germany. Not Europe.

America.

300,000 killed GIs turn in their graves.


Yet still they still have absolutely no power in government and are a laughing stock for the general public. Free speech is one of the many things that separates us from the Nazi regime. By limiting that, you draw one step closer to them. It also gives them a fee card to act and feel "oppressed". That could draw sympathy for them. I'd prefer to let history speak for itself than to censor out the negative aspects.

[Morts]

Your ignorance groups millions of people as murderous psychopaths so easily. I refuse to limit millions of people's religious rights for your paranoia
Give it up, when it comes skybird and muslims, he is a lost cause, not open to anything other than his own close minded opinion.
And dont bother replying to me skybird, i dont read your paranoid rants about muslims.

[Skybird]

Your ignorance groups millions of people as murderous psychopaths so easily. I refuse to limit millions of people's religious rights for your paranoia.
:nope: Nazism is no religion. Nor am I paranoid regarding Nazism. The evil nature of it is not my personal mental disease, but proven historical fact.


Yet still they still have absolutely no power in government and are a laughing stock for the general public. Free speech is one of the many things that separates us from the Nazi regime. By limiting that, you draw one step closer to them. It also gives them a fee card to act and feel "oppressed". That could draw sympathy for them. I'd prefer to let history speak for itself than to censor out the negative aspects.

History has spoken. And the dead roll in their graves that you let the cause of their death still move freely. Why have your forefathers even fought against Nazism ion the first, then. What have they died for? Why was the Third Reich crushed in the first, then?

[Skybird]

Give it up, when it comes skybird and muslims, he is a lost cause, not open to anything other than his own close minded opinion.
And dont bother replying to me skybird, i dont read your paranoid rants about muslims.
And why should I, I have given up on you, when it comes to you and Islam, you are a lost cause, not open to anything other than your own close minded opinion. And don't bother replying to me morts, I don't read your islamophile glossings of islam.

[19Herr_Rapp86]

That is not surprising, your stomach must really churn so you can still keep down the rubbish you swallowed.
Perhaps it would be easier for you to avoid the sickness feeling if you finally seperated Iraq from the "war on terror"

It wasn't a war on terror? That's news to me. Seeing Zarqawi worked for Al Qaeda, among many others. And as for handing the country over to Islamic revolutionaries and Iran or whatever the hell else you spewed... Guess you don't own a globe? Look what is in the middle of Iraq and Afghanistan. I wonder what borders those two countries with, those two countries with a large amount of American troops, equipment, bases, and airfields.... Hmmmm... If only I had a map....

[Skybird]

It wasn't a war on terror? That's news to me. Seeing Zarqawi worked for Al Qaeda, among many others. And as for handing the country over to Islamic revolutionaries and Iran or whatever the hell else you spewed... Guess you don't own a globe? Look what is in the middle of Iraq and Afghanistan. I wonder what borders those two countries with, those two countries with a large amount of American troops, equipment, bases, and airfields.... Hmmmm... If only I had a map....
Afghanistan was a reaction to 9/11, Iraq was not: Iraq war was planned written by Wolfowitz ten years before the war, and before Clinton took office. When Bush became president, that plan was taken out of the drawer where it was parked for wintersleep during Clinton's years.

Al Quaeda had no links to Saddam, and Saddam had no links to Al Quaeda. That is noi surprise, becasue both were natural enemies indeed, for Saddam represented - like the Saudi regime - what Bin Laden called to fight against in corrupted Islamic regimes. There was a short sniffing between the two at some time, followed by the disillusioned conclusion that they still did not love each other at all. Iraq has had no hands in 9/11. Saudi Arabia did, the one with which the Bush clan is so very close befriended with. So close that representatives from Saudi Arabia who were guests of the Bushs at the time the towers got hit, were helped by the Bushs to leave the country before the FBI could question them.

"War on terror", is a war against wepaons and tools, "terror" in this case. Would you say WWII was a war against submarines? Tanks? Planes? Hardly. I assume you still would prefer to say that WWII was a war against the Third Reich and Imperial Japan, who both made use of these weapons and tools. The issue thus is who makes use of the tool of terror, for what reason, what is he motivated by: this somebody is who the war is on. The answer is: Islamic ideology, the demands of Quran and Sharia for superior reign of Islam over all world, Bin Laden's declaration of war against the corrupted Saudi elite and the big Satan, America.

Afghanistan gets destabilised by Pakistan that wants to improve its position against a possible war with India. It also gets destablised by Iran that wants it because the US wanted it. Iraq gets destablised by inner ethnical hate, and a power struggle between Shias and Sunnis, Iran and Saudi Arabia, Kurds in the North and any central government, and thus Turkey that does not want a strong Turkish faction in Iraq. The big winner in this game is Iran.

The formal excuse that the government gave to the public over launchign an attack on Iraq was that it had biological and nuclear wepaons of mass destruction, it was said: "We know they have them and we know where they are." Original quote end. But as I said, the war was planned and accepted by the socalled Neocons already a decade before that - when WMD and war on terror had nothing, absolutely nothing to do with it. When WMD were not found, we have seen a series of repalcmeent ecuses being tried, who also did not hold theirt ground. It finally ended with something "But we killed Saddam, isn't that not already reason enough?" - Sorry. There is a difference between a reason, and an excuse made in order to get away with it.

The strategic power balance has shifted in the region, against the US and in favour of Iran. The US military'S reputation suffered dearly, so did the prestige of the US, with its nimbus of being "invincible" (especially after Iraq 92) neutralised.

The longterm benefit will be earned by Iran, Iran and then by Iran again. Iran is the big winner. And they know it.

So, two lost wars later: was it worth it? My answer is a clear No.

And Afghanistan: when the Soviets were fought by the Taliban back then, they got support from Islamic legionaires from other countries, the socalled Green Legion. Afghjnais did not like them for the most. However, Legionaires, Taliban and fighters from othe rfactions all said that now they fight to overturn the Russians, and tomorrow the whole world. Today, Taliban spokesman say the same again, that the fight is about bringing Islam to all the world.

Well. Hallelujah.

[Codz]

:nope: Nazism is no religion. Nor am I paranoid regarding Nazism. The evil nature of it is not my personal mental disease, but proven historical fact.

I was referring to Islam.

History has spoken. And the dead roll in their graves that you let the cause of their death still move freely. Why have your forefathers even fought against Nazism ion the first, then. What have they died for? Why was the Third Reich crushed in the first, then?

They have no power here, or in any other major western country! You can't arrest someone just because they believe in a bad political party. If they commit a crime against a Jew or a communist or whoever the neo-Nazis currently spew their hatred toward, then they'll go to prison for that. Censorship will just garner them more sympathy. I am certainly not pro-Nazi, but I am also not pro-censorship either. After what happened in the Second World War, they have no chance of ever gaining serious support in any major country ever again.

[Catfish]

I do not really believe that Iran will be the winner, after all.
certainly not the people in short terms, but also not the religious leaders in long terms.

As it was said before (by MH ?) seeing the western techniques and freedom, the "religious" leaders (indeed it is all about power, and the best religious pretext is just an excuse for poor dictatorship) will have a hard time to sweep it all under the carpet, with mobile phones with cameras, internet and seeing what happened in Libya, Egypt, and now in Syria.

@Skybird i'd propose to just talk to some "islamists", or better just people living in Germany as muslims and not being religiously or otherwise radical in any respect. There should be enough in Berlin to ask or talk to.

[Skybird]

I was referring to Islam.
You answered directly to a paragraph that was about Nazism. Why you did that then I cannot see.


They have no power here, or in any other major western country!
I see. Their freedom only must be cut after another world war being waged that showed their ideology spelling disaster. No lesson learned from WWII. Let the same barbaric thinking breath and bloom again.

[Skybird]

I do not really believe that Iran will be the winner, after all.
They already are. They have both hands plunged into Iraqi politics now. Al-Sadr represents Iranian interests and influence, too. Persians are Shias. The Iraqi Shias differ from them since they are more following Arab Shia tradition (different than Persian Shia tradition), but still - ther eis ties forming up.


certainly not the people in short terms, but also not the religious leaders in long terms.
Since when is powerpolitics about the interest of the people...? The rift between Sunni and Shia branches nevertheless remain, and so does the faceoff Saudi-Arabia versus Iran


As it was said before (by MH ?) seeing the western techniques and freedom, the "religious" leaders (indeed it is all about power, and the best religious pretext is just an excuse for poor dictatorship) will have a hard time to sweep it all under the carpet, with mobile phones with cameras, internet and seeing what happened in Libya, Egypt, and now in Syria.
How many times have we heared that in the poast ten years now? Concerning Afghanistan? Pakistan? Tunisia? Egypt? Kuwait? Libya? And where tough regimes do not stay in control, new theocratiuc regimes get voted for in free democratic elections.

Nice.


@Skybird i'd propose to just talk to some "islamists", or better just people living in Germany as muslims and not being religiously or otherwise radical in any respect. There should be enough in Berlin to ask or talk to.

I have been in Muslim countries for much longer than one year, mainly Iran and Turkey, and for short times in some more, and I have spoken to German Muslims also - true Muslims and "fake" (="moderate")-Muslims who indeed already were apostates but did not confess to that. I also talked two guys so much into doubt that they took the courage and strength to stand up against their families and left Islam - at tragically high costs for them, and greta risk for their health and life. They are apostates now, but they have lost their families. I have been part of a Bürgerinitiative that confronted a Muslim fraudery over a mosque-increasing project next to the place I live here and we managed to prevent it at court and to reveal it as an act of fraud over forged contracts. I have been told to the face that of course they lied, else they would not have gotten what they wanted, our chairman got beaten up on the street, his wife mobbed repeatedly, and they finally fled from the city. I have gotten paper-letters with threads of murder. The police refused to take them seriousl, instead threatening ME with investigations by the BKA against ME.

What was it you wanted to tell me about "speaking to Muslims?"

It'S the ideology. It'S the regional patriarchalic culture. What some Muslim says, does not chnage that. Can you imagine how often someobdy in thos forum told me in the past ten years "Hey, but I know a friendly Muslim who lives in the flat at the end of my floor"? Can you imagine how tiresome it is that one refers to ideology, or history, or content of religious law - and gets met by a superficial reply like this? "I know somebody who lives down the floor, and I like him."

Well. Fine. Nice. I'm not impressed. I drank tea in houses of Muslim hosts inj Turkey and Iran and was treated very nicely in Iran (mostly), and polite but ery cold in Turkey (mostly). And one minute lkater I got told how proud I should be that my German people have killed so many Jews. Or that aid of a mullah in Teheran that my boss back then interviewed in another hall. We sat on the balcony, and he asked me about myself and back then I still was wearing that stupid stamp on my forehead "Buddhist", and he jzust nodded and did noit eat me alive. He then reflected nicely about joy and freedom and the meaning of life in Islam - and how good it serves a man'
s chance for later entering paradise if he bans the evil in women by whipping them frequently. Nice!

Again refer you - all - to comparing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam. If then you think that terms like freedom and tolerance have the same meaning in Islam as in our culture, I cannot help you.

Wait, you are lucky, you speak German. In German I have a link for such a comparison at hand:
http://www.citizentimes.eu/2012/03/20/menschenrechte-im-islam/

Say good-bye to free speech, free opinion, humanism, equal rights, equality for women. The flag of the prophet must fly above everything.

[Tribesman]

It wasn't a war on terror? That's news to me.
Obviously.:yawn:
Seeing Zarqawi worked for Al Qaeda, among many others.
Times and dates young man, preferably with the conflict of your choice being the key measure so they can be slightly relevant.
But please don't relate the tale of the one legged terrorist you couldn't find even though he was a "KNOWN not SUSPECTED terrorist"

And as for handing the country over to Islamic revolutionaries and Iran or whatever the hell else you spewed...
Simple stuff isn't it.
You do know who the goverment is and you do know where they were based and you do know that the Obama rejected the Sofa agreement because SCIRI handed the negotiations over to Iran for agreement.
Did someone mention sarcasm?:woot:

Guess you don't own a globe?
Old ones or new ones?

Look what is in the middle of Iraq and Afghanistan.
Exactly, a crazy persian shia theocracy with a saudi funded pashtun sunni fundamentalist nutjob on one side and a sunni arab nationalist dictatorship on the other side with a side order of nuclear armed sunni nuts on the south east side and some sunnii turkoman nationalists for good measure to seal the deal in the north
Did you just look at the pretty colours on your globe?

I wonder what borders those two countries with, those two countries with a large amount of American troops, equipment, bases, and airfields.... Hmmmm... If only I had a map....
If only:doh:
Maybe you should count another border, one of your allies who is happy to slaughter those kurds you think people don't know about:yep:and that happens to be the only border where you have relatively safe bases.
It seems you are well out of your depth

I must say though, I am almost amazed that you manage to introduce all these angles into an almost entirely unrelated topic, it does suggest that the mess that was Iraq has problems settling in your stomach and causing you problems of a digestive nature, but its Ok I think most people understand that and will treat you gently like I have.

[19Herr_Rapp86]

Times and dates young man, preferably with the conflict of your choice being the key measure so they can be slightly relevant.
But please don't relate the tale of the one legged terrorist you couldn't find even though he was a "KNOWN not SUSPECTED terrorist"

So.... we couldn't find him... Hmmm.... He's dead... via a US bomb... Moot point, Tribesman. Times and dates, sonny! No one said a war against a faceless enemy would be a quick or easy one. Ask Bin Laden about that. Oh wait, you can't. Found him too. Go pick your potatoes Irishman.


Simple stuff isn't it.
You do know who the goverment is and you do know where they were based and you do know that the Obama rejected the Sofa agreement because SCIRI handed the negotiations over to Iran for agreement.
Did someone mention sarcasm?:woot:

Don't care. My point is there is US equipment there now and Iran is staring down the barrel of it. Go pick your potatoes, Irishman.


Old ones or new ones?
Any. Not my fault you failed geography. Go pick your potatoes.


Exactly, a crazy persian shia theocracy with a saudi funded pashtun sunni fundamentalist nutjob on one side and a sunni arab nationalist dictatorship on the other side with a side order of nuclear armed sunni nuts on the south east side and some sunnii turkoman nationalists for good measure to seal the deal in the north
Did you just look at the pretty colours on your globe?
Still missing the point. All this American military equipment, and all those troops getting bored, just waiting for something to attack, sitting on the Iranian border. You know what to do, Irishman.


