Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Air Force Hires Civilian Drone Pilots For Combat Patrols (latimes.com)

Posted by timothy on from the ender's-game dept.

schwit1 writes: For the first time, civilian pilots and crews now operate what the Air Force calls "combat air patrols," daily round-the-clock flights above areas of military operations to provide video and collect other sensitive intelligence. Civilians are not allowed to pinpoint targets with lasers or fire missiles. They operate only Reapers that provide intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, known as ISR, said Air Force Gen. Herbert "Hawk" Carlisle, head of Air Combat Command.

74 comments

  1. This isn't hard folks by ColdWetDog · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    Now, where in the world can we get a bunch of people who are used to playing video games while sitting in an air conditioned trailer for 12 hours straight?

    Alabama? Georgia?

    Pretty much anywhere FEMA has been in the past decade?

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    1. Re:This isn't hard folks by TWX · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Mother's Basements and other places used for self-imposed isolation exist in all places and probably in all cultures.

      The biggest problem is finding people that will follow orders when the penalty for not following orders is lower than it is for a military officer or enlistee. That barrier will probably preclude civilian contractors that have never had military service from performing that job. Don't know about former-military civilian contractors though, they might be better at not flinching, but then there's the legality issues surrounding the ramifications of bad calls where innocent people died, or where someone intentionally does something that kills noncombatants. At least in the past civilian contractors had to be present to do the acts that killed innocents such that the country in which the acts were committed could mount something of an objection. What's the law on a civilian remotely operating a machine in a foreign country that's specifically equipped to kill, using that machine to kill? At least a military member could see prosecution if through the military system of justice, but I don't know how well that would work for civilians.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    2. Re:This isn't hard folks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Mother's Basements and other places used for self-imposed isolation exist in all places and probably in all cultures. "

      That's exactly where I want my air force personnel to come from.

      So were the jet pilots angry about drones that they were going to be out of a job, or that their job was going to be given to civilians?

    3. Re:This isn't hard folks by ColdWetDog · · Score: 3, Insightful

      TFA explicitly points out that the civilians will not be pulling the trigger. They will be used only for Combat Air Patrols (a term that seems just a bit inappropriate) that are for data gathering and surveillance only. The trigger pullers will be active duty military.

      The problem, in TFA's eyes is that this represents a slippery slope - how many degrees of separation do you need in a military setting?

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    4. Re:This isn't hard folks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude. 9/11. You don't need a trigger to ram the drone into a target.

    5. Re:This isn't hard folks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      civilian contractors why do we use that 'polite term' call them what they really are mercanaries.

    6. Re:This isn't hard folks by thoughtlover · · Score: 1

      Unless there's GPS buffers built-in to the protocol (min/max elevation capacity, hard turns limited, etc), the drone could strike any target by simply crashing into it.

      I think that concept was pretty-well hammered into the public's mind after 9/11, yeah?

      --
      No sig for you! Come back one year!
    7. Re:This isn't hard folks by amRadioHed · · Score: 1

      Maybe because they don't match the definition of a mercenary?

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    8. Re: This isn't hard folks by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      Korea? The Philippines?

      There are places people get paid to level up your pathetic pud. Note all they need is a security clearance.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    9. Re:This isn't hard folks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      some one who works soley for pay? I would think they fit that criteria.

    10. Re:This isn't hard folks by TWX · · Score: 2

      Maybe because they don't match the definition of a mercenary?

      That's sticky mainly due to the Geneva Convention's definitions for the criteria needed for the label. Given that the United States has been a party to the conflicts in which nonmilitary persons have been hired by the US to participate in, they're not mercenaries by the definition that requires Nationals not affiliated with the belligerent nations. Given that they're generally not hired into infantry or other common roles and are usually used for specialty jobs it's hard to argue that their pay is disproportionate. Given that their roles aren't generally infantry, it's even difficult to claim that they take a direct role in fighting the hostilities. Would someone working VIP security that gets into a firefight with a specific group of assassins fall into the same 'direct fighting' role as a soldier in-uniform on a routine patrol?

