The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community

The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/index.php)
-   War, Religion and Politics Thread (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=25)
-   -   Drones (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=110343)

Pontius Pirate 03-07-2013 08:10 PM

Drones
 
So Rand Paul decides to filibuster John Brennan's nomination because of....drones. Anyways, seems like drones are a hot topic right now. How do you feel about this controversial topic?

houghtam 03-07-2013 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pontius Pirate (Post 3806962)
So Rand Paul decides to filibuster John Brennan's nomination because of....drones. Anyways, seems like drones are a hot topic right now. How do you feel about this controversial topic?

Broad topic, so I'll answer equally broadly. I would like to see them used to replace "front line" troops (whatever that means these days), and less for covert and precision ops. There are some things that need the precision of a human's touch, and these are one of them.

The thought that they could (have) be (been) used on Americans, whether on American soul or not, is appalling. The REALITY that it is only a matter of time before someone weaponizes one for personal use in the United States is downright terrifying. You can guarantee the second amendment rights folks will be out for that en force.

cutthemdown 03-07-2013 10:43 PM

LOL I know you mean soil but American Soul sounds like a cool new music show that should be on TV.

Paul was grandstanding but i guess he has a point. They need to make killing an American with a drone more then just what the white paper laid out. It said something like a high ranking govt official with knowledge of a threat to America? A little vauge regardless of what party you belong to.

But Houghtam how do drones take over for front line troops? Are you a fan of battlestar gallactica?

milehighiniowacity 03-07-2013 11:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by houghtam (Post 3806983)
Broad topic, so I'll answer equally broadly. I would like to see them used to replace "front line" troops (whatever that means these days), and less for covert and precision ops. There are some things that need the precision of a human's touch, and these are one of them.

The thought that they could (have) be (been) used on Americans, whether on American soul or not, is appalling. The REALITY that it is only a matter of time before someone weaponizes one for personal use in the United States is downright terrifying. You can guarantee the second amendment rights folks will be out for that en force.

Well put. +1

Blart 03-08-2013 12:38 AM

Drones, as they're used right now, are for monitoring civilians in other countries, and (apparently) our own country soon.

Stanford & NYU did extensive studies on how drones are used, and published their findings here:

http://livingunderdrones.org/

http://livingunderdrones.org/wp-cont...90&w=300&h=133


Personally, I don't like that the USA is violating international law. I don't like that women and children are slaughtered by drones. I don't like forcing towns to live in fear, with the constant buzz of human-less death machines, and how that creates a new generation of terrorists.


If we had a Republican president, you'd see protests against drones. Which is why capitalism is so perfectly built for neoliberal presidents: They keep the people from rioting at home with a handout or two, and big business supports the never-ending wars. Everyone is happy.


Rand Paul didn't want this coming to America,

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/6yMOzvmgVhc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

And for that I thank him.

IHaveALight 03-08-2013 10:29 AM

They are currently using drones for residential surveillance purposes in Denver. If you pay attention you will see. Just don't expect them to look like the war drones that we see pictures of.

Requiem 03-08-2013 10:40 AM

I got about 9 drones in my shed.

Rohirrim 03-08-2013 10:47 AM

Constant surveillance is the price we must pay for our security. All is well.

houghtam 03-08-2013 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Requiem (Post 3807170)
I got about 9 drones in my shed.

A friend of mine does work on them for the forestry service, I think, and helped them develop some sort of mapping software that he apparently can't talk about now because he just got sent over somewhere in the ME.

This ship has come and sailed, folks. Halfway to Portsmouth by now. The only solution is to nip it in the bud and start regulating. Anything over a certain weight ratio or something like that needs to be licensed and registered. That way you're not outlawing stuff that is purely for entertainment and not capable of carrying out an attack, but honestly...I don't even know enough about drones to even begin to fathom what they're currently capable of, let alone what they will be 5, 10 years in the future. This is something that needs to be brought to the forefront of discussion with the public before it gets out of hand.

Pontius Pirate 03-08-2013 09:09 PM

http://scm-l3.technorati.com/11/04/2...20110420200649

Dukes 03-08-2013 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rohirrim (Post 3807179)
Constant surveillance is the price we must pay for our security. All is well.

Talk about one of the biggest horse **** pieces of legislation (The Patriot Act) in the history of this nation.

Dukes 03-08-2013 09:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by houghtam (Post 3806983)
The REALITY that it is only a matter of time before someone weaponizes one for personal use in the United States is downright terrifying. You can guarantee the second amendment rights folks will be out for that en force.

First off, I completely agree with you on this topic. But this part is silly at best. If someone really wanted to, and i'm not advocating it by any means, they could make their own drone with a RC airplane and a camera. Would be pretty easy to put explosives on it as well. The technology is there, the desire is not.

Arkie 03-09-2013 08:47 AM

Right to bear drones! lol It's only fair if we're still a government of the people, by the people, for the people. The spirit of the 2nd amendment is for the people to protect themselves from outside and inside threats. The idea is to never again allow a privileged ruling class to have better weapons than the people. It will begin with law enforcement using them for surveillance with tiny mosquito drones equipped with a cameras, microphones and needles to take a DNA sample with the pain of a mosquito bite. They will be able to inject tracking devices under the skin. They can fly in swarms, they can have lethal toxins in their needles. The possibilities are endless for future development.

http://robertstaniford.com/wp-conten...ug-300x225.jpg

houghtam 03-09-2013 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dukes (Post 3807504)
First off, I completely agree with you on this topic. But this part is silly at best. If someone really wanted to, and i'm not advocating it by any means, they could make their own drone with a RC airplane and a camera. Would be pretty easy to put explosives on it as well. The technology is there, the desire is not.