If only:doh:
Maybe you should count another border, one of your allies who is happy to slaughter those kurds you think people don't know about:yep:and that happens to be the only border where you have relatively safe bases.
It seems you are well out of your depth


Yep. One more ally in the upcoming war.


I must say though, I am almost amazed that you manage to introduce all these angles into an almost entirely unrelated topic, it does suggest that the mess that was Iraq has problems settling in your stomach and causing you problems of a digestive nature, but its Ok I think most people understand that and will treat you gently like I have.
I love how those who weren't even there and had no idea what went on are the experts. Since you know so much, Tribesman, enlighten me, Galway girl.

[mapuc]

When reading this thread a memory came up

Sometime in the late 80'ies I was studying industrial electrician and under that time I meet many people and one of them came from Iran

He told me that no muslem will ever work with Americans or it's allied and if they do they will lie and decieve

He also told me that one day All muslem countries will be one again as they were under Muhammad

"It's going to happen and then America and it's allied will get what they deserve"
(can't remember the exact wordframe)

I found out late that he was a radical muslem

Markus

[Tribesman]

So.... we couldn't find him... Hmmm.... He's dead... via a US bomb... Moot point, Tribesman. Times and dates, sonny! No one said a war against a faceless enemy would be a quick or easy one. Ask Bin Laden about that. Oh wait, you can't. Found him too. Go pick your potatoes Irishman.


Wow potatoes. classy:har:
Moot point? times and dates young man, you brought it up in a topic that it had bugger all to do with, now try and prove your point.
Oh sorry you was just talking bolloxwasn't you:yep:

Don't care
You can't answerbecauser you have no point.

My point is there is US equipment there now and Iran is staring down the barrel of it.
Errrrr....Iran said buggfer off and take your equipment with you , Pakistan said you better beg again if you want access, Afghanistan says oopps soory we don't control that territory:yeah:
Well done mein herr.

Go pick your potatoes, Irishman.

Keep it up young man, you are on to a winning arguement there:rotfl2:

Any. Not my fault you failed geography. Go pick your potatoes.

Sorry fella, you already trashed yourself on that count.

Still missing the point. All this American military equipment, and all those troops getting bored, just waiting for something to attack, sitting on the Iranian border.
Thats a strange globe you have, are you sure it isn't a game of Risk you are using for a map? are you poised in Siam perhaps?

You know what to do, Irishman.

Yay freedom of speech:woot:

Yep. One more ally in the upcoming war.

You want Turkey to fight Iran:har::har::har::har::har:

love how those who weren't even there and had no idea what went on are the experts.
Even a rank amatuer with a michelin road map and a 200 year out of date political guide would trounce your arguement on the region.

Since you know so much, Tribesman, enlighten me, Galway girl.
As you asked so nicely here we are, after all it took a yank to write it , so here is Steve Earlhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4rAqVlwjZgg&feature=related

[Codz]

Say good-bye to free speech, free opinion, humanism, equal rights, equality for women. The flag of the prophet must fly above everything.

This is just sad. I've never seen a more pure example of fear mongering. The chances of radical Islam "taking over the world" are somwhere around zero. All of the most powerful countries in the world have laws enforcing free religion. The US, Russia, France, Germany, Japan, China, etc. Not a single Middle Eastern country could take on any of those powers outside of their own territory. If your talking about a "cultural invasion", then where are all of the new Mosques or massive amounts of Islam converts in Western civilization? This is paranoia and Islamophobia plain and simple.

[Takeda Shingen]

Well, this thread went south from the last time I read it.

[19Herr_Rapp86]

Thats a strange globe you have, are you sure it isn't a game of Risk you are using for a map? are you poised in Siam perhaps?



Yeah that is a strange globe I'm using that shows Iran on the border of Afghanistan and Iraq, isn't it. Very strange. Ought to get a refund on that globe and get a new one, even though it will still show Iran in the middle of Afghanistan and Iraq. Maybe I ought to just do away with the globe and get a map. Perhaps the outdated Michelin road map will work. Oh wait, that still shows Iran on the border of Afghanistan and Iraq. Dang. Cartographers must be stupid, huh. You're right, Siam (Thailand) borders Iran and has a bunch of US military troops and equipment in it.

[Morts]

This is just sad. I've never seen a more pure example of fear mongering. The chances of radical Islam "taking over the world" are somwhere around zero. All of the most powerful countries in the world have laws enforcing free religion. The US, Russia, France, Germany, Japan, China, etc. Not a single Middle Eastern country could take on any of those powers outside of their own territory. If your talking about a "cultural invasion", then where are all of the new Mosques or massive amounts of Islam converts in Western civilization? This is paranoia and Islamophobia plain and simple.
"the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."
--Hermann Göring

[Onkel Neal]

Wow potatoes. classy:har:


Keep it up young man, you are on to a winning arguement there:rotfl2:




It earned him an infraction.

People, make your points without referring to someone's nationality over and over, that's not helping the discussion.

[TLAM Strike]

If your talking about a "cultural invasion", then where are all of the new Mosques Murfreesboro, Dearborn, Ground Zero on my route to university...

or massive amounts of Islam converts in Western civilization?
Prisons... (http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/hearings/testimony.cfm?id=4f1e0899533f7680e78d03281ff19bc6&wit_id=4f1e0899533f7680e78d03281ff19bc6-2-1)

Magnitude of the Threat
? "For many disaffected young people, their first contact with Islam comes in jail. Over the past 30 years, Islam has become a powerful force in America's correctional system. In New York State, it's estimated that between 17 and 20 percent of all inmates are Muslims - a number that experts say holds nationally."
? "Currently, there are approximately 350,000 Muslims in Federal, state and local prisons - with 30,000-40,000 being added to that number each year....These inmates mostly came into prison as non-Muslims. But, it so happens that once inside the prison a majority turns to Islam for the fulfillment of spiritual needs... It is estimated that of those who seek faith while imprisoned, about 80% come to Islam. This fact alone is a major contributor to the phenomenal growth of Islam in the U.S."

Notable Prison Converts
? Richard Reid (the Shoe Bomber) was converted by a radical imam (Abdul Ghani Qureshi at the suggestion of his father, a Jamaican-born career criminal who converted to Islam) in a British prison. British MP Oliver Letwin says that Reid's conversion to Islam suggests that young inmates are being targeted by radical organizations.
? Jose Padilla (aka Abdullah al-Muhajir) - "the Dirty Bomber" - was exposed to radical Islam during time in American prisons, and from there was recruited into the al Qaeda network.
? Aqil converted to Islam while serving time in California's boot-camp system. He went to an Afghani training camp with one of the men accused of kidnapping and murdering Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl.

Back in the old days the Soviets would target disenfranchised western University students for recruitment. We saw this with The Weathermen, RAF, etc. The Soviets offered them the peaceful socialist utopia they wanted.

The Islamists are targeting prisons because they can offer them what the Prisoners (some of them anyways) want: a moral excuse for committing crime... that and 72 (female) virgins sounds real nice for a inmate bending over for a 300 lb ex-biker named 'Bubba'.

[Tribesman]

Yeah that is a strange globe I'm using that shows Iran on the border of Afghanistan and Iraq, isn't it. Very strange. Ought to get a refund on that globe and get a new one, even though it will still show Iran in the middle of Afghanistan and Iraq. Maybe I ought to just do away with the globe and get a map. Perhaps the outdated Michelin road map will work. Oh wait, that still shows Iran on the border of Afghanistan and Iraq. Dang. Cartographers must be stupid, huh. You're right, Siam (Thailand) borders Iran and has a bunch of US military troops and equipment in it.
I hate to bring you up to date with the events you are an expert on but your bunch of US military troops and bases and airfields and equipment in thast country which borders Iran happens to be ....about 150 troops guarding the US embassy:yep:
Perhaps you missed the event, after all the end of the US presence after such a disasterous waste of time didn't make much headline news again and again on every news channel and every newspaper did it.
The Iranian backed government wouldn't give America decent terms for its troops to stay on so they all left.

It earned him an infraction.

Was it needed?
After all it must be very frustrating and confusing for him if he is only just discovering that the US handed over Iraq, so you can have sympathy with him while he gets over the shock as people can do strange things when something hits them like that.

[Skybird]

This is just sad. I've never seen a more pure example of fear mongering.
That most likely is because you lack knoweldge and too superficially trust in what you just are being told, not questioning the motives of the person who is telling you. Especially on Quranic ideology. If you do not know that Islam sees itself at war with all the non-Islamic world and bases on the argument that there can be no peace as long as it does not rule everywhere (Islam=peace, absence of Islam=war), then you know nothing about this ideology, nothing worthwhile at least. The claim of Islam for superiority and rulership, is universal. Sorry if that spoils your glossing illusions, but that is what this ideology is like. I did not make it.

The chances of radical Islam "taking over the world" are somwhere around zero. All of the most powerful countries in the world have laws enforcing free religion.

Islam is the fatserst gropwing religion in the world currently (once again). And it spreads in turbo mode throughout Europe. This brings a lot of integraiton problems as well, because Muslims do not like to integrate, they prefer that their hosts changes accoring to their likings. Those Muslims integrating, or trying to - are a MINORITY here.

Already in your own country America there is a very sharp conflict going on between Christians and atheists. Seven of your federal states ban atheists from public offices despite the constitution/amandements saying different. In Germany, the church has special status that in parts excludes it from law enforcement, tax duty, and the state collects manadatory church taxes. Freedom of relgion also must include freedom from relgion, but you cannot really escape it. The number of mosques being build constantly raises: in England, in sweden, in Netherlands, in Germany.

Islam does not now the sepoaration between relgion and politics, it both always were in one and the same hand from Muhammad'S time on, until today. That is why they demand a religious rule book to be the basis of any state's jurisdiction and constitution. We are secular, more or less, Islam is "monolithic". Western guarantees - in our constitutions for example - for freedom of religious practicing base on the prnmciple of secularism, of strict separation between state and church, politcs and relgion. But Islam does not know this separation, refuses to accept it, and claims right the opposite: both are the same (of course lobby groups in the West tell you differently: they want to deceive you so that they get their way). That means that bIslamic groups can make and attempt poltical claims and goals - and avoid political resistence to that by opportunistiucally disguising it as "relgion", which they demand to be free to practice. This works nicely. Our courts time and again let Islamic perpetrators get away when they break the law for exmaple over violence at home and beating up women or raping their babysitters - with courts and judges expressing acceptance to this cultural charcateristic. Then ther eis the issue of ironically so-called freedom courts, an Islamic parallel justice where self-declared "judges" bystep the only their there can be: that of the state, and prevent law enforcmeent and hinder pllice research by negotiating conflicts betwen Muslims internally. This leads to deals getting done, witnesses and victims being itnimidated by their families, charges being recalled/cancelled.

You think that is okay? Two things.

First. We have somethign we call civil rights and equality of men and women. The freedom courts however do not base or accept these, they base on opportunistically hisding conflicts from the law enforcement auhtorities, and partially on implementing Shariah as well as poatriarchalic habits and rites, for example that a female'S confession is not worth half as much as that of a male, and that a victim of rape is the perpetrator when she provoced the assault by just existing, or family murders of dishonour (sorry, I refuse to call them honour killings). Witnesses get called back by their families, families do internal deals to save their face/"honour", the law of the penlty codce gets evades, the polcie gets hgindered. Fighting organised crime (which is a vwery big problem in case of the many Muslim giant family clans we have here with hundreds of members of which the majority can be crminal) becomes impossible that way.

Second. Freedom courts are not about the question of guilt, and responsibility. They are about not lettiong the public now, and keep it internal. What our law system includes: to solve the riddle of who is repsonsible for what, is not that much interesting. And what our coiurts want to acchieve: involved people taking their share of repsonsibility, also is not necessarily part of the process.

You think that this will help integration? Wrong. It actively hinders integration by evading the rules of the hosting nation, it keeps such migrants isolated and amongst themselbes, actively resistring to integration. It teaches them that it is okay to not respect the law of their hosts.

Finally, you may want to do some rserahc yourself on the issue of taqiyya. No matter how you pronolunce it, there are so many versions of how to write it around. It emegred from the shia tradiiton during the time when the Sunnis gained the upperhand in the internal Islamic civil war (which rages since a 1000 years until today, if you do not know that). Taqiyya means the permission to hide and to lie over one'S own Muslim identty and motives if that is needed to survive a prsent repression or situation in which one is at danger to lose one'S life when it gets revealed one is Muslim. Originally, it was relgious permission to renounce oneself withoiut that being seen as sinful or blasphemic. Later - and that is what often doe snot get told - the Sunni tradition copied that tactic and now it is in wide use by Islamic lobby groups in the West who want to spread Idslam further and further and want to make states chnage their legislation in favour of Islamic demands. It is nothing else than the relgious permission to lie and betray over the real motives and goals of Isalam, if this lying and betraying helps the cause of Islam. I experienced this directly myself: I was part of a citizen's group that several years successfully sued a Muslim community that bought additional property near an existing mosque on basis of forged information about identity and intention of the buyer, in other words, the deal was done on their behalf by a strawman who traded the seller false information. They did so becasue the local oppsotion to increaisng the mkosque, was immense. After the court was done and the deal annuled, I spoke with one of those cheaters representing the other side. He smiled me in the face and without any sign of feeling guilty or having a bad conscience he told me right to my face that of course they lied and cheated, else they would not have gotten what they wanted, and that it was for the case of Islam, and that that always is a good case. Compare to statements you hear time and again from Muslim clerics and politicians and representatives who time and again tell the world'S cameras that it is impossible that this or that Muslim guy, this or that Muslim country did somethign wrong or did something evil - becasue iot were impossibole for a Muslim or a Muslim ci8hjtry to be evil or to do something evil.