      Based on the need to satisfy several conditions of the 1977 Amendment, Protocol 1, Article 47, it would be difficult to call people in specialized roles mercenaries. It's a challenge applying even one of the several criteria depending on how taking a direct role is interpreted.

      Mind you, I don't think that we should employ so many non-military individuals in the military roles in forward-deployed areas, even in things like the laundry or meal production. I believe that other than the medical corps, every individual providing services to combat personnel should themselves be trained as combat personnel and be prepared to take on that role if necessary. I don't want a bunch of laundry workers or mess hall attendants being unable to defend the base because they're civilians, and as civilians have to be defended by the regular military personnel.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    11. Re:This isn't hard folks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the hell is a "mercanary", a small songbird that is trained in warfare? You are an idiot; please kill yourself.

    12. Re:This isn't hard folks by pixelpusher220 · · Score: 1

      That's a hell of a lot of fine print that will be expressly ignored when an enemy starts slaughtering civilians saying they could have been involved in the military chain of command.

      You just don't DO THIS for very, or I assumed, very clear reasons of the laws of war.

      --
      People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people :-D
    13. Re:This isn't hard folks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why wouldn't they claim they are CIA spies even without the mercenaries as a factor?

    14. Re:This isn't hard folks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TWX > Blah Blah Blah

      Weasel words

      pixelpusher220> That's a hell of a lot of fine print that will be expressly ignored when an enemy starts slaughtering civilians saying they could have been involved in the military chain of command.

      Yes. TWX is a brainwashed hypocrite.

    15. Re:This isn't hard folks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Our current list of hot-topic enemies do not follow the Geneva conventions and do not make fine distinctions like 'military' vs 'civilian'. If they can get your hands on you, they consider you an enemy combatant even if you are engaged in an entirely innocent pasttime such as tourism or journalism. They have proven over and over again that they won't hesitate to execute civilians if they happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

    16. Re:This isn't hard folks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I suspect most of these civilians are former military who the Air Force couldn't hold on to because of pay, discipline and lifestyle issues. Not that I'm faulting them. As civilians I'm sure their pay is higher than it would be for an equivalent military member. They aren't subject to the UCMJ. Don't have to worry about being arbitrarily transferred to Podunk Idaho or Deathcamp Afghanistan, and while they have to be polite to officers for whom they work, they can't be jailed for calling them a dickwad if it comes to that.

  2. How much do they charrge? by gurps_npc · · Score: 1
    How much are they charging the civilians to let them pilot the drones?

    If they let civilians use the weapons, they could probably eliminate the deficit.

    --
    excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
    1. Re:How much do they charrge? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      This would be so much more fun than piloting my little Phantom 3 around town.

      Pew! Pew!

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    2. Re:How much do they charrge? by Scarletdown · · Score: 1

      So after a drone strike, we can expect to see one of these drones come in, hover, and bob up and down over the victims' bodies.

      --
      This space unintentionally left blank.
    3. Re: How much do they charrge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck yeah! And it needs a loudspeaker so the gamer^h^h^h civilian pilot can yell "noob" at them before slamming the drone into a passing car.

  3. Next stop, outsourcing drone pilot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Next stop, outsourcing drone pilot

    Next stop, offshoring drone pilot

    Next stop, mechanical turking drone pilot

    Next stop, cloud-computed virtualized drone pilot

    Next stop, machine-learning drone pilot

    1. Re: Next stop, outsourcing drone pilot by jd2112 · · Score: 0

      Next stop, SKYNET

      --
      Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
    2. Re: Next stop, outsourcing drone pilot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Next stop crash the auto drive truk in to the ceo house just be for you lose the job to a h1b and go to prsion to get a doctor that covers more then the er and medcade

    3. Re:Next stop, outsourcing drone pilot by AHuxley · · Score: 2

      Re 'Next stop, machine-learning drone pilot" That is the end design. Entire section of nations will just become free fire zones for US drone AI systems.
      The US mil is thinking back to Vietnam and the Strategic Hamlet Program https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... and even the UK experience in the Boer War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
      The AI will just patrol 24/7 and interdict in any movement it its grid.
      Until then its more of the (Nov. 20 2015) https://theintercept.com/2015/...

