Live data from Hacker News

Confessions of a Drone Warrior

gq.com

61–70 of 172 posts

Re: Confessions of a Drone Warrior

#61
post #48

Drones are just like any other tools of war. The fact that the combatant is sitting very far away from the battle doesn't make the killing any less real, the stakes any lower or the human cost to the operator any cheaper. War is hell because of the horrible decisions that have to be made. Distance doesn't make it any easier. Drones don't kill innocent non-combatants, people do. There are many cases of civilians being…

The blame for the cost of war doesn't go to to ... the people who pull the triggers.

Yes, it most certainly does. I used to be a submarine officer in the Navy, but I was discharged 2 years ago as a conscientious objector [1]. I left because I felt I had a moral responsibility to do so.

If your conscience says "don't kill someone," then you shouldn't kill them. You can't absolve yourself of responsibility just because the president ordered the killing.

[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/23/nyregion/23objector.html?p...

Re: Confessions of a Drone Warrior

#62
post #17

I couldn't finish this article. It just makes me too angry. Warrior? How dare anyone involved in this dignify themselves with such an honour-laden term. They're just murderers, and the fact they hide behind so many layers of technology just makes it all the more cowardly and despicable.

There were reactions just like yours when the longbow was introduced in the 1300s. And again when the gun was introduced in the 1500s.

Re: Confessions of a Drone Warrior

#63
post #48

Drones are just like any other tools of war. The fact that the combatant is sitting very far away from the battle doesn't make the killing any less real, the stakes any lower or the human cost to the operator any cheaper. War is hell because of the horrible decisions that have to be made. Distance doesn't make it any easier. Drones don't kill innocent non-combatants, people do. There are many cases of civilians being…

"Drones are just like any other tools of war. "

No they are not. The are risk free and relatively cheap, meaning its easier to order their use. The easier war is, the easier it is to make war.

"The fact that the combatant is sitting very far away from the battle doesn't make the killing any less real"

Oh yes it does. There have been plenty of studies that clearly demonstrate this. It is always easier to press a button that look a man in the eyes and shoot him.

Lastly. How do you surrender to a robot?

Had Bin Laden and his men held up their hands and put down their weapons, they all may well be in US jails right now. Had that been a drone strike, that would not have even been a possibility.

Re: Confessions of a Drone Warrior

#64
post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Keep in mind that the JTAC is usually an enlisted soldier embedded with a ground unit. He is highly trained on ROE and positive ID, and generally has a good first hand perspective on what is happening on the ground. He is responsible for protecting the lives of the unit he is embedded with, and air assets are tasked to support him. From my experience, these are not warmongers, just guys doing their jobs, trying to pr…

Worship war much? Fact is, these drones allow your government to commit heinous crimes against humanity with impunity. If these JTAC's are so great, why the 50 to 1 civilian to 'bad guy' kill ratio?

It's worth pointing out that the 50-1 civilian to "bad guy" ratio comes from Pakistani intelligence, and no other sources have it that high. The figures are also only about Pakistan, where as far as I know we have no (or significantly fewer) JTACs. You're also talking about significantly different missions, whereas in one drones are supporting ground units and in another they are the primary unit.

I don't trust American figures about drone strikes, but I certainly don't trust Pakistani intelligence either.

Re: Confessions of a Drone Warrior

#65
post #46
post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Keep in mind that the JTAC is usually an enlisted soldier embedded with a ground unit. He is highly trained on ROE and positive ID, and generally has a good first hand perspective on what is happening on the ground. He is responsible for protecting the lives of the unit he is embedded with, and air assets are tasked to support him. From my experience, these are not warmongers, just guys doing their jobs, trying to pr…

I understand that. And this isn't about me trashing the operator. But I also have a logical mind and I can't avoid the implication that if his JTAC was a bad apple, he'd do what the JTAC said.

I don't want to get into an argument and you are certainly entitled to your own opinion, but the military is a pretty old profession and has dealt with this problem before.

JTACs are basically radio/telephone operators, and often aren't physically with the unit calling in the fires because there are more platoons than there are JTACs, so the JTAC sits at the company (or sometimes up to the brigade) HQ and handles a whole bunch of platoons at once. He takes what the ground commander says (via radio in the field), and passes that to a control center via telephone, IRC (seriously), satcom, etc. The control center then routes a plane overhead and facilitates direct contact between the pilot and JTAC (not the ground commander). The real specialty of the JTAC is speaking in both Air Force-isms and Army-isms and communicating clearly with both parties. Imagine a weird game of telephone where adding another person in the chain actually makes the message come out more clearly at the end.

