SurelySerious

Don't think I've seen this yet https://www.booster.com/moosetshirt?share=771409569302583

https://www.defenseone.com/technology/2014/08/islamic-states-own-photos-were-just-used-find-one-its-training-camps/92267/ Someone in the ISIS PA department wasn't current on their information protection CBT.

Putin checked that container

Article definitely lacks in presentation since I assume it is serious. And maybe the sleep problems have to do with working on rotating shifts for more than 25 months at more than 51 hours per week. Agree with guineapigfury, times you cannot help are vastly more frustrating.

So does that rule out dunk tanks at base events, too? Edit: good catch 10%...which also begs the question on solo tanks at upt

But back to the article instead of your personal cheap shots. What I will take issue with is taking time to imagine some far off sci-fi world while the rest of us were in the real world practicing, fighting, studying and building TTPs for the foreseeable future so that we can integrate as a fighting asset in current/near-future contested environments (within limitations) or rescue package and as a reconnaissance/strike asset beyond the Army-S2-point-and-stare game. I've done actual contingency mission planning to bring unmanned to the fight in real time and for future OPLANs as well as plenty of lobbying with actual war planners, joint teams, and within AOC cells to leverage the very real skills that our unmanned assets possess. I’ve also cautioned when they're at their limits to steer the conversation back to getting unmanned assets into a viable role to achieve desired effects. And I think that's the key: useful thinking versus wishful thinking. What people ought to be reading are things like Squeeze Callahan's SAASS paper, because it can be taken seriously. This article is fantastical and does little to prove that any of what he talks about can be done at the simplest level. For instance, the AOD/commander's intent isn't a 1's and 0's programming problem like he paints mission/targeting prioritization to be. We do it with preplanned ground targets and standoff weapons, but those typically don't move and the missile doesn't interpret commander's intent, the MPC and aircrew do. And if a semi-autonomous system has to reach back to its operator at a critical juncture, it is vulnerable, whether from the increase in decision time thereby negating its computer advantage or from the transmission it just made to give itself away, negating its stealthiness. Unmanned technology definitely has a future, but there are so many other problems to solve before frying his big fish.

I've got plenty to stand on; he didn't earn his UAV, he selected it and put all his chips in because he believes in them, too much, and can't see their limitations. I read the article when it appeared, and I think it's too UAV-Kool-Aid laced with a narrow scope of the nature of and attributes required for aerial combat. ETA: This is why I said the person and opinion go hand-in-hand. He is that dedicated to the cause. I haven't started chucking spears. You started that.

Ah

Everything that emits, though, is detectable.

A 386 is cutting edge, right?

Those people probably shouldn't be in charge of people anyway.

You think that really matters to anyone?

They're pretty hand-in-hand in this case.

If her politicking is anything like her reported airmanship, then yes.

Except you never really have a discussion, you just write 690 paragraphs belittling everyone that disagrees with anything you say with no real content, like an asshat, which is why you get put in the corner every 6 months.

No, that's pretty reasonable.

Written by a guy who doesn't understand aerial combat, seems credible.

Prove it. But please use brevity.

The "Sons of Iraq" have been fighting ISIS since at least January when ISIS rolled in and started disrupting life for everyone. The Sunnis recognized them as bad news and fought back. This is from open source information much contrary to whatever you're trying to quote, but won't provide. Here's the first result from my 6-9 second search that corroborates what I read earlier in the year:

1500? AQ-I/ISIS has been bigger than 1500 for a long time. You're right it's not the same; it's far more brutal than it was 8 years ago.

ISIS is the former AQ-Iraq Zarqawi was running, different than Sons of Iraq.

I do not care for Tony Stewart, but a significant contributing factor is that the deceased got out and played chicken with race cars on a race track. Yellow flag or not.

It doesn't matter, it's still a bad approach.

Hah. Suppose it could just as easily be Operation Iraqi Futility, or Operation Iraq Forever.