Why is this freak-out territory? This doesn’t seem directly economically or culturally relevant to anything but war, and the effect on war seems easy to counter: put nets around power lines you need to use, and turn off power-lines you don’t need to use, two things you really shoulda been doing anyway during war.
The US’s capability of drone striking anyone anywhere will get much cheaper, and working out which nation or non-state actor performed which drone strike will get much harder. Basically, the dynamics we currently see around cyberattacks, but kinetic.
I think you need to argue better for 1) The US not already having that level of capability, and 2) The ability to deploy self-recharging drones enabling that capability, 3) The willingness of the US to actually buy & use such drones, 4) The willingness of the US to use such drones for such purposes, 5) The response of countries not just being to eg put nets over their power-lines (or increased drone detection ability) so that this happens a few times but is not persistent like cyber-attacks are (due to different offense-defense balances in that domain), and 6) The propensity of the US public to actually care at all.
No doubt drones seem an important military development, but self-recharging drones seem silly to me, if operating in enemy territory the slightest bit wary of being attacked. Drones are very much primarily a defensive and surprise attack sort of thing, and countries with sophisticated operational capabilities don’t seem too have much trouble getting drones into position for such surprise attacks right now. For instance, see Israel’s covert use of drones in June’s 12-day war.
I’m not talking about the US, it already has and uses this capability, along with israel, and I’m sure china has it too but they don’t seem to use it.. I’m talking about russia, china, iran, pakistan, walmart, taiwan, isis, Micheal Reeves- and all able to take up the strategy of modifying other countries leadership via droning the leaders they don’t like,
Why is this freak-out territory? This doesn’t seem directly economically or culturally relevant to anything but war, and the effect on war seems easy to counter: put nets around power lines you need to use, and turn off power-lines you don’t need to use, two things you really shoulda been doing anyway during war.
The US’s capability of drone striking anyone anywhere will get much cheaper, and working out which nation or non-state actor performed which drone strike will get much harder. Basically, the dynamics we currently see around cyberattacks, but kinetic.
I think you need to argue better for 1) The US not already having that level of capability, and 2) The ability to deploy self-recharging drones enabling that capability, 3) The willingness of the US to actually buy & use such drones, 4) The willingness of the US to use such drones for such purposes, 5) The response of countries not just being to eg put nets over their power-lines (or increased drone detection ability) so that this happens a few times but is not persistent like cyber-attacks are (due to different offense-defense balances in that domain), and 6) The propensity of the US public to actually care at all.
No doubt drones seem an important military development, but self-recharging drones seem silly to me, if operating in enemy territory the slightest bit wary of being attacked. Drones are very much primarily a defensive and surprise attack sort of thing, and countries with sophisticated operational capabilities don’t seem too have much trouble getting drones into position for such surprise attacks right now. For instance, see Israel’s covert use of drones in June’s 12-day war.
I’m not talking about the US, it already has and uses this capability, along with israel, and I’m sure china has it too but they don’t seem to use it.. I’m talking about russia, china, iran, pakistan, walmart, taiwan, isis, Micheal Reeves- and all able to take up the strategy of modifying other countries leadership via droning the leaders they don’t like,