64 Drone Bases Located On American Soil

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

64 Drone Bases Located On American Soil

Posted by samzenpus on Thursday June 14, 2012 @12:06AM from the protect-and-serve dept.

MikeatWired writes "We like to think of the drone war as something far away, fought in the deserts of Yemen or the mountains of Afghanistan. But we now know it's closer than we thought, writes Lorenzo Franceschi-Bicchierai at Danger Room. There are 64 drone bases on American soil. That includes 12 locations housing Predator and Reaper unmanned aerial vehicles, which can be armed. Public Intelligence, a non-profit that advocates for free access to information, released a map of military UAV activities in the United States on Tuesday. Assembled from military sources — especially this little-known June 2011 Air Force presentation (.pdf) — it is arguably the most comprehensive map so far of the spread of the Pentagon's unmanned fleet. What exact missions are performed at those locations, however, is not clear. Some bases might be used as remote cockpits to control the robotic aircraft overseas, some for drone pilot training. Others may also serve as imagery analysis depots."

24 of 234 comments (clear)

Woah! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-14 00:09 · Score: 4, Insightful

Wait, you mean the American military has bases on American soil?! Well stop the fucking presses!
1. Re:Woah! by MightyYar · 2012-06-14 00:24 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  The drones are staying in people's houses?
  
  --
  W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
2. Re:Woah! by DrgnDancer · 2012-06-14 00:24 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  The Third Amendment prohibits quartering soldiers in private homes during peacetime. WTF are you on about? This is military equipment being stored on military bases, and being used for training and readiness operations like every other piece of military hardware on every other military base spread all throughout the United States. There are *thousands* of bases in the US for all five branches of the military (if you count the Coast Guard and separate out the Marines) in the US. I've personally served on half a dozen of them. These bases have existed from the founding of the country. Where else are you going to quarter soldiers other than bases, since we've obviously (and correctly) prevented them from being quartered in private homes?
  
  --
  I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
3. Re:Woah! by __aaeihw9960 · 2012-06-14 00:36 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
  So, one has to assume that a drone is being quartered in your home without your consent, AC? Want a tip on how to defeat it? Watch the Terminator movies. They are probably the most informative, and action-filled set of documentary movies (I assume documentary, time-travel and all) that you will ever see.
4. Re:Woah! by Robert+Zenz · 2012-06-14 00:53 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Yeah! Totally right! We need to end that freaking military occupation of land which rightfully belongs to the Native Americans!
5. Re:Woah! by tnk1 · 2012-06-14 02:10 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Strictly speaking, the Continental Army was ordered to disband in 1783 by Congress and never was actually a US force under the Constitution.
  That said, the example you are probably looking for is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_American_Regiment
  The First American Regiment, later called the the 1st Infantry Regiment, now called the 3rd Infantry Regiment (The Old Guard), was founded in 1784 and obviously lasted through the Confederation and then the United States under the Constitution.
  Still it must be pointed out that even though we always had at least some standing Federal force, it is historical that there was great distrust of standing armies at the time of the founding of the US, and that same distrust has had an effect on all sorts of decisions, from heavy use of the National Guard, to the fact that we refused to use naval ranks like Admiral or army ranks above Major General. (Even today, Major General is the highest permanent rank in the US Army, three and four star ranks are only granted while in positions requiring them. Unless you retire in such a position, you revert to your two star rank for retirement purposes.)
6. Re:Woah! by chrb · 2012-06-14 02:58 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  That said, the example you are probably looking for is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_American_Regiment
  