So to wrap up a long story, there's a whole lot of communication being passed around and it would be awfully difficult for a JTAC to just decide "I'm going to get that family over there killed because I feel like it"

Re: Confessions of a Drone Warrior

#66
post #48

Drones are just like any other tools of war. The fact that the combatant is sitting very far away from the battle doesn't make the killing any less real, the stakes any lower or the human cost to the operator any cheaper. War is hell because of the horrible decisions that have to be made. Distance doesn't make it any easier. Drones don't kill innocent non-combatants, people do. There are many cases of civilians being…

We're all responsible for the things done in our names, and responsible for changing them if we don't like the outcome.

I agree wholeheartedly. It's good for people in the west to read stories like this from the front lines and realise the moral ambiguities and atrocities which are inevitable in wartime. If you don't like this, do something about it, and vote against any politician who proposes to continue it, because in many cases our taxes are paying for it. The UK and Germany also host drone bases used in this expanding war.

I don't agree that drones are just like any other tools of war though. There are a few important differences from say cruise missiles or artillery - they are capable of stand-off surveillance for hours before and after strikes. They don't require warships or other platforms in the theatre of war, just an air base which could be several countries away and controllers who can be a world away. Also, importantly, many of them are tasked on missions directly controlled by the President or CIA (not this operator though). I think that has changed the way this administration looks at war and made Obama a very direct military leader.

Prior to drones, it was far harder for President Obama to order a strike in say Pakistan or Yemen, based on what his intelligence handlers tell him is a terrorist, and be sure of hitting targets moving on the ground so precisely, with visual footage before and after. Because they give a feeling of omnipotence over low-tech adversaries, even if the footage is blurry and the intelligence scarily incomplete, it will be tempting to use them more and more for surveilling and attacking as one operation, in any country in the world, without really having permission or a war ongoing. It will also be tempting to use them on civilian targets like houses or groups of people in ordinary life. That's a distinct change from previous engagements which if they killed civilians were far less targeted.

Drones, and this administration's use of them, have blurred the boundaries between war and peace, and of war itself, until it seems the world is viewed as a battlefield, and the war is an eternal one against enemies who look like civilians. There hasn't even been a formal declaration of war, and pre-crime assassination has been adopted as a tool of war. That is a huge change in how we view war, partly brought about by drones and partly by the nature of the enemy the US is trying to face down in this asymmetric war.

Re: Confessions of a Drone Warrior

#67
post #63
post #48

Drones are just like any other tools of war. The fact that the combatant is sitting very far away from the battle doesn't make the killing any less real, the stakes any lower or the human cost to the operator any cheaper. War is hell because of the horrible decisions that have to be made. Distance doesn't make it any easier. Drones don't kill innocent non-combatants, people do. There are many cases of civilians being…

"Drones are just like any other tools of war. " No they are not. The are risk free and relatively cheap, meaning its easier to order their use. The easier war is, the easier it is to make war. "The fact that the combatant is sitting very far away from the battle doesn't make the killing any less real" Oh yes it does. There have been plenty of studies that clearly demonstrate this. It is always easier to press a butto…

They are similar risk to airforce units (ie: little/no risk to pilot). They are similar cost to airforce units (about 2/3 the cost of an F-15, which is certainly significant but not completely game changing). They perform similar actions to airforce units. I am always surprised that people draw such a big line between the pilot being in the cockpit and out of it.

It's also totally possible Bin Laden did hold up his hands. None of the points you are making really have anything to do with drones.

Re: Confessions of a Drone Warrior

#68
post #19

This is the future of warfare, and i am afraid it will only get worse, much worse. In a decade or two tanks and soldiers might be remote controlled too, and between nations fighting their playstation-wars there will still be innocent civilians.

They just won't put their bases near civilians, because they won't need people to operate them. Then we can pretty much just designate some spots to put each other's base, defend those as well as we can, and war will be "whoever can destroy the other guy's base first, wins".

Meanwhile, civilians are over there, just waiting for the game of Playstation to end.

Re: Confessions of a Drone Warrior

#69
post #17

I couldn't finish this article. It just makes me too angry. Warrior? How dare anyone involved in this dignify themselves with such an honour-laden term. They're just murderers, and the fact they hide behind so many layers of technology just makes it all the more cowardly and despicable.

There were reactions just like yours when the longbow was introduced in the 1300s. And again when the gun was introduced in the 1500s.

Those reactions were justified then, and reactions to drone warfare (several orders of magnitude more distance) are at least as justified now.

Re: Confessions of a Drone Warrior

#70
post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Worship war much? Fact is, these drones allow your government to commit heinous crimes against humanity with impunity. If these JTAC's are so great, why the 50 to 1 civilian to 'bad guy' kill ratio?

It's worth pointing out that the 50-1 civilian to "bad guy" ratio comes from Pakistani intelligence, and no other sources have it that high. The figures are also only about Pakistan, where as far as I know we have no (or significantly fewer) JTACs. You're also talking about significantly different missions, whereas in one drones are supporting ground units and in another they are the primary unit. I don't trust Ameri…

Americas' own Brookings Institutes' conservative estimate is 10 to 1. That is still heinous.
Post reply on HN