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  4. so, open season on American civilians now? by Khashishi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    After all, if I were at war with the United States, they would be legitimate targets. And presumably, if they didn't wear uniforms and hid among civilians, then US is to blame for any "collateral damage" from bombing civilian centers. After all, there are unlawful combatants hiding among them.

    1. Re:so, open season on American civilians now? by silas_moeckel · · Score: 4, Interesting

      To be at war requires you have a nation state and declared war. No nation state is willing to openly declare war so we end up with nation state sponsored or at least ignored terrorism/asymmetric warfare.

      --
      No sir I dont like it.
    2. Re:so, open season on American civilians now? by bones_nl · · Score: 3, Informative

      That depends on your country's laws. Apparently, we Dutch are officially at war with IS/Daesh, and they're not a recognized nation state.

    3. Re:so, open season on American civilians now? by tlambert · · Score: 1

      An announcement by the PM that "the Dutch are at war" is different than a declaration of war. What does "being at war with an ideology" even mean?!?

      Unless you are talking about the No Surrender Motorcycle Club, who decided to join the Kurds in Northern Iraq and Syria

    4. Re:so, open season on American civilians now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does it? Is there a form for declaring war? A special hand shake, a ritual dance? Or is "declaring war" just that, declaring that you are war?

    5. Re:so, open season on American civilians now? by vbraga · · Score: 2

      Yes, it's usually a written statement approved by a legislative body, allowing the executive to wage war to a foreign country and, possibly, allowing special war times powers to the executive.

      --
      English is not my first language. Corrections and suggestions are welcome.
    6. Re:so, open season on American civilians now? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Is there a form for declaring war? A special hand shake, a ritual dance?

      Yes. This is how we do it:

      https://youtu.be/YRKhTvUUYMI

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    7. Re:so, open season on American civilians now? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      No, it was rarely that, when the US Constitution was written. Usually "war" was whatever the Commander in Chief said, which is why "war" as a declared thing is one of the few things specified and defined in the Constitution.

      --
      Learn to love Alaska
    8. Re:so, open season on American civilians now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So before this, you believe that the terrorists being targeted were saying, "We must not harm civilians in our global jihad!"

    9. Re:so, open season on American civilians now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      terrorism/asymmetric warfare. - even when your legitamate recognised government has been over thrown and you land invaded by a nation state that deliberately doesn't declare war so it can be called a peace keeping and prisoners of 'none' war have no rights?

    10. Re:so, open season on American civilians now? by currently_awake · · Score: 2

      Civilians in support roles to the military have always been targeted. Not all those German factories that got bombed were empty, and the ships carrying supplies to England in U-boat infested waters had civilian crews.

    11. Re:so, open season on American civilians now? by Simulant · · Score: 1

      These are ex-military, tax payer trained pilots.

    12. Re:so, open season on American civilians now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes, there is a ritual (two actually).

      Ritual is the correct word. Declarations of war are a matter of international law, and legal systems use rituals to mark important things and events. It's a specific act that cannot be re-interpreted to mean anything but the declaration of war. In the Roman era, for example, declarations of war involved a priest called a Fetial who would throw a particular kind of spear across the border into enemy territory. A Fetial priest would never have reason to throw a spear across the border except in declaring war, so his act cannot be misinterpreted or re-interpreted as anything except declaring war.

      In modern states, there's generally a legislative procedure for declaring war, one that produces a clearly written text. In the Dutch constitution, there are technically two procedures, although only one is now available: one for declaring war on another nation and one for declaring that a state of war exists between the Netherlands and another nation. The former cannot be used in the modern international legal climate, as it would imply a war of aggression. The latter, however, can be used if the Netherlands is attacked by an enemy and finds itself placed in a state of war through the actions of a second party. The relevant sections of the Dutch constitution are at https://nl.wikisource.org/wiki/Nederlandse_grondwet/Hoofdstuk_5#Artikel_96

    13. Re: so, open season on American civilians now? by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      You are at war with people who are at war with you.