Okay. It is now your turn again, i only wait to be called "Islamophobic" like so often before. Somewthing is missing if I do not get called Islamophobic, and the audience is waiitng for it, so do us the favour. But I base on over 14 months of living in Muslim countries, I base on seeing since many years how non-Muslim integration in germany works very well and Muslim integration in germany is a disaster, I base on having read the damn the Quran and some commentary books on it as well, and having had an input from almost three dozen books about Islam and its history. I do not do academic studies on it, but I have had some information on it, you see.


The US, Russia, France, Germany, Japan, China, etc. Not a single Middle Eastern country could take on any of those powers outside of their own territory. If your talking about a "cultural invasion", then where are all of the new Mosques or massive amounts of Islam converts in Western civilization? .
They are right here. Come over and I lead you around.

Islam has understood that it cannot take over the world, the Wetsenr world at least,m by launching another general war on Europpe, like it tried repeatedly in the past. Their fighting spirit outbreathes ours (they can endure longer wars, we cannot without our socities revolting), but our weapons are better. They have found alternatives: first, there is oil, of which the US has been wise to m,ake itself indepednet from, as far as Saudi arabia is concerned. But the real Islamic atomic bomb is - demographics. In several European states, the numbers speak volumes. Muslim migrants have signifivcantly higher birth rates, than European native families. In some countries, Muslim names lead the hitlists of baby names, by numbers. France will be a dominantly Muslimc country somewhere by the middle of this century. Jews need to flee from regions and city districts in Sweden, Netherlands, England. Malmö is a powderkeg, in England "radical" Islam is on a rally, in germany it has started as well recently. The number of converts rise everywhere, and nlike with converts to any relgion, these often are even more fanatical than the already native Muslim fanatics. Public courts get besieged by Muslim charges over minimal issues and non-issues, in attempts to lock down the legal system and to gain concessions made even if it only happens on a basis for one concession won, 9 failed - the meree mass is what makes this still successful. The migration into the social seciurtioy sytem is immense, as far as Muslim mirgants are meant. Muslim mleaders in Muslim countries have annoucned sinc decades that Islam shall bring down Eurpope by "outbreeding" the local population peacefulkly, and by making the social systems collapsing, ending in a state of nations descending in riots.

Call it demographic warfare. For an ideology that sees women only as lifestock to produce future djihaddis, this is nothing unusual.

It even got announced at the UN, already in the - I think the early 70s. And still Wetserners still refuse to believe what is beign told in t heir face, smiling, and they really htink they know better what Islam "really" is than Islam itself knows.

That is the biggest case of rwality-denial I can imagine. A whole culture refuses to reralsies that it is under attack. A non-conventional attack, but still an attack.

What told an angry Turkish premier Erdoghan the West two years or so ago? "Stop differentiating between moderate and radical Islam, as if such two form of Islam had ever existed! That is an offence to all us Muslims. There is only one Islam." Not excactly in these words maybe, but very close, and identical in meaning and content.

Well. Open your eyes, that is if you have not already poked them out with a pencil.

Some quotes, since I happen to have them at hand since I am currently busy with them:

Bassam-Tibi, German Islam critic and orientalist who is very well-known over here: "Wer sich in der Islam-Diaspora Europas auskennt, weiß, dass nicht nur die Islamisten von einem islamischen, von der Scharia beherrschten Europa träumen; auch orthodoxe Moslems tun dies und rechnen Europa durch demographische Islamisierung durch Migration zum Dar al-Islam/Haus des Islam***8220;. - He calls it that: demographic Islamisation.: "When you know a bit about the Islamic diaspora in Europe, then you know that not only Islamist dream of an Islamic Europpe ruled by Shariah law, orthodox Muslims also do so, and they count Europe for the House of Islam, acchieved by demographic Islamisation."

Imam Abu Talal: "Der Terrorismus gegen die Feinde Gottes ist für unsere Religion eine Pflicht. Unser Islam ist eine Religion der Gewalt." - "Terrorism against the enemies of our God is a dutry for our relgion. Our Islam is a relgion of vioence." Well, Muhammad couldnt have put it any more precise.

14 years ago, Erdoghan said, quoting an Islamic poem: "Democracy is just the train we board to reach our destination. The mosques are our barracks, the minarets our bayonets, the cupolas our helmets and the faithful our soldiers.***8221;

The Imam of Izmir said I think in 1999 to Christian European delegation: "Dank eurer demokratischen Gesetze werden wir euch überwältigen, dank eurer religiösen Gesetze werden wir euch beherrschen." - "By your democratic laws we will overwhelm you, by your religious laws we will control you."

Again Erdoghan in 1994, the EU's great hope, hehe: "Thank God we are followers of the Shariah, our goal is the fully islamic state everywhere."

Mehmet Sabri Erbakan, former chairman of one of the biggest Muslim and ultra-nationalistic Turkish lobby groups in Germany, Milli Görus: "You Europeans seriously think that we Muslim just come to Europe to earn money! But Allah has a very different plan."

Omar M. Ahmad, chariman os the American CHAIR lobby organisation: "Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth."

Houari Boumedienne, former Algerian president, in a speech to the UN 1974: "One day, millions of men will leave the Southern Hemisphere to go to the Northern Hemisphere. And they will not go there as friends. Because they will go there to conquer it. And they will conquer it with their sons. The wombs of our women will give us victory."

And so many more and more and more.

What will people choose? Stand up, fight for their freeedom and give Islam the monsterous kick between the legs that it deserves - or rolling over on their backs, smiling when laying in the dust and sticking legs and arms to the air like a dog that wants to get cuddled? Chrisztians and Jews are mandatory objects of discmrination in Islam. All others either ocnvert to Islam, or must be killed. This is what the Quran demands, this is Islam. And ther eis only one Quran, and one Islam.

What Westerners call their superior culture, is corrupt, decadent, and rotten to the bone. What they call their tolerance, is the need to comply to the demand of a superior aggressor due to their own weakness. We are no longer masters in our own house, that is the sad truth. And this shabby combination, weakness and cowardice, should be the shining example that makes young, energetic, totalitarian, aggressive, powerful Islam questioning itself , taming itself, refomring itself? Hahahahaha! You get laughed in your faces, your values get trampled on, and you even kindly say "Thank You" for that! Islamic global societies are brimming with energy currently, there is an excessive overload of young males, and this demographic energy will carry on to push them for their global mission for another two generations, due to demographic dynamics. Not before then their socieites will be where we are now: having become overaged, tired, exhausted. The confrontation ith Islam will go on for as long, before the next ophase of stagnation and temportary seize-fire sets in. Either we non-Muslim countries are still there by then, or we are not. But that is the timescale in which we need to think: two generations, around 60 years.

Again Bassam Tibi: " ***8222;Man muss offen sagen, die Religion des Islam erlaubt die Integration nicht. Ein Muslim darf sich einem Nicht-Moslem nicht fügen. Wenn er in der Diaspora lebt, dann ist das eine Notsituation, und er kann sich absondern. Das besagt die normale Religion und nicht die fundamentalistische Variante." - "One has to say it plain and clear: the religion of Islam does not allow integration. A Muslim is not allowed to confrom to a non-Muslim. If he lives in the diaspora, then this is a extreme situation of extraordinary need/a situation of emergency, and he is allowed to stay separate/distanced. That is what the normal religion says (mainstream), not just a fundamentalistic variant of of it."

Well, dear Europe, I wish you good luck with that social engineering hobby and that Euro-Islam-idea of yours, it both will earn you the Darwin Award, no doubt. Send me a picture of your remains once Islam is done with you. I will post it in the newspaper, under "obituaries".

Or under "cartoons", if I feel like that on that day.

[MH]

"the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."
--Hermann Göring


Witty quote time


One ought never to turn one's back on a threatened danger and try to run away from it. If you do that, you will double the danger. But if you meet it promptly and without flinching, you will reduce the danger by half. Never run away from anything. Never!



I personally don't agree with all the apocalyptic drama Skybird creates but he has some very good points there.
Remember that while most muslims you may know are just people who want to get with their lifes it is usually the loud and active who dictate the policies.
Vast majority of muslims seem to be very neutral about extremism.
It is very evident by lack of any serious Muslim opposition that denounces some violent preachers. Reason might be fear or ideological conflict.
The few that manage to oppose are usually afraid for their lives...sort of remains of 1930s.....



..................

[Onkel Neal]

Al-Qaeda supporter pleads guilty to model plane plot (http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iwZvEfibKqXylbZsIX_3B3dWTWBg?docId=CNG.34ae9 044ca522ccec11ac9e3a3fb0511.81)

How about that, Skybird, my predictions only take a few days to come true! :ping:

[Skybird]

Al-Qaeda supporter pleads guilty to model plane plot (http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iwZvEfibKqXylbZsIX_3B3dWTWBg?docId=CNG.34ae9 044ca522ccec11ac9e3a3fb0511.81)

How about that, Skybird, my predictions only take a few days to come true! :ping:
And people call me a pessimist. :-? At least it is no B- or C-weapon plot. My nightmare would be a model plane flying down time square at new years eve, spraying. Or spraying at an international airport where people immediately are up and away, spreading "it" to all the world.

Another potentially devastatic way to spread a lethal disease: bank notes. If somebody manages to successfully infest them so that the virus or whatever it is survives on them for some time (tricky to acchieve, I read), then its XXXL-showtime.

[MH]

It may happen just like it did in japan.

[Bilge_Rat]

Al-Qaeda supporter pleads guilty to model plane plot (http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iwZvEfibKqXylbZsIX_3B3dWTWBg?docId=CNG.34ae9 044ca522ccec11ac9e3a3fb0511.81)

How about that, Skybird, my predictions only take a few days to come true! :ping:

Is'nt it amazing how similar all these terror plots are?

1. the man is recruited by a FBI informant:


However, the affidavit also raises several questions. Few details are given as to how Ferdaus came to the attention of the FBI. Mention is only made of a co-operating witness, known as CW, who met Ferdaus in December 2010 and soon began recording his conversations.

No details are given as to CW's identity, but it is mentioned that he or she has a criminal record and has served time in prison. That raises the possibility that the CW may have had some ulterior motive to bring an alleged terror suspect to the attention of the FBI or could be an unreliable witness.


2. The FBI supplies the funds and materials:


At the same meeting the undercover agents also gave financial assistance for Ferdaus to travel to Washington on a scouting trip: a fact that raises the question of whether he would have made the trip without that financial help. The undercover agents also supplied thousands of dollars in cash for Ferdaus to buy the F-86 Sabre miniature plane to be used in an attack.


3. All of his "conspirators" in the "terror plot" are undercover FBI agents.

Anyway, as long as the American public feels safer, I guess that is all that counts.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/sep/29/fbi-entrapment-rezwan-ferdaus

[MH]

Its better for everyone that FBI finds those guys and not someone else or most problematic...no one.
Question is if they had given him ideological support.

Its not so much complicated plot that would be impossible without FBI help.

[MH]

Not sure if fbi involved here....

Report: Al-Qaida planning to crash U.S. airline during London Olympics
According to the Sunday Times, a Norwegian who was trained in Yemen plans to crash the plane on a suicide mission; British authorities say there is a shortage of personnel to carry out proper security screenings.


By Ofer Aderet (http://www.haaretz.com/misc/writers/ofer-aderet-1.516) | Jul.01,2012 | 12:57 PM



The al-Qaida branch in the Arabian Peninsula is believed to be planning a terror attack during the Olympic Games in London, scheduled to begin at the end of the month. According to a report in today's Sunday Times, quoting intelligence services, the organization has recruited a Norwegian Muslim convert who was supposed to hijack a U.S. passenger plane and crash it on a suicide mission. It is not clear though that the attack targeted one of the Olympic venues, despite the timing.
Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) has been involved in a number of attempts to carry out high-profile attacks on Western targets.
Jonathan Evans, head of MI5, Britain's domestic security service, said in a rare public address last week that "the games are not an easy target, and the fact that we have disrupted multiple terrorist plots here and abroad in recent years demonstrates that the UK as a whole is not an easy target." Despite the successes in foiling terror attacks, Evans warned that "in back rooms and in cars on the streets of this country there is no shortage of individuals talking about wanting to mount terrorist attacks here," and spoke of the threat of Western Muslim citizens who have been radicalized and trained in camps in countries such as Yemen and Sudan, traveling back to the West to carry out attacks.
According to the sources quoted in The Sunday Times, a Norwegian citizen in his mid-30s and who names himself Abu Abdulrahman converted to Islam in 2008 and has in recent months been undergoing training at AQAP bases in Yemen. There have been a number of reports over the last few months of Western citizens who joined al-Qaida and are involved in its operations in Yemen against the local Western-backed security forces.
The intelligence services believe that AQAP will try and take advantage of the fact the Norwegian has a "clean" criminal record and can travel throughout Europe with few restrictions. Around 600 thousand people are expected to be accredited to the Olympics and millions of additional tourists are expected in London over the next month. British airports are suffering from a shortage of qualified passport officers and authorities have expressed concern that the border control will be "swamped" around the Olympics and many visitors will not be sufficiently screened upon entrance.
As part of the elaborate security set-up for the Olympics, the airborne threat has also been taken into account. Anti-aircraft missile batteries have been set up in open spaces and on the roofs of apartment buildings around London, Typhoon fighter-jets have been stationed at Northolt airfield near the capital and snipers - trained to shoot down light aircraft - will operate from helicopters, taking off and landing from a battleship on the Thames. Prime Minister David Cameron will personally authorize shooting down a passenger plane believed to be on a suicide collision course. The preparations have drawn a significant amount of criticism, including from residents of one of the buildings where missiles have been stationed, and who are petitioning the court to have them removed.
Whether or not the planned attack is connected to the Olympic Games or just set to coincide with them, it is reportedly scheduled to take place during a period when western security services will be at their highest alert. The Games are also going to take place at a time when chaos in Yemen is increasing, as is the uncertainty in Saudi Arabia and the breakdown of negotiations over Iran's nuclear program.

[Onkel Neal]

Drones: From War Weapon To Homemade Toy (http://minnesota.publicradio.org/features/npr.php?id=157441681)

Conservative pundit Charles Krauthammer recently called for a ban on drones in the U.S. Speaking on Fox News, Krauthammer said, "And I would predict — I'm not encouraging, but I'm predicting — the first guy who uses a Second Amendment weapon to bring a drone down that's been hovering over his house is going to be a folk hero in this country."