  U.S. Congress 1784: "standing armies in time of peace are inconsistent with the principles of republican government, dangerous to the liberties of a free people, and generally converted into destructive engines for establishing despotism."
  U.S. Congress 2012: authorizes indefinite military detention, authorizes war with Iran (a nation that poses no threat to the U.S. and hasn't attacked another in over 200 years), and legalizes domestic use of military propaganda.
  How times change.
7. Re:Woah! by flyingsquid · 2012-06-14 03:01 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Still it must be pointed out that even though we always had at least some standing Federal force, it is historical that there was great distrust of standing armies at the time of the founding of the US
  Arguing about the intent of the Founding Fathers is a bullshit argument. Maybe it was the intent of the Founding Fathers not to have a large standing army. So what? It was also the intent of the Founding Fathers that women not be allowed to vote, that black people could be bought and sold as property and counted as 3/5 of a human being, and Indians should be evicted from their lands.
  There are certain core principles that are timeless- life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, government with the consent of the governed, freedom of speech and religion. But precisely how we promote those things has to change with the times and the technology. We can't all run around in tricorns with muskets, trading negroes and telling our wives to stay home, just because that's how the Founding Fathers would have done it.
An analysis could be interesting by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-14 00:10 · Score: 5, Funny

If someone overlaid a map of UFO sightings over the top of this...
1. Re:An analysis could be interesting by chill · 2012-06-14 01:21 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Make all the jokes you want, but a drone was confused as a UFO just yesterday in D.C. I expect the number of UFO "sightings" to skyrocket.
  http://www.myfoxdc.com/story/18785637/beltway-ufo-said-to-be-military-drone-aircraft?clienttype=printable
  
  --
  Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
5 Point Streak by protonics · 2012-06-14 00:11 · Score: 5, Funny

Thankfully, the weapons are inaccessible until someone obtains at least a 5 point streak.
You're kidding!?! by DrgnDancer · 2012-06-14 00:16 · Score: 5, Insightful

... Really?
There are also more US Army, Air Force, and Navy bases in the US than in the rest of the world combined. Many of them have tanks, warplanes, aircraft carriers, howitzers, and many other weapons that can be loaded and armed with live ammunition and dangerous explosives. I mean, who knew right? Oh wait... Everybody knew. Of course we have drone bases in the US. They have to train people, provide headquarters and on going operational training for units not deployed, stored undeployed hardware... this is the stupidest thing I've ever read.
What did these guys think? They send untested multimillion dollar drones over to Yemen where they hand them to an untrained unit and expect them to just figure out how they work in the field? It's just like any other military operation: for every deployed unit there are probably five waiting in reserve, getting readiness training, refitting, etc. Most of that happens in the US.

--
I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
1. Re:You're kidding!?! by DrgnDancer · 2012-06-14 01:06 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  I don't disagree. Your questions are valid, and had the article been written in a reasonable fashion, asking those questions and wondering how we might find out the answers it would have been a much more useful piece. As it is the piece is a written in tones intended to make the reader panicked over the hardly surprising fact that the US military is storing and using US military hardware inside the US. As if anyone should be even slightly surprised over this fact. Of course we're doing this, the bulk of all US military personnel and equipment are in the US; and except for a few periods of heavy action (the World Wars, mainly), the bulk of US military personnel and hardware are *always* located in the US. Home territory is simply the most convenient place to do most of what nondeployed need to do.
  
  --
  I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
2. Re:You're kidding!?! by Sparticus789 · 2012-06-14 01:34 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  1. Keep in mind that the UAV operators are lower ranking people, usually E-2 to E-5, that really just want to go home and drink or play WoW. We usually pick some random car, read the license plate, then test the auto-follow feature for a few minutes, then test it again. It is really anti-climactic. Training flights are the worst, 16 hours of nothing happening gets old really quick.
  2. The information is basically stored until the drives are full. Nobody really pays attention to it until the maintainers (former me) come along and format the drive. Yes, I will admit that UAV's have caught the occasional nude sunbather in the backyard and such. Since I was in Georgia, it was not nearly as common as some other areas. So I cannot speak to the efficacy of peeping-tom drones in the San Diego area.
  3. I'm sure the CIA, FBI, or local police could get the information, but first they would have to know the drone was even up there. Flight schedules for military aircraft are considered secret and are not published on a bulletin board or anything. UAV flight schedules are kept decently secure, because of their sensitive equipment. If they call the military asking if there were any drones in the air, they are really grasping at straws. Second, with a camera range of 30+ miles, there's a lot of area to cover. Third, during my 3 years at one of these "drone" bases, we never heard anything from any law enforcement or spy agency.
  