      Did the school bully ever ask you if you wanted to be bullied? Did the drunk in the bar ever ask if you'd like to be beaten up, please sir?

      Seriously, if a group picks you as their enemy, it doesn't matter of they are a nation-state.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    14. Re:so, open season on American civilians now? by Alypius · · Score: 1

      That's not what "targeting civilians" means. Factories and cargo ships were targeted because they affect the ability of the state to wage war. The civilians working there were non-combatants, but they weren't the targets. To say "civilians were targeted" is when you bomb school buses and pizza parlors.

    15. Re: so, open season on American civilians now? by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Keep in mind you analogy of the school bully and the bar drunk. So if you are at war with a school bully, the accepted US tactic blow up the school and adjoining properties are guilty by association. If you are a war with a bar drunk, target the bar with drone missiles and if it is a chain target all the rest of the chain because the drunk might be in one of them instead. Lets be clear on the reality of the terror wars, the fantasy Global War on Terror versus the real Global Terror War (where little or nor focus is given on separating the guilty from the innocent and hellfire missiles at $58,000 a pop are fired off like fireworks at Christmas because the investors at Lockheed and Boeing want a new yacht for Christmas).

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    16. Re: so, open season on American civilians now? by silas_moeckel · · Score: 1

      You are not at war with the school bully or the drunk. You might have to defend yourself from them you might have to kill them when you reasonably believe to not means they would kill you. In war you kill them in the safest way possible, civilian casualties are acceptable as long as your kill your enemy. You kill from a distance you kill with technology you kill them till they submit or there is nobody left to kill. There are reasons why in war you have to treat a captured enemy humanly they did nothing wrong. I would hazard to say if you think getting beaten up is war you have never actually been in one or even a life threatening altercation.

      --
      No sir I dont like it.
    17. Re: so, open season on American civilians now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry, what military target did they utterly destroy leaving thousands dead and more wounded on 9/11?

    18. Re: so, open season on American civilians now? by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      Modulating your response is rarely helpful. With the bully, once you've given up on avoidance, the authorities, and reasoning, snack them hard. Or you continue to get abused.

      In war, conventional war, you would if course focus on combatants, overwhelming force, quick resolution if possible.

      In unconventional war, where combatants mix with civilians and disguise their identity, you have no such luxury. Starving them off their weapons sounds good until they start making them in kitchens. Starving them literally means starving their civilian shields.

      Fortunately ISIL is becoming a well organized state-like entity. We could starve it's revenue, oil for instance, and see how many of its fighters flee. But our president is reluctant to do so. And given time, Iran may get access to enough funds to bankroll ISIL and deny that option.

      So many people who find gains to deny the option of warfare in this modern world, while our enemies do not. Are they hopeful or oblivious?

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    19. Re: so, open season on American civilians now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With the bully, once you've given up on avoidance, the authorities, and reasoning, snack them hard.

      I tried to run, I tried to hide, the police refused to help, and the bully was beyond all reason...so I busted out a box of Snickers bars and trounced that motherfucker into submission with my hellfire candy bar assault. I left him whimpering and begging me not to resort to the mother of all snack tactics, the Dorito Assault, for had it really came down to crunch time, he knew his bitch ass would be done for. -PCP

    20. Re: so, open season on American civilians now? by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, autocorrect is a marvel.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    21. Re:so, open season on American civilians now? by ebvwfbw · · Score: 2

      That's been the state of things for a while. Obama killed a US Citizen abroad using a Drone. As is standard procedure, someone asked about the legality - you know, due process. The White House said "There was enough due process." Meaning the justice department said it's ok. No trial, no jury, you know rule of law. Just whacked the guy. Not a peep from main stream media. Imagine if GW Bush did that. They'd still be talking about it and how terrible it was.

      Anwar al-Awlaki
      https://www.washingtonpost.com...

      Granted, this was probably justifiable and probably should have been done. However we're a nation of laws and I think they should have had more due process. Problem is, if one guy gets away with it, what's to stop the next guy in the WH from whacking whomever he wants abroad? Killing always gets easier the more you do it I understand.

