Drones and the Re-symmetricized Battlefield [link fixed]

The skyrocketing use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) by U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan has generated intense debate about how useful they are against insurgent/terrorist networks. Some prominent counterinsurgency experts have decried the "siege mentality" among non-combatant locals caused by collateral damage from the drone strikes. But despite the charge that drones represent a technology (i.e., a means) in search of a strategy (i.e., end goals), there's no question that: 1) drones are here to stay, and 2) they're truly re-symmetricizing the battlefield in a much-needed manner.

Continue reading Tom's New Rules post at WPR.

Comments

[ExUrbanKevin]

Wrong link.

Unless Boeing is working on turning the 777 into an unmanned armed drone, that is. :)

[Sean Meade]

gah! sorry for the error and thanks for the heads up. fixed now.

[Louis Heberlein]

The drones are more effective in environments like Afghanistan and Pakistan, although DARPA is developing a new generation that can operate in complex urban areas, or areas with sophisticated air defenses.

I've been looking for the AQ/Taleban crowd to experiment with cheap commercial products to detect drones, but there are probably ways to handle such methods. Topic for Sean's info site?

[Alvis Brigis]

Great term - "resymmetricized" - gets the complex idea across instantly. There must be some historical warfare symmetry cycle. Anything you're aware of? Wonder what how that cycle will thread through accelerating times.

Cleary resymmetricization is coming soon to the Army, too, via the Big Dog robot, mini pac bots and smaller aerial drones: http://www.scenarioland.com/futureblogger/show/1154-robotic-pursuit-squads-are-a-forgone-conclusion

[large]

Good piece . .