BtH: Kill Chain: Drone warfare - Mindless mayhem or 'strategy of terror'?

[Niall]

A century of secret programs, technological breakthroughs and rule by a military-industrial complex has all come to this: drone warfare, which today is the US' principal way of waging war.

How is it that the Pentagon's hi-tech 'precision' weaponry can ratchet up such staggering levels of 'collateral damage'? Why is it that the 'war on terror' is producing opposite results to its ostensible aim of 'eradicating terror'? The more the US military throws its weight around, the more terror, violent death, and destabilization results. Is that the REAL point?

This week on 'Behind the Headlines', we're discussing Kill Chain: Drones and the Rise of High-Tech Assassins, a book by journalist and writer Andrew Cockburn. We'll be looking at the way the US does war, exposing the thoroughly inept management of a system that is, at its core, rather more like a cornered beast than an all-powerful global Leviathan.

Show time is 1.5 hours. We're live this Sunday 22 May 2016 from 12 noon US Eastern, 6pm Central European, 4pm UTC

https://radio.sott.net/

 

[Voyageur]

Finally caught up with Sunday's show, so thanks for the review of the book, Scottie, along with the conversation around it.

It's simply astonishing concerning the lengths that some of those boffins would go to in coming up with crazed and expensive war ideas (data point collections) such as the ones discussed - good grief. If people only knew the half of it.

SoTT Talk Radio Rocks!

 

[Yupo]

Surprising to me is how poor is the resolution of these drone cameras.
I found the information to be interesting, sad, funny and somehow encouraging.
The folly of high technology!
For the 'as above - so below' factor, I see this everywhere, at every level in any sort of bureaucracy. No matter how idiotic the scheme, it is common sense out the window, shovels of money in the door, and honest, helpful people that actually care and speak up for the good of the organization are out of jobs.
Over many years I have observed this, my jaw dropping as I watch colleagues go along with stuff, flattering the boss, etc. We are seeing not just the rise of machines, but also the rise of the patootie kissers.
Those people today all have fabulous jobs. Even when the organization crashes, they still have chums from the top that help carry them up that staircase.
Now I realize that these colleagues might be psychopaths.
I digress, sorry.

 

[A Jay]

Finally caught up with Sunday's show, so thanks for the review of the book, Scottie, along with the conversation around it.

It's simply astonishing concerning the lengths that some of those boffins would go to in coming up with crazed and expensive war ideas (data point collections) such as the ones discussed - good grief. If people only knew the half of it.

SoTT Talk Radio Rocks!

Yes, great show and thanks for the review Scottie! The description of the totally useless 'total information awareness' network was baffling. As Scottie said, it's become this religion and everyone's drunk the koolaid. Never mind that this approach hasn't produced anything useful and it's possible effectiveness is easily subverted. It's just one giant money pit that the corporations building the drones, computer networks, etc. are just all too happy to cater to. Sick.

I also thought the description of just how poor drone camera resolution really is was good in dispelling this illusion that we've been given by the MSM. Thinking about it, and I think this was discussed, that's why the drone operators bomb civilians. It's not that they're trying to go after civilians, it's just that they can't tell who they're bombing and they really just don't care. Again, sick.

 

[Yupo]

http://<iframe width="560" height="...Iw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

There is a lot of information in this new thriller about high tech information collection by military. If it is to be believed, drone operators have great visuals and have hearts enough to disobey a strike order if they see a kid with a hula hoop in the blast range.
I'm not buying it.

 

[Oxajil]

I'd also like to thank you for the show, it was very informative! I could be wrong, but after listening I would think that when push comes to shove (which probably won't happen) and the US has to prove that their military means and strategies are actually effective at all in a real battle with a competent and real opponent, they would probably lose miserably as was the case in that game they did (unless of course as you mentioned, this opponent would "turn on its radars all the time, miss with all its missiles, and blow up its own tanks"!).