    22. Re: so, open season on American civilians now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aim High: Snack Squad. G.I. Ho-Ho: A Real American Hero. Go Navy - Accelerate Your Snack. -PCP

  5. BAD! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Read Geneva conventions.

    1. Re:BAD! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... of which the US is not a signatory.

  6. Really? by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 0

    "Air Force Hires Civilian Drone Pilots For Combat Patrols"

    Sounds perfect, I mean, what could possibly go wrong?

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    1. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those things aren't armed, so short of someone using one of those drones for a kamikaze strike (which i'd imagine would be p. hard given that the thing is flying relatively high and there are armed soldiers in the room), there isn't much one can do.
      You can get shot down, but that's about it.

    2. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Air Force Hires Civilian Drone Pilots For Combat Patrols"

      Sounds perfect, I mean, what could possibly go wrong?

      Read more than just the headline.

    3. Re:Really? by tlambert · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Those things aren't armed, so short of someone using one of those drones for a kamikaze strike (which i'd imagine would be p. hard given that the thing is flying relatively high and there are armed soldiers in the room), there isn't much one can do.
      You can get shot down, but that's about it.

      The MQ-9 typically carries an ordnance load-out of some kind, even when operating in an observer role; it's just that when it's operating in an observer role, it carries less ordnance, not zero.

      Typically, if the analysts get alerted, and while watching the feed, decide that they need to go "weapons hot", there is a military pilot or two in the room with the civilian pilots to handle laser-painting the targets, or the dropping of ordnance on them.

    4. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What could go wrong?

    5. Re:Really? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      "Air Force Hires Civilian Drone Pilots For Combat Patrols"

      Then they should put the video on twitch.tv.

      I'll bet the chat would be awesome:

      Nevada1: xD
      R1ku1313: just pooped myself
      monkeytamarin: 100
      Cjadl24: VAC
      Tomraax: drone Kappa
      Bx_flip_mula: whites created EBOLA
      Drayco88: CruW CruW CruW CruW
      Dylan88937: MP7?
      MohammadTayyemHD: As pasha once said rippepperonees Kappa
      Nios03: REKT! god bless KappaRoss
      Ovxe: GOOO LG
      Kosaukacz: cyka nuggets
      BambiOnPcIn1080p: lick my balls
      Caki322: chupenme la japi manga

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
  7. Japan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Japan has been hiring children to control giants robots for like 20 years.. It's about time.

  8. Enemy combattants are fair game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Think about that before you participate in a war.

    1. Re:Enemy combattants are fair game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you are a citizen in a democracy and your country makes the policy decision to go to war, then you are participating whether you like it or not. If you don't like it, agitate to change your country's policies. If that doesn't work and you really don't like it, then move out.

  9. Stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's what they train underpaid military types to do. Putting a CIVILian in a COMBAT role - even without guns - is wacky. But this IS the Air Force, where if you were a female trainee you got your fair share at Lackland from your instructors on up.

  10. Just like a call center by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It will run like any other call center does. Where each team of client support representatives, has a supervisor to handle the difficult problems, military will have supervisor that will take control and shoot.

    1. Re:Just like a call center by Pax681 · · Score: 1

      It will run like any other call center does. Where each team of client support representatives, has a supervisor to handle the difficult problems, military will have supervisor that will take control and shoot.

      erm.. no

      Civilians are not allowed to pinpoint targets with lasers or fire missiles. They operate only Reapers that provide intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance,

  11. Require military trigger pullers by Etherwalk · · Score: 5, Informative

    TFA explicitly points out that the civilians will not be pulling the trigger. They will be used only for Combat Air Patrols (a term that seems just a bit inappropriate) that are for data gathering and surveillance only. The trigger pullers will be active duty military.

    The problem, in TFA's eyes is that this represents a slippery slope - how many degrees of separation do you need in a military setting?

    IIRC, the air force has about four major protocol points that they follow in order to ensure that drone strikes are legal. One of those is that the person pulling the trigger be military so that you are ensured a direct chain of command, i.e. legal authority to kill others on behalf of the state, (this also ensures they get qualified immunity from lawsuits.)

