Slashdot Mirror
ISIS Is Dropping Bombs With Drones In Iraq (popsci.com)
In addition to rifles, mortars, artillery and suicidal car bombs, ISIS has recently added commercial drones, converted into tiny bombs, into the mix of weapons it uses to fight in Iraq. In October, The New York Times reported that the Islamic State was using small consumer drones rigged with explosives to fight Kurdish forces in Iraq. Two Kurdish soldiers died dismantling a booby-trapped ISIS drone. Several months later and it appears the use of drones on the battlefield is becoming more prevalent. Popular Science reports: Previously, we've seen ISIS scratch-build drones, and as Iraqi Security Forces retook parts of Mosul, they discovered a vast infrastructure of workshops (complete with quality control) for building standardized munitions, weapons, and explosives. These drone bombers recently captured by Iraqi forces and shared with American advisors appear to be commercial, off-the-shelf models, adapted to carry grenade-sized payloads. "It's not as if it is a large, armed UAV [unmanned aerial vehicle] that is dropping munitions from the wings -- but literally, a very small quadcopter that drops a small munition in a somewhat imprecise manner," [Col. Brett] Sylvia, commander of an American military advising mission in Iraq, told Military Times. "They are very short-range, targeting those front-line troops from the Iraqis." Because the drones used are commercial models, it likely means that anti-drone weapons already on hand with the American advisors are sufficient to stop them. It's worth noting that the bomb-dropping drones are just a small part of how ISIS uses the cheap, unmanned flying machines. Other applications include scouts and explosive decoys, as well as one-use weapons. ISIS is also likely not the first group to figure out how to drop grenades from small drones; it's a growing field of research and development among many violent, nonstate actors and insurgent groups. Despite the relative novelty, it's also likely not the deadliest thing insurgents can do with drones.
In violation of several Samsung patents, I'm sure.
Only with a multiple million dollar registry of every single drone bought and sold in the US can we hope. Otherwise the terrorist will just build them out of raw components anyway and you'll make the entire thing look silly.
This reads like a bad anti-drug commercial. SEE WHAT WE F-ING STARTED NOW? Two Words... Jihad Drones! :-D
on woot! for $800 last week. Sure I know it's a refurb, but how long does it have to work?
Suddenly extremely applicable life skills outside of bird hunting.
i'm suprised it took this long to happen non-sporadically
this was only a matter of time, with IMU's and position sensors so widespread and cheap today, all we can do is to try and restrict export to these countries, but sooner or later it will get out there too.
It's good to see they have an outlet for their creative energy.
Count de Monet...
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Our Nobel Peace Prize President dropped 26,000 bombs (real bombs, not little hand grenades) last year on various brown people (even though we are not at war).
This effort by ISIS is a pittance in comparison.
BTW, has anyone considered that it might be preferable to address their grievances rather than just bomb them?
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
Killing people with remote control aircraft, I wonder where they got that idea. They're getting almost as good at killing people as Americans.
This is a great case study.
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
We make guns - They make guns. We make planes - they make planes. We make tanks - They make tanks.. etc.. etc.. We make drones - (What do you expect the answer is?)
Do you honestly think it will work?
After all, they are hardly going to obey a tweet saying "Could all ISIS members stand at these coordinates please - Signed Donald". I mean, you may get some but mostly you are just going to piss them off even more.
I have no idea why the US is so reluctant to deal with the actual issues but I am fairly sure dropping nukes isn't going to help.
Or you could address the problem....
WTF am I saying? Why address issues when you can nuke them! (sigh..)
Are you suggesting we address ISIL's problem with the Iraqi Security Forces? If I'm not mistaken ISIL has a problem with non-sharia governments and wants to carve out part of the land in Iraq (and Syria) to establish a Caliphate. How would you propose we address ISIL's problem?
Not that nuking them would solve any problem, but some problems aren't for us to solve...
Good point. This is precisely the point about the Sharansky Doctrine that everybody missed. President Bush and others around him naively believed that if they unleased democracy in the Middle East, everything would be hunky dory. The factor they missed out completely: Islam. Which is NOT a democratic or pluralistic religion, and which specifically is opposed to democracy in the Quran itself (18:26).