Maybe the US has 'quantity' (does it?), but not sure if you can beat another army without smart intelligence, strategy, and 'quality'! They probably don't care too much about all of this, when the point is making money $ and killing whoever stands in their way. Even if it's as clear as day to the world that the US bombed a hospital in the Middle East, the US military gets away with it. It's sad. Nobody asks: What happened to ''total information awareness'' in that incident?

There is a lot of information in this new thriller about high tech information collection by military. If it is to be believed, drone operators have great visuals and have hearts enough to disobey a strike order if they see a kid with a hula hoop in the blast range.
I'm not buying it.

Not buying it either. Seems like they propagate this idea via movies (and other means) that their technology is superb when in reality it really is not... There is also the (US-UK) movie Fury where a Sherman tank crew (Americans) try their best to destroy a German Tiger tank (still, they didn't present the Tiger tank as 'weak'). Several mainstream movies I think do affect viewers in one way or another, as it happened with the American Sniper movie; people would hail the hero, not knowing what really happened and how many innocent people were killed by their hero. And the movie you mentioned will probably have people think that the image the 'pilots'/others get from drones is HD quality...

Thanks again!

 

[taratai]

As it was mentioned on the show and in the chat, it really sounds like a big video game (but a very bad one, and with 20 second lag :O ). However, it's even more funny (or tragic, depends on how you look at it ;) ) if you actually realize how similarly to some gamers those making decisions behave.

Imagine yourself trying to play a strategy game against another player, you get a small taskforce, go to his base, notice that he has nothing, and completely destroy him. Then the person "screams" in chat "NO RUSH. THIS DOESN'T COUNT. PLAY AGAIN.".
So you play with him again, taking your time, but this time noticing he has no anti-air defenses. You get some air units, obliterate his army, and win. Then he "screams" in chat "NO AIR. THIS WASN'T FAIR. ANOTHER GAME."
So you play again, this time with no air units. But then you realize he didn't get any navy, and he's exposed from the sea, so you build your navy and go for him. Then, of course, he screams "NO NAVY. NEW GAME.", or better, decides to counter your navy with his air. After he said that no air is allowed.
So of course, he wins. Then he starts gloating about his awesomeness and how much of a loser you are. And no telling him that you agreed to play crippled while he used whatever he wanted works, he simply ignores it, and continues his gloating.

Sounds a bit too similar to what happened in that Millennium Challenge 2002...

But it's not like it's only exclusive to the military. This also happened when Ireland voted against the Lisbon Treaty in the referendum, and the EU made them to vote again - some people are just really bad losers (especially if they're hungry for power and want total control). Now, if only people would realize that the situation will repeat on and on again, until they finally say "no"...

Maybe the US has 'quantity' (does it?), but not sure if you can beat another army without smart intelligence, strategy, and 'quality'!

The US army was always about going big and their fancy gadgets (or at least started to become during the Cold War), but didn't care about cost efficiency at all. Maybe they got spoiled by their wealth - since they could just pump out more money for what they need, why need to worry about it? The Abrams tank is a good example of this: it drinks so much fuel that, whenever they are used, they need a constant, uninterrupted supply of fuel trucks, or they become useless.

The Russians, however, had no access to the technology the US had, and didn't have as much money to spend. That's why, when the US was focusing on putting as much electronics into their tanks and aircrafts as possible, the Russians focused on making them fast and agile instead (for example, the vector thrust on F22 that the US was so proud of, was already a thing on Russian fighters before the US even started F22 production). This also means that, especially compared to the US, the Russian military equipment and vehicles are much cheaper. Just not as "fancy" and "high-tech".
And even though recently this is changing, Russian equipment is still comparatively cheaper than what the West has to offer.

 

[bjorb]

[quote author= taratai]Maybe the US has 'quantity' (does it?), but not sure if you can beat another army without smart intelligence, strategy, and 'quality'!