[frau kaleun]

I had a drone hovering over my desk at work today.










Oh no wait that was just my boss. :O:

[CaptainMattJ.]

The Japanese had the same general attitude towards muskets and matchlocks when they first were brought to them. ZOMG its going to make us lose everything we value! Its not traditional! The unfortunate reality is, that the wrong people get their hands on the wrong thing, and then sentiment towards the technology you detested goes out the window. Id rather better people have their hands on such dangerous things to prevent dangerous men from using them unopposed. Soon we will advance to he point that either we take the halo technology path where our weapons still rely on brute ballistic might, or we discover powerful lasers and superweapons. whatever our technological advancements in weaponry may be, its always going to be bad for recipients.

Scientists talk of how our lives will be in a million years, a couple thousand years, ect. we wont live that long, IMO. We will destroy ourselves with ever more pwoerful weapons and we shall cease to be apart of this universe. So, it is inevitable.

[THE_MASK]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-16/aerial-drones-to-patrol-queensland-beaches/4263948

[Onkel Neal]

A dangerous new world of drones (http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/01/opinion/bergen-world-of-drones/index.html?hpt=hp_c1)

Without an international framework governing the use of drone attacks, the United States is setting a dangerous precedent for other nations with its aggressive and secretive drone programs in Pakistan and Yemen, which are aimed at suspected members of al Qaeda and their allies.

Just as the U.S. government justifies its drone strikes with the argument that it is at war with al Qaeda and its affiliates, one could imagine that India in the not too distant future might launch such attacks against suspected terrorists in Kashmir, or China might strike Uighur separatists in western China, or Iran might attack Baluchi nationalists along its border with Pakistan.



This moment may almost be here. China took the United States by surprise in November 2010 at the Zhuhai Air Show, where it unveiled 25 drone models, some of which were outfitted with the capability to fire missiles.


Psst: they're still talking only about military drones.... :shifty:


...oops, wait, they are onto the real danger now. :dead:


States are not alone in their quest for drones. Insurgent groups, too, are moving to acquire this technology. Last year, Libyan opposition forces trying to overthrow the dictator Moammar Gadhafi bought a sophisticated surveillance drone from a Canadian company for which they paid in the low six figures.
You can even buy your own tiny drone on Am

azon for $250. (And for an extra $3.99, you can get next-day shipping.)


Oh dang! :o


As drone technology becomes more widely accessible, it is only a matter of time before well-financed drug cartels acquire them. And you can imagine a day in the not too distant future where armed drones are used to settle personal vendettas.

[Oberon]

The trick comes in hijacking drones. For the smaller off-the-shelf drones it's as easy as finding the right radio frequency but for complicated military drones it's a little bit harder. Note, I said little because it can still be done by a group of university researchers and/or by the Iranians:
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-18643134

So, when you can hijack a signal, you can block a signal. I would wager that around about now they are working on ways to block signals to drones, which can then be rolled into a system that blocks the operators signals and replaces them with your own. Thus turning the drone that was going to kill you, into a weapon you can use against the people trying to kill you.

Of course, such technology isn't going to be available off the shelf, but it will probably trickle down the systems of those in organised crime if drone warfare does take off in the cities, and also it will probably become available to law enforcement officers as well...knowing the way that equipment requisition in the forces happens, it will probably happen some time after the organised crime get their hands on it.

The problem comes when drones are used as 'suicide' weapons. Take a drone, load it with explosives, fit an impact trigger. Hover it at about 100 ft above your target and then cut the engines. Sit back and enjoy the fireworks. That could be a little hard to work against as you're not only having to override the control signal, you're having to do so before the drone hits the ground/roof/car/whatever.

Then again, this technology isn't exactly new:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/9237329/Men-appear-in-court-charged-with-plotting-to-attack-Territorial-Army-with-model-car.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goliath_tracked_mine

And I'm sure that more people have used RC cars as tracked mines in wars somewhere. They would be daft not to.

[TLAM Strike]

And I'm sure that more people have used RC cars as tracked mines in wars somewhere.

http://imageshack.us/a/img202/7937/aaassbbb.jpg

[Oberon]

http://imageshack.us/a/img202/7937/aaassbbb.jpg

Danke, although I was thinking more something like this:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c7/Hyper8.jpg/300px-Hyper8.jpg

with some remote triggered plastic explosive in it. Of course, you'd have to make sure the frequency of the detonator and the RC weren't the same otherwise it would be very embarrasing when you told it to drive forward... :haha:

That is a very impressive little bit of kit though, I did love some of the stuff that the Libyan freedom fighters were coming up with. Some very clever people there.

[August]

Imagine a robot the size of a bee with a bee's agility. Give it a stinger filled with a deadly poison and fly it into the neck of an unsuspecting victim. It'd be the ultimate in precision guided munitions. You could even watch the attack unfold from a bee sized surveillance drone sitting on a wall or tree branch nearby.

[Oberon]

Imagine a robot the size of a bee with a bee's agility. Give it a stinger filled with a deadly poison and fly it into the neck of an unsuspecting victim. It'd be the ultimate in precision guided munitions. You could even watch the attack unfold from a bee sized surveillance drone sitting on a wall or tree branch nearby.

That's the next step I'd wager.

Funny, back in the 1990s there was a British TV drama called 'Bugs', it was quite good:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bugs_(TV_series)
One episode even had a Russian sub in it! :doh:

However, the episode I'm thinking of (and this being the internet, here it is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ledDTfftpcA) had tiny 'seeker' darts which honed in on a targets DNA for the kill. There were also small explosives which were able to camoflage themselves when placed on a surface which they then stuck to. Can't remember if they were in the same episode or another one.

[frau kaleun]

I knew I hated bees for a reason.

[JU_88]

Ask again the next time I say something unpopular, or something critical of technology. :O:

Imagine you would have listened to me when in a angry dispute with Subman back then I said that as an emergency treasure for hard times, solid gold beats stocks, paper and coins hands down, always, and since always. The value you would have invested in buying real gold back then (some years pre 2008), by now would have almost increased five-fold, the price since then went from 450 or so, to 2000. You would possibly be a rich man today. :D


Well its still not too late to jump on the gold bandwagon, it would be a very smart move for anyone right now.

[Onkel Neal]

Israeli army fears drones will be used to hit strategic sites (http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4289261,00.html)

After Israeli fighter jets shot down a drone over the Yatir forest in the south Mount Hebron area on Saturday, the army is trying to figure out what its destination was. One of the possibilities the security establishment is looking into is that the unmanned aircraft, which was apparently Iranian-made, was on its way to test the option of infiltrating the nuclear reactor in Dimona, perhaps even to examine the option of targeting the plant in a future conflict.

Yes, I know this news item has already been posted.

[Onkel Neal]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24036964

German police say they have seized a "functional" bomb and several model airplanes that neo-Nazis planned to use against political enemies.

A man with links to far-right extremists was arrested on suspicion of commissioning the bomb, police in the south-western city of Freiburg say.

It would have caused serious injury within a radius of 30 metres, they add.

According to official figures, neo-Nazis committed more than 800 violent crimes in Germany last year.

The flying bomb was discovered last week after police raided the homes of four suspects and a neo-Nazi meeting place in the city following a tip-off, officials say.

[Tchocky]

Trust the Germans for flying-bomb innovation :D

[Red October1984]

I knew somebody was going to try that sometime!

Seems like a brilliant idea...but then, why do people fly model planes down the street?

[Wolferz]

Captain Hindsight to the rescue with ifs ands and buts.:up:

[Oberon]

Trust the Germans for flying-bomb innovation :D

:har::har:

They could have at least put a pulse jet engine on it, for the full experience. :nope:

[Red October1984]

:har::har:

They could have at least put a pulse jet engine on it, for the full experience. :nope:

"We don't know where it's going to go...but it's gonna GO!"

:rotfl2:

[Tchocky]

Don't complain about reanimated threads - for two reasons.

A) Neal did the voodoo dance to bring this one back, so YES SIR, ONKEL STEVENS

B) Title tells us to "forget zombies"

:arrgh!:

[Sailor Steve]

Who said anything? Only you. Were you fighting the temptation to post a Ressurection picture? :O:

[Jimbuna]

Trust the Germans for flying-bomb innovation :D

Not always :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1vr4G48Vt0

[Onkel Neal]

http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/07/us/faa-drones-over-us/index.html?hpt=hp_t2


The Federal Aviation Administration took the initial steps Thursday toward introducing privately operated unmanned aircraft into the heavily populated U.S. skies, issuing two documents it hopes will pave the way for manned and unmanned aircraft to co-exist.

But, there's more!
Colorado town residents: It's a bird, it's a plane ... no, it's a drone -- shoot it!
(http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/19/us/colorado-town-drone-ordinance/index.html?iid=article_sidebar)

[Rhodes]

Not always :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1vr4G48Vt0

Well, the first did take off and the second (or third) did exploded, so they just make a fourth that combine the success of the previous ones and voila!

[nikimcbee]

So what's the difference between this and an RC aircraft?

[TarJak]

So what's the difference between this and an RC aircraft?

Coupla thousand bucks and a paint job to you. :D

[Jimbuna]

So what's the difference between this and an RC aircraft?

A RC might work.

[Onkel Neal]

New and mysterious drones sighted casing French landmarks and nuclear plants. (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11431491/Why-are-mystery-Paris-drones-flying-over-city-landmarks-at-night.html)

“The aim of these flights may simply be to demonstrate that the authorities are incapable of responding to these threats, which could become real in a few years,” he said. “Drones are not a problem today but in a few years they will be, when drone technology develops and they will have much more capacity to carry things like explosives.”



I wonder how many sticks of dynamite a drone like these can carry...:hmmm:

[August]

New and mysterious drones sighted casing French landmarks and nuclear plants. (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11431491/Why-are-mystery-Paris-drones-flying-over-city-landmarks-at-night.html)





I wonder how many sticks of dynamite a drone like these can carry...:hmmm:

Plastic explosive might give you more bang per pound.

[Onkel Neal]

Yes it would! Might be difficult to obtain, though.



Vandalism!:o
http://www.wired.com/2015/04/age-drone-vandalism-begins-epic-nyc-tag/

[Jimbuna]

Hopefully laws will be passed to prevent or at least deal this happening as quickly as possible before the idiots and terrorists latch on...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FI--wFfipvA

[Betonov]

IMO it's been long here.
The idea is long here and jerry rigging it together is no rocket science.

His just the first idiot the media picked up. :nope:

[Harvs]

Just as easy to rig it up with something nastier, fences and gate security are outdated because of these things.

[Betonov]

I think I'm going to go into EMP grenades/rifles business.
Any investors ??

[Harvs]

They need a radio frequency to operate, jammers would be a good security measure but lobbing a few EMP bangers wouldn't hurt and i'm sure a load of buckshot would ruin their day.

[Betonov]

Ron Swanson had the right idea :)

https://cdn1.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/3439276/ron-drone.0.jpg


Shooting them from the sky is no problem. A simple rope tied to a tree and a stone could do it. Detecting them is the problem :hmmm:
How small can we make a radar and sell it :arrgh!:

[Harvs]

Good idea on the radar or even motion sensors but the bird population could suffer a bit of a setback. :yep:

[Gargamel]

They need a radio frequency to operate, jammers would be a good security measure but lobbing a few EMP bangers wouldn't hurt and i'm sure a load of buckshot would ruin their day.

Radio jammer's would be ineffective in a ways.

I'm currently (slowly) building a Quadcopter of my own. The Tx/Rx system is the same for the rest of my RC stuff, so that will be easy, the rest is all off the shelf.

Where Jammers would fall short is when you start adding GPS guidance. Yes, GPS jammers do exist, but having them on all the time is not practical. I guess an on demand jammer could work though.

My Design I'm eventually building is a Automated drone, with a camera, that will follow another GPS tagged device at a given distance and altitude. Using a couple Arduino processors, The camera's auto leveling gimbal will always point the camera at the target, and the Drone will try to stay at a pre programmed (or variable through the controller) bearing on the 'target'. Hopefully this will result in very accurate and steady Camera work. I eventually plan on programming in predetermined fly-by paths.

Of course, I'll have the controller in hand if anything goes wrong.

This is all off the shelf stuff, and can be done for only a few hundred bucks.

So somebody can prepogram in a flight plan, and positions and angles to fire a gun or drop explosives. If they want to get clever, without switching hardware, they can have the navigation processor switch over to an inertial guidance system if the GPS signal is jammed.

At that point, it's pretty much down to physically bringing the thing down, and I'd put my money on the drone surviving attempts at being shot down by rifle fire, as most guards don't carry shotguns.

[Moonlight]

Blimey they won't need to use suicide bombers anymore, they can just strap some c4 onto it and send it on its way.
It won't be a good day for the intended target though, I wonder how long it will be before some buffoon tries it out, any takers on less than a year.:stare:

[Catfish]

Well why not, if no one protests against killing with drones, the folks home will find it cool to have such stuff themselves.
Laws against drones? Don't take away our freedom blahblah :03:

[vienna]

Radio jammer's would be ineffective in a ways.

I'm currently (slowly) building a Quadcopter of my own. The Tx/Rx system is the same for the rest of my RC stuff, so that will be easy, the rest is all off the shelf.

Where Jammers would fall short is when you start adding GPS guidance. Yes, GPS jammers do exist, but having them on all the time is not practical. I guess an on demand jammer could work though.

My Design I'm eventually building is a Automated drone, with a camera, that will follow another GPS tagged device at a given distance and altitude. Using a couple Arduino processors, The camera's auto leveling gimbal will always point the camera at the target, and the Drone will try to stay at a pre programmed (or variable through the controller) bearing on the 'target'. Hopefully this will result in very accurate and steady Camera work. I eventually plan on programming in predetermined fly-by paths.

Of course, I'll have the controller in hand if anything goes wrong.

This is all off the shelf stuff, and can be done for only a few hundred bucks.

So somebody can prepogram in a flight plan, and positions and angles to fire a gun or drop explosives. If they want to get clever, without switching hardware, they can have the navigation processor switch over to an inertial guidance system if the GPS signal is jammed.