    1. Re:Require military trigger pullers by mysidia · · Score: 1

      One of those is that the person pulling the trigger be military so that you are ensured a direct chain of command

      What they really should do is provide an "easy" way for their 'civillian' drone operators to just become military by signing a piece of paper that subjects these people to a chain of command, without other problematic caveats such as a 6 year or X year commitment, or caveats of an ability to be reassigned to any other random job as an interchangeable part, or caveats of a requirement to undergo physically excruciating trials.

      They would likely find many more volunteer drone combat pilots; if these people didn't have to go through a huge unnecessary ordeal and be worried about being spontaneously re-assigned to physical labor or an in-the-line-of-fire job, or guard duty on someone's whim.

    2. Re:Require military trigger pullers by dywolf · · Score: 1

      when one of our gunships knowingly strikes, for an hour, an active field hospital to get just one guy...I get the felling certain people in charge don't really care that much about being all 'right and proper'.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
  12. FiRst by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    obvious that there iMpaired its

  13. They should hire convicts. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think they have the right mindset for this kind of thing. They could give them extra cigarettes for good performance. Prison-industrial-drone complex for America! I'm in a pessimistic mood today.

    1. Re: They should hire convicts. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They took away the smokes and now phone calls under the law just had a big price cut

  14. Schools educate future warriors and by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    School buses transport future warriors to schools who educate future warriors. Pizza parlors nourish the warriors, their support teams, and future warriors.

    The entire economy, certainly the taxed part and much of the underground part, directly and indirectly support a state's ability to wage war.

    The entire notion of civilians in a war is an element of propaganda. Reality is far messier than some kind of absurd "legal" strictures about war.

  15. Bill Murray: We're getting into a weird area here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > TFA explicitly points out that the civilians will not be pulling the trigger. They will be used only for Combat Air Patrols (a term that seems just a bit inappropriate) that are for data gathering and surveillance only. The trigger pullers will be active duty military.

    i.e. "everything but pull the trigger."

    "Hey Bob, I've positioned the drone over some fellow American who has not been tried in any court. Can you press the button?"

    "Certainly, Ben. It would be wrong of civilians to actually kill someone. "

    "Thank you Bob. Yes, that would be a terrible line for society to cross."

  16. Mercenaries aren't new by Headw1nd · · Score: 1

    Using mercenaries is not a new thing for the US military, especially in "non-combat" roles. Generally they prefer ones that previously had US military service. Dollars to donuts the drone pilots this company has are all ex-military, who mustered out and are now looking at doing their same job for twice the pay with half the oversight.

    1. Re:Mercenaries aren't new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Replying as AC because I'm in the business (deployed Army customer)

      The pay gap is actually much higher. It's normal to meet pilots earning over $200k and they're always hiring. There's no shortage of work, and If anything, it's difficult to get time off. Our pilots are always bitching about never being home.

      If anyone reading this wants to make some money while hopefully helping to end to our international clusterfucks by providing LEGIT intel, I highly encourage you to get a pilots license and start applying. I wouldn't even bother with a $200,000 Embry Riddle education either. A month of private training is probably enough if you can pass a security clearance background check. You would actually be doing our flight crews a favor by relieving them and letting them go home more often.

      I will not be reading responses, but everything I said is public information and easily verifiable.

  17. CIA, is that you? by bhmit1 · · Score: 1

    Civilian pilots is what they call the CIA and other members of the intelligence community. Lots of the spy planes of past eras were piloted by "civilians". Sounds to me like an awkward phrasing of "the CIA negotiated some air time in our drones" with the phrasing designed to distract from what's actually happening and instead creating a debate about a completely different topic.

    Then again, the intelligence agencies already have plenty of drones and that's no secret, so it's entirely possible I'm wearing too much tin foil.

  18. That's How Artillery Started by tmjva · · Score: 1

    When artillery were first used by nation states, they were also hired out to contractors. (Of course when captured they weren't given the honors of war due soldiers, they were slaughtered. That was the impetus to incorporate them into their respective armies.)

    There is nothing new here.

    --
    Tracy Johnson
    Old fashioned text games hosted below:
    http://empire.openmpe.com/
    BT