Pentagon to triple the number of drones

[Rez O. Lewshun]

You are a real piece of work there chief. A class act all the way.

So is war.... save it for the next gen to figure out this whole peace thing.....


War is peace.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

So if oil was the reason, where is it all? Why aren't prices cheaper? Are we hoarding Iraqi oil, putting it in ships and storing it someplace?

Where did all of that precious oil go?

The CPA under Bremer failed to stabilize Iraq into the free market utopia so desired by multinational companies....

Iraq is not secure enough......

The Iraqi's are creating agreements for their oil fields to be tapped, but.... surprisingly, US oil companies aren't in the front of the line....

 

[JungleJett]

That was easy....

Go back and correct it.

I can't unless someone knows a trick to doing it.

Show me irrefutable proof where oil was the reason for the Iraq invasion. Cite reputable sources, links, documents, personal knowledge, ect.

Well, I do remember someone in the Bush White House (I think it was Rumsfield) telling the press that the war would be paid off with Iraq oil. Other than numerous articles that you would just blow off as being leftest rants I would need a top secret clearance or a freedom of information act to do so. But then again you asked this so you can justify disregarding my comments and avoiding my questions. Fair enough.

Balls in your court. If you cannot provide proof for your allegations, I would recommend remaining quiet.

That's nice, I guess I'm the fool for trying to debate on flight info.

 

[CFI2766]

Lost in this thread is the potential ramifications of the military slowly getting out of the business of training human pilots. Sure, it won't happen tomorrow, but the stage is being set for the end of the manned military aircraft.

1) Without manned military aircraft, the Air Force will ultimately cease to exist. If everything that carries a weapon is remotely piloted, the term for the person who controls that airframe will become 'operator', not pilot. Training will adjust to become more efficient and cheaper for the military to the point where a specialist with a computer background will control the UAVs in the field from an office somewhere stateside. These are capabilities that other branches of the armed services do well currently. What need would there be for a branch dedicated to flying UAVs? (Granted, space and missiles could ultimately be the only reason for the continued existence of the Air Force. How much of a budget priority would there be for a capabilities that are thought to be handled by NASA, or, not necessary since the end of the Cold War?)

2) The commercial aviation industry as a whole will ultimately change if the military is no longer producing the same quantity of pilots. There will be unintended consequences.

A social debate is good for the people in the debate, even if you strongly disagree with the opponents in the debate...Rez. All that being said, this whole thread has missed the point of the article.

 

[splatt]

Sometimes it hard to tell who is dumber, the drunk or the guy arguing with the drunk.

 

[AvroGuy]

2) The commercial aviation industry as a whole will ultimately change if the military is no longer producing the same quantity of pilots. There will be unintended consequences.

The airlines have not had a steady flow of Military pilots for a while now, really since 9/11. In fact, there were many who got out before 9/11 and were able to get back in after 9/11. Also there has been a decline becuase the Airline environment change dramatically after 9/11. Yours is an invalid point in my view.

 

[CFI2766]

The airlines have not had a steady flow of Military pilots for a while now, really since 9/11. In fact, there were many who got out before 9/11 and were able to get back in after 9/11. Also there has been a decline becuase the Airline environment change dramatically after 9/11. Yours is an invalid point in my view.

Really? You see no effects on the airline business with the possible downturn in military trained pilots?

 

[JohnQ]

So is war.... save it for the next gen to figure out this whole peace thing.....


War is peace.

The libertarian, pro-military (and anti-religion) sci-fi author Robert Heinlein said it best:

"Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty."


He wasn't talking about you Rez?

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

The libertarian, pro-military (and anti-religion) sci-fi author Robert Heinlein said it best:

"Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty."


He wasn't talking about you Rez?

Nope.... I'll go to war.... for the right reasons...... hindsight is 20/20... even WWII could have been significantly reduced... suggesting... that we learn....

 

[MGlobemaster]

I kinda got bored reading the same argument over and over and skipped to the last page so forgive me if we talked about this already. The drones that have sparked this debate, the ones firing into pakistan, are a teeny tiny percentage of the drones operating in Afghanistan. Most of the drones I had experience with were unarmed, purely observation drones. These drones observe towns suspected of making IED's or LZ's (landing zones, rez) before we drop our troops in with helicopters to make sure they're clear, and various other activities that don't involve killing "innocents". BTW, if you're just bringing food, water, and other necessities to say...Bin Laden...you are knowingly aiding a terrorist. Although you might not be a terrorist yourself are you really "innocent"?