At that point, it's pretty much down to physically bringing the thing down, and I'd put my money on the drone surviving attempts at being shot down by rifle fire, as most guards don't carry shotguns.

I think you're gonna get a call from DARPA at best or the NSA at worst :haha:

Drones are also posing another severe danger to public safety: interference with fire and law enforcement operations. I heard recently of drones giving way police positions during operations by flying over the LEOs grouping at crime scenes. A more troubling danger is drones flying over wildfire or other such large fires. Here in Southern California, we have had a number of situations where fire fighting tanker aircraft have had to abort water or fire retardant drops because civilian drones have entered the airspace, posing a danger to the aircraft. The planes and helicopters must fly very low and rather slow in order to effectively make the drops; the low altitude places them at the same level as some of the drones and the low speed makes it extremely difficult, if not impossible, to take evasive action if one of the drones is on a collision course. Even the pleas of local authorities for the drone owners to ground their craft during such emergencies go unheeded. All so some idiot can get footage he can try to sell to the news media (who actually haven't bought any of the footage, AFAIK) or so he can "enhance" his social media postings...

The most recent occurrence was just last week when a brushfire exploded and rushed up a hillside, jumping a highway and trapping vehicles and people on the road. The intense heat and embers caused many of the vehicles to catch fire; at least 20 vehicles were destroyed and many more damaged; in addition a number of homes were destroyed or damaged. The road is a mountain pass without access such as frontage roads causing a massive traffic stoppage around the scene and emergency vehicles could not reach the victims. An aerial drop was organized to deal with the fire but had to be postponed for nearly a half hour because drones were sighted over the area, effectively grounding the fire fighting effort. I am sure the owners of the vehicles and homes are really happy with the idiots who flew those drones...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pi7LxrUK1Vc

<O>

[Betonov]

I say we bang our heads together, pool our resources, turn Jims house into a workshop and turn Subsim into a primary anti-drone technology enterprise :shucks:

I see Gargamel already has the tech to make drones, he can be chief R&D.

[Catfish]

There was a self-made device in Germany, to take out the bass-boom of bypassing cars via EMP, using an old microwave oven (unfortunately this also killed the complete electronic engine management of said car, but hey ..).

But it burned itself out during the impulse.
We need something that can be used several times, not just once :hmmm:

:D

[Betonov]

I was thinking more along the lines of a complex system that includes a radar to detect, a heat sensor to confirm if it's a machine or animal and a high powered laser to quickly burn the thing out of the sky. I prefer laser over gunpowder is because it strikes where you point. No balistics.
And the laser must be powerfull enough to cut plastic or heat the metal exterior to destroy the wiring behind it.

Expensive stuff, but those that will be prime targets will be able to afford 10 of them :D

[Jeff-Groves]

A .357 Slayer Air Gun will take anything out of the sky up to 250+ yards.
I have "No Drone Fly Zone" signs saying I will shoot them down.

[nikimcbee]

I've seen this done with paintball guns.

[Stealhead]

I'd be more concerned about a terrorist using a drone for recon. Though for offensive purposes a drone with explosives might be more their speed.

Honestly the main gates to any military base is pure suicide you'd never make it the barricades can stop a semi truck dead and then you've got the sighted machine gun positions. At one gate at Ramstein AB they had three M240s and a HUMVEE with a 240. You'd simply get cut to bits. The only option is a full assault or breaching the gates away from the main entrances.

All of this is why they target places like recruiting stations there's another soft military target I won't even mention because I doubt they are even aware of this particular type facility.

Another serious threat a drone could pose is being used as a method to desperse an aerosolized biological or chemical weapon. A group of people with just four or five equipped drones could do a lot of damage.

[Aktungbby]

I've seen this done with paintball guns.
Indeed! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vICfKPoCubw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vICfKPoCubw)
But hey!...that's for namby pamby's; let go full auto: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNPJMk2fgJU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNPJMk2fgJU) :up:

[CCIP]

You know, given how a certain other three-letter US government agency uses drones abroad (https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2014/01/23/more-than-2400-dead-as-obamas-drone-campaign-marks-five-years/), it shouldn't be surprising that some terrorists might've already contemplated the idea of using them to shoot at people. They probably have more experience than anybody, being on the wrong end of shooty drones most of the time :hmmm:

[Torplexed]

You know, given how a certain other three-letter US government agency uses drones abroad (https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2014/01/23/more-than-2400-dead-as-obamas-drone-campaign-marks-five-years/), it shouldn't be surprising that some terrorists might've already contemplated the idea of using them to shoot at people. They probably have more experience than anybody, being on the wrong end of shooty drones most of the time :hmmm:

I keep waiting for a downed drone to become Frankenstein.

"Selfie time for now. But once we get this bad boy patched up---USA got big trouble!"

http://pyxis.homestead.com/fallen_drone.jpg

[Stealhead]

A Pakistani man I'm guessing seeing as that is where most have been flying for the past decade. You never know maybe he's thinking "just think of the number of TV stations I could get if I could get this thing flying again".

Most likely they probably scrap the things or I'd not be surprised if the US government pays a reward for locating downed ones. Good thing is the technology is only partly there and they are very unlikely to replicate the control network a drone like a Predator requires.

They are big into low cost high return weapons the IED for example.

[Gargamel]

I think you're gonna get a call from DARPA at best or the NSA at worst :haha:

Highly unlikely. Everything I mentioned is an off the shelf Arduino based system. Arduino was designed so electrical engineering students could do advanced motion control and robotics projects and eat dinner, not have to choose between one or the other for budget reasons. The Arduino Nano (https://www.arduino.cc/en/Main/ArduinoBoardNano)(I have 5 or 6 here on my desk, and a couple UNO's) is only .75" x 1.7", about the size of a USB stick. It has 20 ports or so that can control that many different sensor inputs or outputs, like motors or servos. It is programmed using C++, only costs about $10, and is sold on Amazon (but better prices are found elsewhere).

Hardware is trivial and plentiful. Quadcopter parts are Trivial and plentiful. Coding an Arduino to function as a Flight controller, while not trivial, is not overly complicated, it usually comes down to how good your PID algorithm is. Adding the GPS is trivial. And intertial guidance, while not trivial by any means, would be easily doable for a coder who understands the theory of it. And since the concept of inertial navigation has been around for quite a while, that's not top secret.

Arduino is the flag bearer for the revolution we are seeing in the automation and miniaturization of our electronic devices. Flight Control boards (they sell them ready pregprogrammed) are just another form of modern micro controller. Raspberry Pi, Edison, and other's are just other forms of these MCU's. There is a Quote the arduino group uses: The question isn't what can arduino do, but what can it not do? Read throough the arduino forums and look at all the really amazing projects people are doing with these things.

/thread tangent

[Oberon]

A lot of people talking about terrorists putting C4 on drones...well, surely the key thing would be to stop terrorists getting C4? As far as I know, outside of America at least, it's not exactly an easy thing to get. Fertiliser based explosives are the more likely type to use and you need to have a bigger amount of them to get the sort of explosion that you would need to cause multiple casualties, I believe that's why it's used more in car bombs. There's Acetone peroxide but you've only got to look at that the wrong way and it explodes in your face. Quite how the 7/7 bombers managed not to blow themselves up is anyones guess, the chaps that tried the same thing a week later didn't have as much luck.
That being said, shaped explosives like a nail bomb are a possibility, but again you'd need a device that's not exactly small and the average cheap drone would struggle to take off with it taped to its belly, and most of the time people use nail bombs in dustbins and the like in order to contain the explosion until it reaches maximum potential and destroys the bin.
Outside of the western world, out in Syria and the like, then yes, all bets are off since explosives are easy to get, but in the western world, or at the very least in western Europe, intelligence agencies tend to keep an eye on who is buying what, and if you're found to be buying large amounts of the stuff needed to make a bomb, then your name goes onto a list and the house across the street from you gets new occupants with cameras and telescopes. :hmmm:

[Kptlt. Neuerburg]

A Kentucky man shot down a drone and/or quadcopter as some people are calling it while it was hovering over his backyard.

By Ars Techincia The way William Merideth sees it, it’s pretty clear-cut: a drone flying over his backyard was a well-defined invasion of privacy, analogous to a physical trespassing.
Not knowing who owned it, the Kentucky man took out his shotgun and fired three blasts of Number 8 birdshot to take the drone out.
"It was just right there," he told Ars. "It was hovering, I would never have shot it if it was flying. When he came down with a video camera right over my back deck, that's not going to work. I know they're neat little vehicles, but one of those uses shouldn’t be flying into people's yards and videotaping." Merideth was later arrested on the charges of criminal mischief and wanton endangerment.

Now the question is, is what Merideth did right or wrong? Personally I would agree with what he did, that using a drone/quadcopter is such a manner is improper and an invasion of privacy seeing as how the owner of the drone didn't seek Merideth's permission to use his drone in or around Merideth's property. On the other hand it's also impossible to know, without asking what purpose the owner of the drone was using it for. Was he simply flying it around taking videos and photos, or was he using it to case the joint? Here is a link to the article itself: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/kentucky-man-shoots-down-drone-hovering-over-his-backyard/ar-AAdGg2x

As drones, or quadcopters or whatever you care to call them are rapidly becoming more and more popular there is of course going to be problems caused by those who use them, most notably their use around commercial airports where they are a hazard to all types of aircraft and in the case of the wildfires in California where one fire jumped the highway and burned some 21 vehicles, firefighting planes and helicopter where unable to fight the fires because of drones in the area. There have also been some instances of drones being used to smuggle contraband into prisons. It's only a matter of time before legislation is passed governing the usage of these machines. I also have a second question, what do you think would be some common sense laws regarding the use of drones?

[Oberon]

I think it should depend on altitude, I mean above a certain altitude airspace laws must qualify, and that means that shooting down an aircraft, be it a passenger jet or an unmanned drone is an illegal act.
Below a certain altitude though it would perhaps class as trespass in which case the gentleman in question was within his rights to protect himself and his property.

Of course, if one does go by those laws then you have to look at helicopters and their landing sites. If a medical helicopter lands in someones backyard to attend to a casualty on the street nearby, is it trespassing and would the owner of the backyard have the right to order the helicopter into the air at gunpoint?

[Platapus]

If he thought someone was operating his drone in an illegal manner, the preferred action is to call the police.

That's what you do when you suspect that a crime is being committed.

Since the drone was not any type of direct threat to this guy, discharging his shotgun in that manner was unnecessary.

Why are there people with guns who seem eager to enforce the law like this? Call the police and register a complaint

It would have been no different had he been standing in my backyard.

Well, you can't shoot people for trespassing either.

You can only shoot people when they pose a direct and immediate threat of violence to you.

People like this are not helping responsible gun owners :nope:

"The people that own the drones and the people that hate guns are the only ones that disagree with what I did," he said.

Well, no. I don't own any drones and I like guns... and I disagree with what you did.

[Kptlt. Neuerburg]

If he thought someone was operating his drone in an illegal manner, the preferred action is to call the police.

That's what you do when you suspect that a crime is being committed.

Since the drone was not any type of direct threat to this guy, discharging his shotgun in that manner was unnecessary.

Why are there people with guns who seem eager to enforce the law like this? Call the police and register a complaint
I see some problems with this, sure you could call the police and complain about a drone hovering over your yard but what are the police going to do? It's not like drones have registration numbers like cars and planes do, and in this case you nor the police have any idea who the owner is, plus the drone could of flown away long before the police would show up, if they would show up at all. Also as I had pointed out unless you find the owner of the drone and ask them what they're doing with it, or they come to you and tell you then there's no way of knowing what the drone is being used for.

[vienna]

It boils down to a question of privacy and the rights of and expectations of individual privacy. If a person came on to your personal property uninvited with a camera or some other recording gear while a you or a member of your household were engaged in personal activities, took pictures and posted them to the Internet or otherwise disseminated them, that would be a severe breach of personal privacy, one I don't think very many people would tolerate. We would look on this as criminal trespass, invasion of property, and any number of other offenses, depending on laws in your local jurisdiction. Now, you may see the person on your property and, I believe legally so, arm your self in some way and force the person off your property or, perhaps, force them to stay until proper police authorities arrive. However, it appears you do not have that ability when it comes to drones. Notice I said "ability"; I do believe you should have the right be able to treat a drone in the same manner as if it were a person violating your privacy on your property. In the case of a human violator, taking them out is not an option unless the is a physical threat to the property holder or their household members. But a drone is not a person, and it is capable of doing more harm than a person walking onto your property. Is the drone armed? Is it carrying some sort of explosive or chemical threat? Is it perhaps incendiary in some way? The possibilities of real threat are too varied to ignore if you are in such a position...

Perhaps the best solution is to deal with "hobbyist" drones in the same manner as model rocketry. Persons may engage in their hobby in designated areas away from any possible immediate danger or implied danger to others not engaged in that hobby. Fly them in unpopulated parks, remote areas and such; keep them away from homes and other private areas...


<O>

[em2nought]

I think drones might be a good way to sell more air rifles. Of course that will up the ante, and drone operators will start strapping kittens on board to sway opinion their way. lol

Who wants to be responsible for shooting down Hello Kitty? :D

[Jimbuna]

Agree with Platapus in #3 :yep:

[Betonov]

Just throw a net on it.
It will jam the rotors and prove that the drone was close enough to be a violation of privacy and the electronics would survive so police specialists can try to track the owner.

That will be my first anti-drone product :hmmm:

[Wolferz]

The police should be investigating the drone owner/operator for being a peeping Tom and a possible pedophile. There were two twelve year old girls in the mans' yard when Snoopy came flying over with his camera.
The air space above a country usually belongs to that country and they protect it. Why should it be any different than Joe Publics' air space?

Until drones become licensed and registered vehicles like planes and helicopters, I consider them fair game if the pilot wants to watch me barbecue.:yep:

[Oberon]

Just throw a net on it.
It will jam the rotors and prove that the drone was close enough to be a violation of privacy and the electronics would survive so police specialists can try to track the owner.

That will be my first anti-drone product :hmmm:

Someone beat you to it I'm afraid...

http://www.instructables.com/id/Build-A-Net-Gun/

[Betonov]

Someone beat you to it I'm afraid...

http://www.instructables.com/id/Build-A-Net-Gun/

No, someone just gave me unpatented plans :03:

[Wolferz]

Shotgun with a sign on the end of the barrel....