  --
  sudo make me a sandwich
A bit sensationalist? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-14 00:17 · Score: 3, Insightful

"But we now know it's closer than we thought" It has been common knowledge that drones are stationed on and piloted from US soil. Just wait until the author finds out how many soldiers, tanks, and even nuclear bombs are also located on US soil.
1. Re:A bit sensationalist? by saider · 2012-06-14 00:50 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  [kent brockman]
  Just miles from your doorstep, hundreds of men are given weapons and trained to kill. The government calls it the Army, but a more alarmist name would be ... The Killbot Factory.
  [/kent brockman]
  
  --
  
  Remember, You are unique...just like everyone else.
Airplanes and Ships have bases too by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-14 00:18 · Score: 4, Insightful

We keep fighter jets, ships and even nuclear missiles on American soil (and waters) should we be worried about those too? It's barely newsworthy! I'd actually be surprised if there weren't drone bases here.
Re:American Weapons Found in United States by FriendlyLurker · 2012-06-14 00:28 · Score: 3, Insightful

Drones, Keeping America Safe.... NOT!
Come on, Slashdot ... seriously. by tgd · 2012-06-14 00:33 · Score: 3, Insightful

You don't have to try this hard to jump the shark. The shark was jumped a decade ago.
These stories are just making a mockery of the mockery that Slashdot has become.
Just to keep the ball rollin', there's probably GPL violations, Microsoft software and patented things at those bases, too!
An airbase is an airbase. by John+Hasler · 2012-06-14 00:42 · Score: 5, Insightful

And the USAF has many of them in the USA. Why do they suddenly become especially evil because some of the aircraft are unmanned?

--
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
1. Re:An airbase is an airbase. by virg_mattes · 2012-06-14 01:41 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  It's the nature of the device in question. There are many reasons to have an airbase in the continental U.S., like training and defense in the case of attack. Drones, on the other hand, currently serve one and only one purpose, and that's aerial surveillance. Having drones based in the continental U.S. is only useful if the drones are being used over U.S. territory (failing border patrol) and having the U.S. military running surveillance essentially on civilian populations raises the hackles of many people. We've heard the whole "we'll only use it against the bad guys!" line too many times to believe it any more.
  
  Virg
Incorrect info by YrWrstNtmr · 2012-06-14 01:04 · Score: 3, Insightful

At least one marker is totally incorrect. Syracuse NY, Hancock Field, 174th Fighter Wing (ANG) shows its status as "Future". As of March 2010, they sent the last of their F-16's out and fully transitioned to MQ-9 Reapers.

Wonder what else here is incorrect.
Begun, the drone wars have by wintercolby · 2012-06-14 01:20 · Score: 4, Funny

Our republic has lost almost all pretense of democracy, and now there's a massive build up of drones?

What's next, buying an army of clones from North Korea?

And people questioned just how visionary George Lucas is.

--
Most ignorance is vincible ignorance. We don't know because we don't want to know. --Aldous Huxley
The 3/5ths thing was an *anti*-slavery clause by Chris+Burke · 2012-06-14 05:04 · Score: 5, Interesting

that black people could be bought and sold as property and counted as 3/5 of a human being
Just for the sake of accuracy -- Slaves were whole "persons" according to the Constitution, but it was only 3/5ths of their number that counted for determining a state's representation in the House.
The slave states wanted the full number of their slaves to count, because it would increase their influence in the federal government. It was non-slave states and abolitionists who argued against this, and reducing it to 3/5ths was the compromise.
So you see, it's not counting slaves as less than a full human being (which wasn't what they were doing) that is the problem with the 3/5ths clause. It's that people who were slaves and thus not represented by their government were being counted towards representation at all. It's not that it's less than 1, it's that it's greater than 0!
Just wanted to put that into perspective. It's kinda messed up that we had to make compromises like that just to form our nation. But you know, the Founder's reasoning about freedom and liberty were quite good. The only problem was that they didn't extend the concepts to everyone, which is a problem easily fixed -- logically, anyway.

--

The enemies of Democracy are