The US army was always about going big and their fancy gadgets (or at least started to become during the Cold War), but didn't care about cost efficiency at all. Maybe they got spoiled by their wealth - since they could just pump out more money for what they need, why need to worry about it? The Abrams tank is a good example of this: it drinks so much fuel that, whenever they are used, they need a constant, uninterrupted supply of fuel trucks, or they become useless.[/quote]

I think that what happened is that polarization took over. Psychopaths lack foresight and the ability to plan. The whole US defence (offence) weapon program is focused on making profit, If it works doesn't seem to be relevant. And most of it doesn't work like it should.

With makes me wonder if they wishfully think that it does work. Because Russia will mop the floor with them and they still seek out confrontation.


[quote author= Oxajil]and the US has to prove that their military means and strategies are actually effective at all in a real battle with a competent and real opponent, they would probably lose miserably as was the case in that game they did[/quote]

I think that the whole US military was always mostly focused on threatening third world countries. They have around 12 Nimitz class aircraft carriers and recently even introduced a bigger model. There presence is felt on every continent and just 1 is enough to bomb a whole country to the stone-age. I have no doubt that they behind the scenes us it as leverage to push Latin America + Third world countries to do their bidding. All they have to say is, look at Saddam, look at Qaddafi. And those are only recent examples.

Fact of the matter is that aircraft carriers are sitting ducks for Russia's hypersonic missiles and submarines. So who are they actually threatening with those aircraft carriers? It's a way of having leverage and keeping the world hostage. But not Russia.

 

[luc]

Thank you Scottie and all for this interesting show!

All these things are so absurd and would actually be hilarious if they didn't lead to innocent civilians being slaughtered :O

I couldn't find the relevant quote(s) right now from PP, but all this strikes me as a textbook example of the late stages of ponerization: the incompetent rise to the top, good work and sound thinking is penalized by the system and the psychos that run it, wishful thinking galore, and everyone just wanting to plunder as much as they can while there is still money to be made, until the whole thing goes boom. Then all these people will probably flee the scene, take their money, and try to reinvent themselves as big players in whatever field is en vogue then.

 

[Voyageur]

I think that what happened is that polarization took over. Psychopaths lack foresight and the ability to plan. The whole US defence (offence) weapon program is focused on making profit, If it works doesn't seem to be relevant. And most of it doesn't work like it should.

With makes me wonder if they wishfully think that it does work. Because Russia will mop the floor with them and they still seek out confrontation.

Indeed, yet it's a global military machine that operates under the U.S. hegemony; so broken or operational, the merchants of death ensure certain individuals make a great deal of money while maintaining the illusion of control; and they murder a great many along the way. However, why have a war with Russia when you can scare people half to death at the prospects of a major war and keep merchandising the products? Seems in one way, that perhaps this is what has been going on for the last seventy plus years since W.W. II (and further back), which has been about spreading chaos just far enough to keep the wheels of the war machine fully entrenched and in play. And to do that, you need a committed homeland of politicians and public supporters; 9/11 and the many faces of manufactured terrorism plays its vital role. Yet these guys know that a new cold war is golden, especially if you can usurp a few additional countries sovereignty, depose their leaders and steal their assets along the way, while enslaving the citizens to the tune being played. They already have unlimited printed money, and not may question these absurd military budgets like they used to do.

With this newest NATO build up (like bullies in a school yard), can't help to think it is also a positioning (that only some would know) as a war cover for the "celestial intentions" that may come this way?

Perhaps with Putin though, the bullies may taunt and jump up and down and they have friends that follow, yet they are aware that they may get a bloody nose if they provoke too much. And like a school yard bully (cowards), if that happens, especially if the world has some condemnation about what they truly see, they will run home and plan again.

In the transcripts (1995), there is comment concerning a conflict between 3rd and 4th STS controllers about when the economic rug should be pulled (don't have the exact wording here), so perhaps with war, it also comes down to a conflict between those who want it now and those that have not yet picked the time, if at all, yet they are always positioning in case there is a decided outcome - kind of a hyperdimensional Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde interaction in the STS war business.


Nasty business nonetheless.