LAND NOW OR I BLOW YOUR TOY OUT OF THE SKY!:up:

[Oberon]

No, someone just gave me unpatented plans :03:

Make that lapsed patent:

http://www.google.co.uk/patents/US4912869

[Aktungbby]

If he thought someone was operating his drone in an illegal manner, the preferred action is to call the police.

That's what you do when you suspect that a crime is being committed.

Since the drone was not any type of direct threat to this guy, discharging his shotgun in that manner was unnecessary.

Why are there people with guns who seem eager to enforce the law like this? Call the police and register a complaint



Well, you can't shoot people for trespassing either.

You can only shoot people when they pose a direct and immediate threat of violence to you.

People like this are not helping responsible gun owners :nope::sign_yeah:



Well, no. I don't own any drones and I like guns... and I disagree with what you did.

Agree with Platapus in #3 :yep::agree:
Cuius est solum, eius est usque ad caelum et ad inferos (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuius_est_solum_eius_est_usque_ad_coelum_et_ad_inf eros) ("For whoever owns the soil, it is theirs up to Heaven and down to Hell."). Having flown small aircraft and appraised real estate with use rights; currently, the limit of home owner rights is 500 feet above a property. With delivery by drone expected by Amazon, this could become a sticky issue. "The low cost of unmanned aerial vehicles (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unmanned_aerial_vehicle) in the 2000s revived legal questions of what activities were permissible at low altitude. The FAA reestablished that public, or navigable, airspace is the space above 500 feet." Since most homeowners, gazing upward with a brew in hand with a smoky BBQ aren't qualified aerial gunners,:nope: the 500 foot rule simply is difficult to ascertain along a shotgun barrel regardless of the expended buckshot descending into another homeowners yard...clearly violating his airspace.:timeout: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_rights (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_rights) Hey I could open a drone mallard duck -blind shooting gallery. Wear your waders and come on out in the off season to stay in practice.:yeah:http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1yubjb_daffy-duck-ep-140-attack-of-the-drones_fun (http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1yubjb_daffy-duck-ep-140-attack-of-the-drones_fun)

[Onkel Neal]

Just throw a net on it.
It will jam the rotors and prove that the drone was close enough to be a violation of privacy and the electronics would survive so police specialists can try to track the owner.

That will be my first anti-drone product :hmmm:

Best idea yet:up: Get one of those air cannons they use to hurl t-shirts up to the crowd at ball games, and zip a net on that pesky invader.

Of course, we know how this is going to end: anti-drone drones! You'll send your No Trespassing drone to take out the invader.:haha:

Or, enjoy a similar hobby to take down the invading drones :rock:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/a/aa/Rocket1034040.jpg/250px-Rocket1034040.jpg

Of course, it may take more than one to do the job...
http://www.wired.com/wp-content/uploads/blogs/geekdad/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/rs0002.jpg

[Aktungbby]

^ anybody with 30 acres of grassland to defend needs to think big BBY and grow your own pumpkins. This sport is big buck$!:03: http://www.popsci.com/sites/popsci.com/files/styles/medium_1x_/public/import/2013/images/2010/01/shootingthebreeze.jpg?itok=x5Sf_DwNhttps://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/1/1a/Big_10_Inch_-_World_Record_Moab_Shot.JPG/800px-Big_10_Inch_-_World_Record_Moab_Shot.JPGpsst! Nuthin good goes outta style BBY! https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d1/210_mm_Railway_Gun.jpg/170px-210_mm_Railway_Gun.jpg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:210_mm_Railway_Gun.jpg)foto enlarges

[Onkel Neal]

Holy cow! :arrgh!:

[Wolferz]

Gourd head.
Can I legally chunk punkins at the buggas?:arrgh!:

Calling the cops?
An exercise in futility I think...

First, the 911 operator will need to stop laughing before they can dispatch a patrol unit.

Then the officers in the patrol unit will need to stop laughing before they can respond.

By that time the buggah will be long gone.

[Torplexed]

http://pyxis.homestead.com/High_Tech_.jpg

[Aktungbby]

And there's just no telling how many people in Yemen would be incited to join Al Qaeda after hearing of an American drone . . . delivering beers to ice fishermen in Minnesota. ["Allluah Akhbar!"] who thinks like that BBY?!!!:()1:
Blasty the Drone: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/07/11/1312926/-Cartoon-Blasty-the-Drone-To-Protect-nbsp-nbsp-Swerve (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/07/11/1312926/-Cartoon-Blasty-the-Drone-To-Protect-nbsp-nbsp-Swerve)# http://blogs.denverpost.com/opinion/wp-content/blogs.dir/85/files/2013/12/amazon-drones-cartoon-sack-495x375.jpgorhttp://blogs.denverpost.com/opinion/wp-content/blogs.dir/85/files/2013/12/amazon-drones-cartoon-beeler-495x352.jpg:O:

[Oberon]

http://i.imgur.com/BExeirl.jpg

[Betonov]

Popular mechanics article about downing drones

http://www.popularmechanics.com/flight/drones/how-to/a16756/how-to-shoot-down-a-drone/


Taking a drone out of the sky, especially with an actual gun, does not take a whole lot of firepower. According to Cornblatt, "Drones are so fragile that almost anything that hits them or touches them is likely to cause them to crash or lose orientation."



That being the case, virtually any firearm can absolutely thrash a drone if it draws blood, so to speak. 9mm pistols on up to full-on sniper rifles stand roughly the same chance of turning a hit into a kill. Even lowly pellet guns—some of which have muzzle velocities on order with that of a .22 caliber rifle—stand a good chance at doing fatal harm. "If you were to hit a drone with [a BB], that pellet would penetrate and certainly cause some damage," Cornblatt told me. Should you find yourself in range to hit it with a rock or a baseball, that's likely to be a game-ender as well.

[Aktungbby]

Even lowly pellet guns
JEEZE don't even say that around Jeff-Groves!:k_confused:

[STEED]

http://pyxis.homestead.com/High_Tech_.jpg

Yea but you can shoot that bitch out the sky. :O:

[Jeff-Groves]

JEEZE don't even say that around Jeff-Groves!:k_confused:

I got a lowly pellet gun for drones.
Full Auto .22
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvDuCirNCvw

[Betonov]

You don't even need a gun :haha:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/flight/drones/news/a16822/fisherman-catches-drone/

Too bad the drone got away, the footage of him reeling it in would be fantastic :)

[Jimbuna]

LOL :)

[Onkel Neal]

The drone invasion now underway (http://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-drone-invasion-now-underway/?google_editors_picks=true)

One of my favorite topics, of course. It's going to explode our world like the Internet did.

Even FPS Russia has one. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNPJMk2fgJU) :hmmm: Charlene. "In the next 10 to 15 years, sheet is going to get very real". Yeah, I imagine so. Although I don't see a receiver for his submachine gun....

[Betonov]

The Dutch had an idea

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAYVyj6vf3Y

The feet (or talons for fact prudes) are protected by a plastic sock.
It's not mentioned here, but it was on the Facebook video I couldn't link here.

[Wolferz]

A university engineering program has developed a drone that can operate in air or water.:o

[Onkel Neal]

Link?

I guess that means it's not safe to go in the water either.

[Wolferz]

Link?

I guess that means it's not safe to go in the water either.

http://news.yahoo.com/heroic-drone-flies-underwater-150109648.html

Not exqactly the kind of drone that delivers swift justice from on high.

[Platapus]

http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/animals/stories/eagles-trained-hunt-man-made-drones

Eagles trained to hunt man-made drones

[vienna]

Link?

I guess that means it's not safe to go in the water either.

Perhaps not even for drones...

http://dronelife.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/jawsdrone.jpg


<O>

[Betonov]

The Dutch had an idea

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAYVyj6vf3Y

The feet (or talons for fact prudes) are protected by a plastic sock.
It's not mentioned here, but it was on the Facebook video I couldn't link here.

http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/animals/stories/eagles-trained-hunt-man-made-drones

Eagles trained to hunt man-made drones

:O:

[August]

I'm thinking that a repeating dart shooter mounted on a revolving turret would do for that eagle quite nicely. :shucks:

[nikimcbee]

So what happens if a quadcopter/drone flies over your yard and you manage to shoot it down somehow?:hmmm:

[Webster]

I'm thinking that a repeating dart shooter mounted on a revolving turret would do for that eagle quite nicely. :shucks:

you guys are overthinking this, simply send up your own drone trailing a few lengths of twine and fly over the drone. it will instantly disable and "capture" the other drone. you then simply bring your drone in and the offending drone now can be disabled permanently and done with as you wish.

if you want to avoid the capture scenario then attach the twine to your drone with sewing thread that will break off as soon as the offending drones blades get wrapped in it. this avoids any and all claims against you doing anything since you never touched it, your decorative strings just "accidently" got tangled with his intruding drone. your are covered by a million miles of gray area law just as they use to spy on you without legal consequence.

[Aktungbby]

So what happens if a quadcopter/drone flies over your yard and you manage to shoot it down somehow?:hmmm:

U are assuming it's not shooting back! I previously posted this but can't remember where...I'm glad I 'm not currently guarding Federal buildings though. This is no joke especially when they tack on an explosive vest and save on 72 virgins! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNPJMk2fgJU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNPJMk2fgJU) My own rule one 1: If I can think of it; some jihadi already has...:/\\!! EDIT: I would imagine or at least hope that all RC frequencies are jammed in Washington DC and around the Superbowl https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/37/BlackSunday1977.jpg/220px-BlackSunday1977.jpg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:BlackSunday1977.jpg)

[Webster]

then again, you could get you one of those Drone-Hunting Eagles

Watch a Trained Drone-Hunting Eagle in Action https://www.yahoo.com/tech/watch-trained-drone-hunting-eagle-145033616.html

[Aktungbby]

^ Nuthin' good goes outta style!https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d7/Falconry_Book_of_Frederick_II_1240s_detail_falcone rs.jpg/220px-Falconry_Book_of_Frederick_II_1240s_detail_falcone rs.jpg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Falconry_Book_of_Frederick_II_1240s_detail_fa lconers.jpg) http://stronghold2.heavengames.com/history/falconry (http://stronghold2.heavengames.com/history/falconry) Falconry began in China around 2,000 B.C., and slowly spread west, reaching Britain by 860 A.D. The Normans restricted falconry rights to the upper classes, and peasants could be hanged for keeping hawks. Yeomen were allowed to use short-winged hawks to hunt for food, as they were 'ignoble'. Out of this practice the French came to refer to goshawks as cuisiniers. Commoners weren't allowed to have the more noble long-winged falcons. I imagine we'll have to waste ignoble eagles!:O: when the drone goes KABLOOOEY!

[Rockin Robbins]

Unfortunately, on December 21, all the model airplanes I've flown since the late 70s were instantly transformed into drones by the FAA.

Any eagle that swoops down on my 5' flying wing is in for a rude surprise. A VERY rude surprise as I will have complete freedom of action to outmaneuver him, avoid by simply cranking on 80 mph of straight line speed or turning toward and colliding. The eagle will take the worst of it and I will fly away.

My normal course of action would just be to hit the jets and leave him wondering why some idiot sent him out to catch something that flies much better than he can.

Of course, the idea of what a drone is usually doesn't involve fixed wing radio control planes in most people's minds, in spite of our FAA classification. But you have to wonder why people are all up in arms about the quadcopters. Their maximum duration is usually on the order of ten minutes. Their cameras are wide angle. They make a lot of noise that means that they cannot be used stealthily.

My flying wing has a duration of about a half hour and with larger batteries I could get more like 45 minutes. Gliding silently I can truly be stealthy. My single electric motor is more silent than any quadcopter, even when running. I am still hampered by cameras having too wide a field of view to do any real spying, as if such a thing were even interesting, which it is not.

What you should fear is the new generation of SLR's with 100/1 optical zoom! Put those turkeys on top of a 20' pole and do photography where you can tell the color of someone's eyes at a quarter mile away with unlimited duration, no noise at all! People who are worried about drones need to just get a life.

And the string idea won't work. There is one rule you find out very quickly when flying a radio control airplane. Depth perception isn't. Past about 50' it's about as reliable as betting 00 on a roulette wheel. You can't tell me within a couple hundred feet how far away your plane is. The only rule that works when avoiding obstacles is that if you see blue sky under your plane and over the obstacle you'll most likely miss it.

So it is impossible to entangle the other drone's props with the string. It just can't be done. And why would you spend $500 to dangle a string from a drone?:hmmm::hmmm::hmmm:

It occurs to me that proof might be nice. In Utah there is a crazy bunch of fliers from whom I buy my flying wings, CrashTestHobby.com (http://www.crashtesthobby.com/). These batsoid people get 50 people together with their flying wings, take off en-mass and try to knock each other out of the sky. The flier who has the largest number of kills minus deaths wins. Yes, just about every time a plane which has suffered a high G collision and then crashes to the ground is picked up and tossed back into the air with no damage. Here are 50 of them flying simultaneously TRYING to collide. Notice how rare collisions are even then. One quadcopter trying to target another? Forget it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mah3N63-Yik

[Webster]

but RR, unlike your planes, drones have cameras that let you see everything in real time right up to being able to perform intricate tasks and run blind obstacle courses from the onboard eye of the camera through remote viewing.

its like a video game and yes you can have the control you need to run into other drones or carry twine into them to tangle the propellers.

its very possible and can be done quite easily if one were so inclined to is all im saying

[Rockin Robbins]

Cameras are not all they're cracked up to be. These guys also have FPV wings that they fly to try to collide. That is even more difficult to do than controlling from ground view. You have no depth perception and in order to get enough wide-view to be useful you introduce a lot of field curvature.

Let me hunt down an exampla video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCyR0JX5XN0). Frankly, you can't see squat, even with a 90º field of view. Those guys piloting with Mark I eyeballs stuck on the ground have it all over you flying with a camera. Remember this is 58 independently piloted planes TRYING to hit one another.

The mythology of drones is totally at odds with their true characteristics.