I wholly disagree with you that the desire is not there. There are already members of the Michigan Militia (now called the Michigan Militia Corps) who are working on this. And their reasoning is exactly what Arkie said: "Well if the government can have it, so can I."

Dukes 03-09-2013 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by houghtam (Post 3807650)
I wholly disagree with you that the desire is not there. There are already members of the Michigan Militia (now called the Michigan Militia Corps) who are working on this. And their reasoning is exactly what Arkie said: "Well if the government can have it, so can I."

You might be right. I personally haven't seen or heard of the want or desire for that kind of thing.

cutthemdown 03-09-2013 08:06 PM

The private sector should have drones. I can think of some uses right off the top of my head can't you? But mounting a gun on said drone or dropping an explosive will still be illegal.

baja 03-09-2013 08:20 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYETraMg_mM

cutthemdown 03-09-2013 08:58 PM

Obama should announce houghtams plan to replace front line troops with drones asap. Then our boys sit at home in suits controlling their drones. Hell they dont even have to go to war anymore. Damn Houghtam and you call be a hawk. So where are we going to march our drone army to? N Korea? Sweet.

houghtam 03-09-2013 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cutthemdown (Post 3807908)
Obama should announce houghtams plan to replace front line troops with drones asap. Then our boys sit at home in suits controlling their drones. Hell they dont even have to go to war anymore. Damn Houghtam and you call be a hawk. So where are we going to march our drone army to? N Korea? Sweet.

Uhhh, dude? "Robots" have been taking over for humans on the battlefield in an increasing capacity for years, and their uses are only increasing. It doesn't surprise me you can't recognize this, as you are stuck in a 50's mindset and think the first and only purpose of the government is to protect us from an attack by the combined strength of the entire world.

You're clearly not based in any reality I am aware of.

cutthemdown 03-09-2013 10:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by houghtam (Post 3807922)
Uhhh, dude? "Robots" have been taking over for humans on the battlefield in an increasing capacity for years, and their uses are only increasing. It doesn't surprise me you can't recognize this, as you are stuck in a 50's mindset and think the first and only purpose of the government is to protect us from an attack by the combined strength of the entire world.

You're clearly not based in any reality I am aware of.

Name one major battle where robots took over for humans? No humans use robots and drones on the battlefield. Your ridiculous comment they should replace front line troops is some sort of fantasy. Yeah you are based in reality alright.

houghtam 03-09-2013 11:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cutthemdown (Post 3807929)
Name one major battle where robots took over for humans? No humans use robots and drones on the battlefield. Your ridiculous comment they should replace front line troops is some sort of fantasy. Yeah you are based in reality alright.

What do you think "replace front line troops" means, exactly? Did you read it as my saying replace all of them? No. Think of manufacturing. How many jobs were there 50 years ago? 25? Now? How many have been "replaced" by robots? Answer: a metric **** ton.

Same will happen with the military, you watch. Robots, drones, whatever you want to call them will continue to prove successful in more and more areas (they already perform S&D, bomb disposal, mine laying/sweeping, surveying, scouting...all things that used to be done by humans). If we don't figure it out, someone else will.

Btw, this is what Obama meant by the horses and bayonets comment. You guys were so focused on whining about a perceived slight that you apparently didn't catch that.

Why is it so hard for you to adjust to the 21st century? We're 13 years in, buddy. It's time to **** or get off the pot.

jhat01 03-10-2013 01:11 AM

You guys act like these drones are robots. They aren't. They are flown by real people and the sensors are operated by real people. They aren't mindless machines roaming the skies on some super duper AI.

cutthemdown 03-10-2013 05:23 AM

When i hear someone say i support drones replacing front line troops I rightfully think they mean one day instead of 30 thousand troops heading into some hot zone they mean 30 thousand drones controlled by men at a safe distance.

What you mean to say is you support the military continuing to find ways to use drones, that make troops safer. But you said replace and that means replace. Not my fault you don't make sense. It's about as much a fantasy as your world powered by solar and wind. I get a good chuckle out of it though please keep them coming.

houghtam 03-10-2013 06:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cutthemdown (Post 3807964)
When i hear someone say i support drones replacing front line troops I rightfully think they mean one day instead of 30 thousand troops heading into some hot zone they mean 30 thousand drones controlled by men at a safe distance.

What you mean to say is you support the military continuing to find ways to use drones, that make troops safer. But you said replace and that means replace. Not my fault you don't make sense. It's about as much a fantasy as your world powered by solar and wind. I get a good chuckle out of it though please keep them coming.

Yes! I said replace, and I meant it. There will be fewer soldiers on the front line because of what drones are capable of, as well as the smaller cost of resources.

You, still stuck in the 50s, thought I meant the robots that use old people's medicine for fuel, didn't you?

Hilarious!

houghtam 03-10-2013 06:41 AM

I wonder if oarsman and riggers in navies around the world felt replaced when steam power made oars and sails obsolete.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:35 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.