Becoming democratic worked in Latin America and helped those countries like Chile and Argentina become civil societies b'cos there were no other forces undercutting any such pluralistic culture. It's not the same in any Islamic group, as pointed out above. There is no separation b/w mosque and state: Mohammed was both a religious and political leader. The Caliphate was the succession of this dual-role leadership after his death: every Caliph, be it in Damascus, Raqqa, Baghdad, Cairo or Istanbul, was considered both a religious and political leader of all Muslims. It ended in 1924, and the current internecine war b/w Muslims is whether a new one is needed, and who'd lead it.
The other thing about Muslims is that they are not live and let live people. We've seen it in Iraq, where the long persecuted Shias started persecuting Christians, Sunnis and anyone else once the US handed over power to a democrat i.e. Shia government (since they are the majority in that country). Similarly, when Aleppo first fell to the 'rebels' - the Free Syrian Army, they made it a point to either murder or drive the local Christians out of the city. It's not that the persecuted groups anywhere - be it Sunnis in Syria, Kurds in Syria or Iraq, Shias in Iraq, Houthis in Yemen or anyone else - would simply like to be left alone: they want to replace the oppressors and switch roles altogether, so that their respective brand of Islam is recognized as the 'true Islam'. Incidentally, that's what it means in every country: in Iran, it would be the Islam as laid out by the Ayatollahs, in Iraq, it's Shia Islam, since Shias are 60%, in Saudi Arabia, it's the Wahabis, in Oman, it's the Ibadis, and so on. Which is why you have these wars of domination in most of these countries.
This is why you are right: not only is it none of our business, but also, it is something we cannot solve. As infidels, we have nothing to gain in which Islam ends up on top. In fact, given that all of Islam is about hatred of everything 'un-Islamic', the best thing to do is to get out of there and let them fight each other like the 2 cats of Kilkinney. Just bar the doors so that their refugees can't flee to non-Muslim lands spreading their mayhem there, like they've done in Germany and Austria. As long as that happens, just let them go at it. Any of their beauties wants to upload their carnage on Facebook or Twitter, let them, but as a policy, make it clear that it's their war, not ours. Any US journalist is stupid enough to go there, leave them there, and let them be converted to Islam or beheaded or both.
Another positive side-effect of this: the more they fight each other, the less they have in fighting against us, and causing terror out here. This civil war may be a blight on humanity, but it's a good thing for the non-Muslim world that instead of fighting the rest of us, they are busy on each other.
May all sides in this conflict win. And lose. Or whatever
The drones in this case are used to deliver whatever you ordered: you don't get to keep them as well
drone-a-gram!
ISIS is not a centralized enemy as we once had way back in WW II. They're a bunch of little "cells" that are doing their own thing. It would be impossible to "nuke them" as "they" aren't in any one place or country.
Even the nutty Muslims have no centralized governing body. They're interpreting their religion on the fly with likely thousands of nutjobs coming up with their own interpretation of what is "right" and "wrong" so it's impossible to put pressure on any leadership because there is none.
Since WW II, we've encountered a whole different type of war. One of small groups and in some cases, guerrilla warfare (Vietnam) which again,had little centralization as a target.
This is not a drone, it is R/C model!
Not trying to be insensitive here but I wish people would stop being so lazy and type "Islamic State" instead of ISIS. Your laziness is ruining a beautiful female name and makes a lot of women called Isis very uncomfortable.
The people commonly referred to as "terrorists" are better described as "psychotic serial murderers".
Unless fighting one of our enemies, in which case they are called "freedom fighters".
I wouldn't know why not. Nukes worked perfectly well last time we used them. How many Japanese terrorists are there now, especially outside of Japan?
More than there were in 1945.
Known Japanese groups designated as terrorist organizations include Aum Shinrikyo and Nihon Sekigun.
So, what's your proposal to drag Islam from the Middle Ages all the way to the 21st century?
Easy, here it is:
1. stop bombing the living shit out of them
2. stop invading random countries to pump their oil
3. stop assassinating local leaders we don't like
4. don't install puppet governments in place of assassinated leaders we didn't like.
Path to stability needs to be.... stable. I mean if you are out to bomb them then also please occupy, name them your colony and be responsible for what happens over the next few decades, rather than retreating and letting local warlords slug it off for dominance circa 1269.
I have no idea why the US is so reluctant to deal with the actual issues
Because there is money being made. It's as simple as that.
Sounds like the Catholic Church (see: Inquisition).