[Wolferz]

These guys just blew holes in a couple of the presented drone defense strategies....:hmmm:
http://www.msn.com/en-us/video/wonder/a-swiss-company-invented-the-collision-proof-drone/vi-BBp1Xly?ocid=spartandhp

[Platapus]

I feel that the difference between RC aircraft and Drone operators is that

1. RC operators have a reputation (deserved or undeserved) for self policing and responsible operations

2. Drone operators have a reputation (deserved or undeserved) for not self policing and irresponsible operations

I think the best thing the RC community could do is distance themselves far away from the drone community.

[August]

The mythology of drones is totally at odds with their true characteristics.

At present that's true but it will change as the technology improves. Drones are going to get quieter, smaller, easier, faster, they will fly longer and they'll work out that depth perception problem too.

[Mr Quatro]

Warning for drone pilots :o

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-super-bowl-no-drone-zone-20160203-story.html


32-mile-wide 'No Drone Zone' surrounds Super Bowl 50 site on Sunday

Starting at 2 p.m. and lasting until 11:59 p.m. Sunday, the FAA has issued a temporary flight restriction for most aircraft -- including drones -- in a 32-mile radius around the stadium south of San Francisco.

[Rockin Robbins]

At present that's true but it will change as the technology improves. Drones are going to get quieter, smaller, easier, faster, they will fly longer and they'll work out that depth perception problem too.
Drones, as the public thinks of them, are multicopters. Now multicopters have a minimum of three motors and three props. Most have between four and eight motors and propellers. And that's where the problem comes in.

Most drones have a duration under ten minutes. As they get faster, their payload capacity gets greater they have to consume more power, which automatically lowers duration. So faster and more duration are mutually exclusive. Pick one please.

Also smaller and faster are mutually exclusive. To go faster or get more duration you need more power, which means heavier batteries, which automatically scales the multicopter up, not down.

Then noise and speed are mutually exclusive. Since with a multicopter of given size there is a limit on the size propeller you can use, the only way to go faster is to spin that propeller even faster than the 20,000 RPM or so that they already rotate. At speeds over 6,000 RPM propellers get very noisy, MUCH noisier than the motors which power them. In fact, just about all the videos you see of multicopters are without real sound. These guys are VERY noisy and stealth is not on the menu when you use a multicopter.

Let's give a concrete example. Here is a flying wing with just one motor and one propeller travelling at about 100 mph. That means it has a duration under five minutes (even with one motor and much more cargo carrying capacity than a multicopter!). Watch and reflect on how stealthy this is.

It's Dr Bob with his SweepWings Behemoth, about the same size as my Grim Reaper. As a matter of fact the plane that flies with him in the latter part of the video is a Grim Reaper. This guy is an amazing pilot and even with the sound detoxified you can get a feel for just how loud it is. What you are hearing is pure propeller noise. Note the short duration with that kind of power. Also note that this a bigger, and hence quieter rig. Smaller ones are more than twice as loud.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvbowiJOPq4

So no, they are not going to get "quieter, smaller, easier, faster, they will fly longer." They will be quieter OR faster, faster OR fly longer, smaller OR faster, smaller OR fly longer, just about all these options are mutually exclusive. In aeronautics you play a zero sum game. Optimizing one characteristic always is deoptimizing other characteristics. When you mix in photographic, navigation and control systems, you get an even toughter deal with the design tradeoffs. You can't have it all.

[Rockin Robbins]

Why would you even THINK about drone danger when there is this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvXAaRFarwY

Drones will never be able to do that. They are difficult to use, too expensive and can't give you photography like this. When you are shooting from half a mile away you are undetectable, can't be shot down and have perfectly steady high resolution video.

Fear something else. Drones aren't worthy of our fear.

[Oberon]

Military drones are good long range observation units, and pretty good anti-ground units, although the cost to target ratio of the average AGM-114 perhaps skews things a little.
If and when the ARSS unit gets going, then it's going to get a lot more cost effective to use a group of drones to quickly neutralise an enemy infantry group rather than expending a Hellfire missile. It will also help to reduce splash damage, which is a good thing in my opinion.

[August]

When you mix in photographic, navigation and control systems, you get an even toughter deal with the design tradeoffs. You can't have it all.

Well we'll just have to agree to disagree because I think you're severely underestimating the potential for technological advancement. If you look back even the last 10-20 years the tradeoff margins you mention have narrowed considerably already and there is no reason they won't continue to do so.

Regarding drones being defined as multicopters didn't you just say in this thread that the FAA has now defined your RC planes as a drone as well? Apparently their definition is more inclusive than yours.

[Aktungbby]

My own rule one 1: If I can think of it; some jihadi already has...:/\\!! EDIT: I would imagine or at least hope that all RC frequencies are jammed in Washington DC and around the Superbowl OOOOOPS I forgot about NYC: AN ISIS target for sure...now that the first two are gone:nope: http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.2520960.1454651870!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/article_635/drone5n-4-web.jpghttp://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/NYC-Man-Arrested-After-Drone-Hits-Empire-State-Building-367766311.html (http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/NYC-Man-Arrested-After-Drone-Hits-Empire-State-Building-367766311.html) Not the first inadvertent domestic 'terror' attack on this all-American icon:timeout: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/38/Empirestate540.jpg/220px-Empirestate540.jpg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Empirestate540.jpg)14 killed and a Guinness record set: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-25_Empire_State_Building_crash (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-25_Empire_State_Building_crash)

[Rockin Robbins]

Well we'll just have to agree to disagree because I think you're severely underestimating the potential for technological advancement. If you look back even the last 10-20 years the tradeoff margins you mention have narrowed considerably already and there is no reason they won't continue to do so.

Regarding drones being defined as multicopters didn't you just say in this thread that the FAA has now defined your RC planes as a drone as well? Apparently their definition is more inclusive than yours.

So you don't have anything to say, just a nebulous and indistinct faith that the laws of physics are subject to technological advancement. And I've been clear on the definitions of the word "drone."

How about let's get specific. Tell me how we're going to get smaller, quieter, faster and get more duration at the same time. Tell me how to get more speed and less noise from a smaller diameter propeller.

Time for you to be as specific as I have been. Hint: next I talk about Reynolds Numbers.

[Onkel Neal]

Will ISIS Launch a Mass Drone Attack on a Stadium?

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/02/24/will-isis-launch-a-mass-drone-attack-on-a-stadium.html

This would be so easy for a terrorist group to pull off.:shifty:

A team of British intelligence analysts has drawn up a chilling scenario in which terrorists launch a swarm of small drones in an attack on a major sporting event like the Super Bowl, unleashing multiple explosive devices on the crowd in the stadium.

“If we do not act to prevent it, it is only a matter of time,” Chris Abbott, the executive director of a think tank called Open Briefing, told The Daily Beast in an exclusive interview.

Abbott’s group, which calls itself “the first civil society intelligence agency,” includes former military specialists and intelligence agency operatives. They have been tracking the development of drones for several years.

What they now see is a cheap and easily accessible technology that is particularly suited to the limited resources and ability of the small, widely dispersed terrorist sleeper cells that are known to exist in Western Europe and the United States—or lone wolves indoctrinated by ISIS or al Qaeda, like the San Bernardino attackers.

The experts believe that ISIS has already recognized the opportunity provided by off-the-shelf drone technology in its planning of attacks on Western cities.

EoE alert

[August]

So you don't have anything to say, just a nebulous and indistinct faith that the laws of physics are subject to technological advancement. And I've been clear on the definitions of the word "drone."

How about let's get specific. Tell me how we're going to get smaller, quieter, faster and get more duration at the same time. Tell me how to get more speed and less noise from a smaller diameter propeller.

Time for you to be as specific as I have been. Hint: next I talk about Reynolds Numbers.

Sorry I missed this reply but the truth is I don't have to do anything. You can attempt to narrow the definition of drone all you want but time will tell which one of us is correct. I'm content to wait and watch technology advance like I have for the past half century and you've not given me any reason to doubt it will continue.

[Mr Quatro]

Here's a video that explains what China is doing in their UAV development:http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2015-12/scp-svv122915.php


Variable thrust direction (VTD) technology is a type of thrust vectoring control (TVC) approach that allows to manipulate the directions of thrust to the fuselage of the aircraft.

This same technical application is also being applied to their incoming warheads so they can change the direction of the warhead.

Not good says CIC director :o

[Onkel Neal]

Amazon inches closer to actual delivery drones. Does that mean if I shoot down one, I get to keep the video card or book its toting? :arrgh!:

http://www.theverge.com/2017/3/24/15047424/amazon-prime-air-drone-delivery-public-us-test-mars

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YoBqlltIzM

[Rockin Robbins]

Amazon inches closer to actual delivery drones. Does that mean if I shoot down one, I get to keep the video card or book its toting? :arrgh!:

http://www.theverge.com/2017/3/24/15047424/amazon-prime-air-drone-delivery-public-us-test-mars

Too much is missing from the report. The state of the art is this: with a top of the line DJI Phantom 4 Pro+ , costing $1772 at Amazon today (https://www.amazon.com/DJI-Phantom-Professional-Quadcopter-CP-PT-000549/dp/B01N639RIJ%3Fpsc%3D1%26SubscriptionId%3DAKIAICE7LO AJMK3SSLPA%26tag%3Dpcm_contextual-20%26linkCode%3Dxm2%26camp%3D2025%26creative%3D165 953%26creativeASIN%3DB01N639RIJ%26ascsubtag%3D3fe5 e974-0ade-4700-820e-a6324201fc7f). It has a maximum fly time of a half hour on its included battery (this assumes prop guards off and no additional payload.) The drone in the publicity shill Amazon got published on the verge and other media for free clearly shows a drone with prop guards on and carrying the extra weight of a small package.

Now you can extend duration to about 50 minutes by switching to lithium ion batteries from the high drain lithium polymer batteries that come with the drone. However you then cut your max usable throttle from full (at about 30 amps) to 3 amps, totally killing your ability to lift anything and making the craft useless in any wind over 5 mph.

And check this out from a professional drone flier. There is trouble in paradise:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6ysJe6sDok

So what can we conclude from the Verge's dog and pony show video? Most likely they took off from somewhere behind that hedge there and landed on the other side, announcing a brave new world of autonomous drone package delivery.

They are as close to making this happen as the Wright Brothers were in 1903. It's a great way to get free advertisement for Amazon and that's as far as reality goes. There is no and will be no autonomous drone package delivery in the foreseeable future.

[Buddahaid]

FAA says shooting down droids is illegal.

[Rockin Robbins]

FAA says shooting down droids is illegal.
This is true but courts have not gone in the drone's favor all the time. In spite of the fact that your property ownership does not extend infinitely upwards, courts have given certain litigants a pass for shooting down a drone. That is by no means settled law.

Even if it were, crazy people are going to do crazy things, legal or not. Those who would shoot a drone down would most likely be afraid of it and not thinking rationally regardless of what the law says.

[Jeff-Groves]

FAA says nothing about crashing a drone into a drone.
Those cheap little racing ones are perfect as interceptors.
Bonsai!!!!
:har:

[Buddahaid]

Ummm....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23qy6nS9dJ8

[Catfish]

I do not care if it is illegal to shoot down drones.

I am much more interested in how to do that.

[Onkel Neal]

FAA says shooting down droids is illegal.

What if I am shooting at a bird but the drone flies in front of my bullets? :03:

[Catfish]

This is a one-time solution, and an expensive one – if it even works. Anyone?

Take an old microwave oven which still works, build a parabol antenna/wave guide for directing it and aim for the drone.. would be interesting.
This is dangerous though, if you do not know what you are doing!
https://fear-of-lightning.wonderhowto.com/how-to/making-electromagnetic-weapons-directed-microwave-energy-0133231/

:arrgh!:

[Rockin Robbins]

Jamming radio signals is more illegal than shooting down the drone. Whatever you do it has to be defensible as an "accident." It's difficult to use a microwave generator and a parabolic reflector by accident, but it isn't very difficult to accidentally fly another drone or RC airplane into the drone. Unfortunately your drone or plane would most likely also be destroyed.

Try "I was coincidentally flying in the same area and after passing close by the drone several times to demonstrate my good intentions I accidentally collided. Sure am sorry about that!"

It isn't even possible to turn on another radio on the same frequency and accidentally jam the signal. Modern 2.4 GHz transmitters frequency hop all over the spectrum and it's impossible to do any more. You can fly over a hundred planes and drones simultaneously with the exact same radio equipment. Good drones will simply navigate by GPS to orbit the launch point if their radio signal is messed with, making the microwave trick unusable.

[Jeff-Groves]

Walk out back with a Shot Gun and shoot it down?
You just sent a loud signal of what you did.

Most of my Air Guns you will not hear if your a house or 2 away.
100 yards? I can bring a drone down.

Illegal? Maybe.
Can one prove it? Not unless they trespass to retrieve the drone.
Then they still need to prove I shot it down intentionally.

I don't care if a drone is several hundred feet above my property.
That thing drops down to be able to see inside my windows or watch what I'm doing?

It's a target.

There are Anti-Drone systems on the market if you happen to be rich.
They are non-destructive where I think they should lock on and shoot the danged thing down!

[ikalugin]

Jamming radio signals is more illegal than shooting down the drone. Whatever you do it has to be defensible as an "accident." It's difficult to use a microwave generator and a parabolic reflector by accident, but it isn't very difficult to accidentally fly another drone or RC airplane into the drone. Unfortunately your drone or plane would most likely also be destroyed.

Try "I was coincidentally flying in the same area and after passing close by the drone several times to demonstrate my good intentions I accidentally collided. Sure am sorry about that!"

It isn't even possible to turn on another radio on the same frequency and accidentally jam the signal. Modern 2.4 GHz transmitters frequency hop all over the spectrum and it's impossible to do any more. You can fly over a hundred planes and drones simultaneously with the exact same radio equipment. Good drones will simply navigate by GPS to orbit the launch point if their radio signal is messed with, making the microwave trick unusable.
Why is jamming illegal? Unless they prove your intent to destroy the UAVs in your area what would they charge you with?

In here I think the only things they can charge you with is the improper band usage, but I dont think that there are hard penalties for that.

[Jeff-Groves]

In the U.S.A. any device intended to interrupt radio signals is Verboten!

[August]

Interesting discussion.

I wonder what a commercial drone modified to knock down or capture other commercial drones might look like. :hmmm:

[Jeff-Groves]

I saw an article not long ago about swarm drones.
What they do is go up in a swarm like bees and stay in contact with each other while in flight.

Given the programing one could create them and have an auto detect to intercept program to take out drones not in the swarm.

That would give creditable cause for taking down an intruder Drone.

I'd post a sign stating "Swarm Drones only zone"
"Fly here at your own risk"

[Onkel Neal]

I like that, very reasonable.

[ikalugin]

Heh, I guess it makes sense to ban jamming devices.

We already have a degree of inconvenience with the GPS spoofer in central Moscow, which makes the civilian sat-nav show that you are in the Vnukovo airport instead of central Moscow. It's job is to make sure that if the drone's comm link is jammed that it would fly back where it came from - to the Vnukovo airport, where it would be apprehended if the user fails to regain contol.

[Catfish]

This is only completely theoretical, of course. Any resemblance to real life events or people is purely coincidental.

The EMP "device" mentioned does only work once, not continuously. It has to be overcharged to generate an impulse strong enough already for a range of 30 to 50 meters. So it will not jam continuously, but only for a second.

It is said that someone was able to fry a car radio from a distance of 20some meters, to get rid of one of those "thumpmobiles" cruising around at four o'clock in the morning. No idea what it did to the rest of the car's electronics. It can also burn skin if it worked for a longer time, but it does not.
Dangerous, no doubt. From permanent blinding (expositioon to eyes) to actuating airbags, brakes etc. Car electronics should be safe, but.. no guarantees.

So, speaking of drones it has to be closer than it will usually be, to get it to work. And it is probable that the targeted electronics will be destroyed, not just jammed or disturbed.
You could observe what happens to the electronics if you put an aluminium strip in your microwave. I advise not to do that.

[Onkel Neal]

First drone assassination attempt...:o

THE EXPLOSIVE-CARRYING DRONES IN VENEZUELA WON'T BE THE LAST
(https://www.wired.com/story/venezuela-drones-explosives-maduro-threat/)

[Jimbuna]

First drone assassination attempt...:o

THE EXPLOSIVE-CARRYING DRONES IN VENEZUELA WON'T BE THE LAST
(https://www.wired.com/story/venezuela-drones-explosives-maduro-threat/)

This is the film footage that was aired on UK news channels. (click on the YouTube link)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tI0Hrz9FqJk

[Catfish]

Never ban drones. Armed drones don't kill people, people kill people.

[Skybird]

What raises my doubt is how fast Madura apparently was able to react to the "drone attack".



I am not convinced that this event was not staged by the regime itself.

[Onkel Neal]

Saudi Arabia Drone Attack Is a Strike at Oil’s Future (https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-09-14/saudi-arabia-drone-attack-is-a-strike-at-oil-s-future)

Saudi Arabia said the attack affected 5.7 million barrels a day of output, or roughly half their production. The more important issue is how long any disruption lasts. It is unclear whether the strike involved drone-fired weapons or missiles or a combination of them. The Abqaiq facility’s sheer size, covering more than a square mile, makes it hard to imagine that anything but an overwhelming or extraordinarily sophisticated attack could keep it offline for long. But we just don’t know at present. That alone should add some risk premium to oil prices.


Drones = missiles that can be leisurely guided right to a target. Or.... drones that carry missiles, like the US Predator. Man, this is almost a replay of the advent of the submarine in 1914, a small platform that is a threat to large systems. I would love to learn, how are these drones controlled? What are the weaknesses, what are the capabilities? Could a well-funded group terrorists or paramilitary group afford to make 10, 20, 100 of them and use them in a swarm attack on an aircraft carrier? Nuclear power plant? Political rally?:o
https://s3.envato.com/files/147788346/Large%20Group%20of%20Drones%20Flyng%20in%20Sky%20-%20IMAGE.jpg


Wonder what Saudi's response will be? Lie back and take it or respond against Iran with force? Vote now.

I wonder of the climate change warriors will freak out now, look at all that pollution!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sz58GyPoY3o

[Onkel Neal]

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/saudi-attacks-reveal-oil-supplys-094344781.html

Saudi Arabia slashed crude production by half after a swarm of aerial drones bombed the Abqaiq oil-processing facility and the Khurais field early Saturday morning.

:hmmm:

Timeline: Houthis' drone and missile attacks on Saudi targets: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/09/timeline-houthis-drone-missile-attacks-saudi-targets-190914102845479.html
https://www.aljazeera.com/mritems/imagecache/mbdxxlarge/mritems/Images/2019/6/22/4dceaefe4a3f4a4eb479a8009b3097a2_18.jpg

Looks like a lot of duct tape, are they sure these aren't from West Virginia?

[Onkel Neal]

?

Wonder what Saudi's response will be? Lie back and take it or respond against Iran with force? Vote now.




My guess: Watch for retaliatory strikes against Iranian oil infrastructure. Oil at $100 a BBL by year's end.

[Jimbuna]

The US are blaming Iran but not backing it up with any proof :hmmm:

Funny thing is, Iran and Saudi Arabia will both benefit if the price of crude rises.

"We call on all nations to publicly and unequivocally condemn Iran's attacks," Mr Pompeo added.

The US would work with its allies to ensure energy markets remained well supplied and "Iran is held accountable for its aggression", he added.

The White House said Mr Trump had offered US support to help Saudi Arabia defend itself. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-49705197

[Onkel Neal]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/01/us/colorado-nebraska-drones-faa-trnd/index.html

Drones flying in rural Colorado and Nebraska have residents freaking out. No one knows who's behind them.

Mysterious drones have been flying over Colorado and Nebraska in recent weeks and authorities can't figure out who's behind the aircraft.

Deputies have spotted more than 16 unmanned drones flying in northeast Colorado after authorities received multiple reports of drone sightings last month, the sheriff's offices in Colorado's Yuma and Phillips counties said.

Sen. Cory Gardner of Colorado said he is closely monitoring the situation.
"I've been in contact with the FAA regarding the heavy drone activity in Eastern Colorado and I'm encouraged that they've opened a full investigation to learn the source and purpose of the drones," he tweeted Tuesday.

[Skybird]

Cal .50 + skilled shooter = solved.



:D

[Rockstar]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/01/us/colorado-nebraska-drones-faa-trnd/index.html

Drones flying in rural Colorado and Nebraska have residents freaking out. No one knows who's behind them.

The argricultural drone market is expanding. Drones are being used in greater numbers as farming becomes automated. Colorado has a vast weed grow and of course there are the wheat fields of Nebraska to tend to. These days one farmer could run the whole operation from behind a computer.

[mapuc]

I say get use to these drones.

In the future it will not be an ambulance who pick you up when you get so ill the local doctors or nurses send you to the nearest hospital.

No..you will be flown by 4-6 heavy drones who are build together.

You will be laying on a (forgot the word) with some plexiglas over you(just like in M*A*S*H)
while watching the sky and the propellar.

Markus

[Catfish]

And if you did not pay your health insurance they will just shoot you and then drop you into the next bog..

[u crank]

Drones are useful tools.

I have a niece whose partner is a big time mussle and oyster farmer here on the Island. He uses a drone to check on his lines which are spread out over large areas of water...and to keep an eye on the thieves. Big savings in manpower and time.

My daughter's boyfriend is a k-9 guy for the RCMP. When ever they are tracking someone who may be dangerous the drone guy gets called in. They can keep an eye on him and stay at a safe distance. They usually let the person see the drone and that's when they give up.:D

[Onkel Neal]

If you've seen Black Mirror, then you know this ain't good...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=83&v=VRm7oRCTkjE&feature=emb_logo

[Onkel Neal]

Not good at all :wah:

https://youtu.be/R-PdPtqw78k?t=373

Imagine a Neo Fascist or Antifa fanatic sending one of these to their opponent with 10 pounds of C4.

PS: Love the comments!

"This is his fastest speed"
THAT'S WHAT HE WANTS US TO THINK

I feel so sorry when he tripped because he was dragging the weight
I know one day he will kill me and my family but hes so cute

2020: “I give the orders, and Spot decides how to carry them out.”
2021: “Spot has decided he gives the orders now.”

[Catfish]

^ scary enough .. :o
But a fast flying drone with C4 would be even worse :hmmm:

[August]

Cal .50 + skilled shooter = solved.



:D


Yeah because shooting bullets into the air is always a good idea. :roll:

[Onkel Neal]

U.S. Navy Says Explosive Drone Attack Killed Two on Merchant Tanker (https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/41767/fatal-attack-on-tanker-off-oman-blamed-on-suicide-drone-report)


Tucson police chase mystery drone across the city at more than 100 mph
https://youtu.be/ZbTVpmegaDQ

[Jeff-Groves]

fatal-attack-on-tanker-off-oman-blamed-on-suicide-drone-report

I see a suspect 3 posts above!
:yep:

[Skybird]

https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=2759822&postcount=1761

https://www.worldtribune.com/former-chinese-general-owns-200-square-miles-in-texas-next-to-air-force-base/

And America allows it. And then wonders where drones are coming from. Near sensitive centres of its electrical powergrid. And air force bases. And fuel dumps. And now their traffic cops chase mysterious drones that scan these perimeters at night and have described obvious stealth capabilities.

And America allows it. Becasue it is a good idea to have aCXhinese army generla opwinign land in texas with a 5000 ft airstrip who cliams he builds wind mills. In a region with low and no winds.

No, the EU is not the only one behaving intentionally stupid.

And who is said to be the enemy in the coming next big war?

Right. China.

[Jeff-Groves]

Screw the drones!
I wanna know more about "IronMan" flying around airports at 5000 ft!!
https://im.indiatimes.in/content/2021/Jul/jetpack_61039213e48a2.PNG
:o

Is it a true jet pack Guy or a Drone?

[August]

There was a bunch of news stories of this guy. The feds were supposed to be looking for him but then I didn't hear anything more about it. Kinda forgot until you mentioned it.

[em2nought]

There was a bunch of news stories of this guy. The feds were supposed to be looking for him but then I didn't hear anything more about it. Kinda forgot until you mentioned it.




I wonder how many Estes model rocket engines that would take? :D

[Buddahaid]

I wonder how many Estes model rocket engines that would take? :D

I always wonder who buys those out my way in fire prone California. I don't know of any public places you could launch a rocket now and speaking for myself, anyone who actually uses or used them to fly a model rocket.

[vienna]

There was a bunch of news stories of this guy. The feds were supposed to be looking for him but then I didn't hear anything more about it. Kinda forgot until you mentioned it.


There was a reported sighting of the jet pack man a couple of days ago, but still nothing definite as to who or what it is; according to the local LA news reports, the FBI, FAA, and a number of of the alphabet agencies have been looking into the sightings, but have not found anything definitive, although there seems to be a growing consensus the sightings may be of a drone; interestingly, the latest sighting was some five miles to the east of LA International Airport (LAX), and since LAX is located right on the edge of the coastline, that would place the sighting at a significant distance offshore...






<O>

[Onkel Neal]

I sure don't want to be a tank commander

https://youtu.be/vVeXWKzjuXE

[Aktungbby]

nuthin really goes outta style: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDXxsZ_eIBE starting with the Soviet Russian concept: "numbers have a cachet of their own...

[August]

I sure don't want to be a tank commander

https://youtu.be/vVeXWKzjuXE

You'd think that one of those tank commanders would have looked up and noticed that something amiss with that huge grid of missile carrying drones floating just overhead.

[Onkel Neal]

You'd think that one of those tank commanders would have looked up and noticed that something amiss with that huge grid of missile carrying drones floating just overhead.


Yeah, but what's he going to do about it? :)



Drone Striking World Trade Center Is A Wake-Up Call

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidhambling/2021/08/03/drone-striking-world-trade-center-is-a-wake-up-call/amp/

[Skybird]

It gets even better. Technology for drones. Becomes modular more and more. Anybody, any state or organisaiton, can assemble them. The construction does not allow to identify the "sender". Such drones cna be used by EVERYBODY. EVERYWHERE. Against EVERYBODY. AT ANY TIME. And nobody will and cna be hekd acocutbale for any such attack.

The whole concept of "war" is in a revolutionary revision currently.

And then the next thing. Autonomous swarm drones. AI.

Interested customers? States. Criminal organisations. Organised crime. Terrorists. Religious nutheads. Professional assassins. Angry citizens. Ordinary people wanting to try something a lil' different for a change.

It becomes modular, and by that: anonymous. Mass-produced. Cheap. Small. Affordable. Easy to operate. Self-explanatory, almost.

Wars do not become less but more likely. Because the starters of wars will not be caught.

Legal rules and treaties and international conventions do nothign to prevent this. Its like the hope to prevent crime by declaring crime illegal. Absurd.


The biggest issue nin all this is that the modular natur eof near-future systems will allow total anonymity. That reduces the inhibition to use such weapons by absolutely frightening degrees.

[August]

Yeah, but what's he going to do about it? :)

One would imagine that they could launch their own counterstrike drones, but I'd bet that array would be very susceptible to good old fashioned air-bursting anti-aircraft fire.

Heck a stiff breeze might work too!

[Skybird]

The day you jump forward for two seconds to pick a parking lot before another car gets it and you then see the other driver grinning while his car's trunk opens up, you know you're in trouble.

[August]

Everyone looks up for drones.
You do know there are land drones that can mass and only use 1 overhead drone as 'Eye in the sky'.

Right. Lots less energy to keep one light scout drone flying and keep the heavy ordinance on the ground not expending fuel as long as possible.

But I figure that by the time such an array is ever deployed that armored column would have its own armada of combat and scouting drones flying out ahead and protecting their flanks.

That array would work well against rebels and civilians as an area denial system though.

[Onkel Neal]

One would imagine that they could launch their own counterstrike drones, but I'd bet that array would be very susceptible to good old fashioned air-bursting anti-aircraft fire.

Heck a stiff breeze might work too!

Yeah, tanks probably would have to call in anti-drone drones... messy!:k_confused:

[vienna]

What would really be "salt in the wound" would be if, as the tank commander looked skyward, and just before the drones attacked, they flew into a formation spelling out:


"YOU ARE SO SCREWED"...




<O>