Anyone, with very moderate skills can build an aircraft to fly anywhere within a few dozen kilometers and 'land' within a 2m radius.
Right. They lover THEIR freedom to impose their ridiculous beliefs on rest of us, charge a tax for non believers, or just kill us if we don't convert (depends on circumstances).
If you can be killed by what someone is thinking on the other side of the world or their thoughts somehow impose themselves on your thoughts so that you are unable to sustain your pre-existing beliefs, then I'm - no, wait. No. No, No, I have no words for how stupid that sounds. Let me get back to you.
Technically yes, they get 72 drone operators.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
How many do you think you'd have if you bombed the Tenno?
The solution is much easier. Take a look at this map, you might even see it yourself.
We'd first have to change a lot in our foreign politics, though. That's the part that isn't easy.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
But that's how the game is played now.
Colonies cost money. You have to run them, police them, defend them, and all for what? Ungrateful peasants that only want to revolt. It's far more profitable to let them run their own country (under your supervision and tutelage, of course), have them pay for all those expenses and pay for those expenses with their raw materials, sold at a price that you dictate.
Why do you think colonies have fallen out of use? Because we're above that now and we're so much better and more civilized now? Please.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
If they started now, they are not as smart as I thought they were. The materials to buy drones and now even to buy complete drones are so obvious, I wonder why they only start now.
Is this because they are really ineffective and they use it as a last straw? Or is this now news to push some other agenda?
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
Which manufacturing capacity does ISIS have left? Which engineers have not yet run away from the sinking ship?
Someone is using ISIS as a test run for their latest toy, and it's not the Russians (they would test by themselves). Expect the US or some of its allies to use weaponized small drones in the next war against the next terrorists, the result of "years of military research".
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
They'll keep them. If you don't like that, you can come and try to repo them.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
The improved Raspberry Pi module will surely improve the guidance system capabilities. ;)
Ezekiel 23:20
Citizens in those countries were, at least, as free as you were. Otherwise explain vietnam drafts.
Also US may not be the bad guys, but having "bad guys" as enemies doesn't make you part of the good guys.
Explain bombing the shit out of violent dictator on country A while having good relations with neighbor violent dictator in country B (Gadafi vs al-Ásad)
Explain supporting de facto governments in LATAM.
Explain Cuba.
I'm assuming that the drones are remotely controlled, in which case, they can break away. Of course, all this ignores the fact that Amazon is not gonna ship anything to Eastern Syria or al Anbar province in Iraq
This is actually a good tact, but it involves teaching them that Islam is little more than the self-aggrandizement of its founder Mohammed
I mean, despite popular belief rational people did not wake up one morning and decide "I HATE FREEDOM!! RAWWW".
Popular or not, Sharia law is a belief system that is like many other common belief systems in that there is no concept of "freedom" per-se. Nearly all religious belief systems teach some level of subjugation to some type of diety or code. Just because "western" secular belief systems have evolved to favor some sort of "freedom" doesn't mean that is universal.
You can argue if it is rational or not to follow such a belief system, but arguing rationality for human behavior is probably a losing battle.
There is a history here that lead to where we are now, and while (sans time machine) we cannot take back what has already been done and mistakes that were made if we don't go back and look at how we got here today and start to address those issues we are never going to be rid of the problem. Certainly repeating the same mistakes is not going to lead to different results.
Of course if you are advocating assuming the so-called white-man's burden, well, I would argue that's one of the mistakes that got us to where we are today... It is a somewhat of a fools errand to think that we can do something in all cases, sometimes, the best action is inaction. Maybe they hate us for their own reasons? Maybe it is impossible to "get-along"? Why is should they see things our way when we dismiss seeing thing their way?
Well, since there is no draft at the moment, nor is there likely to be one anytime soon, that comment is moot. Where do you draw the line , though; was a WWII draft appropriate? Korea? As for violent dictator in country A versus country B, last I noted the US was bombing both nations. The support for repressive governments in Latin America is not right. Explain Cuba? Not backing Castro is consistent with American values - Cuba is HARDLY a bastion of freedom.
If you want to see it spread, you'd need a map of the 600s through the 1500s.
What I mean is to take a closer look at how Iran differs from the rest, and to ponder that Sunnis and Shiites are about as buddy-buddy as Catholics and Protestants were in the 1600s.
Hint: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.