It certainly ties in with AI which is the perfect thing to coordinate huge swarms of drones that no human could manage.
The sword of Damocles that hangs over the US and it a great threat that could explode at any time is the $40 trillion deficit that this drone-love will only increase. When it comes to the military there is never talk of restraint. Show the flag and go on a spending spree. It would be astounding to hear Hegseth talk about cutting back something to provide money for the drone-love, such as getting rid of one of our carrier battle fleets. But compromise, financial or otherwise, is out of the question.
There was a book written years ago called "The Perils of Dominance" that lead the US into adventures that prove costly and pointless
The last point to make is that no weapon system goes for long without a countering weapon. Think of all the "advancements", tanks, machine guns, aircraft, submarines, ICBM's, nuclear bombs. All have their very short day of tilting the playing field and then it tilts back.
All of this testosterone driven teenage boy bravado that can't be paid for when climate change goes not only unaddressed but deliberately made worse, not even mentioned in the news or the State of the Union address. The only area of restraint in this administration is in regulation...of anything.
Honestly, the US military probably does need a million drones if it were to ever fight a peer enemy, though of course those would end up being used on undefended populations and Americans if history is any guide. Also, it's kind of funny that Hegseth promises every squad will fly drones while also focusing the military on push-ups and testosterone. Neither of those really help in drone warfare. I'm loath to say that US plans are at odds with themselves but...
Pretty sure I remember seeing headlines about the younger Trump monsters having some significant interests in companies "producing" these sorta armaments. This is gonna be empty buildings claiming to ship empty crates to phantom military units who will, if necessary, provide reports of the "equipment" being destroyed in training or operations.
Rudimentary dictator nonsense to loot the treasury.
They could at least show some imagination in their fiddling! Stage the weapons on a comet or under the ocean? Parasites.
Make no mistake, they want these drones to feed them down through local police and national guard squads. The goal here is to use them on citizens. Where else does it make sense to have such short range weapons?
Given the maniacal dreams of taking over all of North and South America - plus all the enemies we're making - not surprised they are afraid, hence stockpiling war gear, and building bunkers.
Couple of points that a lot of people get wrong, due entirely to the fact that our media ecosystem is so poisoned on the topic of any 'hostile foreign power' like Russia, Iran, China, Cuba, etc.
1. Re: the NATOKraine war with Russia - "These are a lot of drones, but this isn’t necessarily the future of warfare. Russia has been resorting to the use of so many drones because it has been unable to conquer its smaller and weaker neighbor and because it is afraid to fly its airplanes over Ukraine (or when it does so, it can’t coordinate or carry out a sustained attack). Ukraine, by contrast, has been the model of self defense. Yet despite the use of these millions of drones, neither side has been able to shift the stalemate...."
This is a deceptively correct looking incorrect take. Yes, Russia (and Ukraine) have used a lot of FPV drones, primarily to take out soldier or tank positions on the other side of the respective line(s) of contact. But the premise rests on a falsehood - Russia does not want to "conquer" Ukraine and never has. This misunderstanding stems from the first days of the war when Russia used a multi-prong offensive that came from the north and east and advanced to the outskirts of Kyiv before pulling back. The goal was never to take Kyiv, a city of millions of people with a total combined force of 40,000 troops. I could go on about this in depth, but the topic is drones and an accurate understanding of the war itself. Saying Ukraine has been the model of self defense is also incredibly misleading if not just mistaken - Ukraine has never been 'on its own' in this war - OR - in the leadup to this war. This isn't the Russia-Ukraine war - it's the NATO Ukraine Russia war. Ukraine would never have been able to defend itself if it wasn't for the copious NATO affiliated minders, equipment operators, advanced ISR, and of course billions of dollars of weapons that the US, UK and NATO flooded into the country.
So it's very incorrect to frame this as a simple situation of poor little Ukraine defending itself, by itself, against a big evil aggressor who wants to conquer it.
2. Regarding "90%" of Iranian drones having been intercepted, again this is misleading without a lot of further context. First off, a large percentage of the drones Iran has launched into its neighbors' airspace and at the US and Israel were **intended** to be intercepted with the aim of identifying the air defenses - AND - depleting them so that later rounds of increasingly more advanced and accurate missiles could be used. This applies to many of the drones launched at US naval assets.
So yeah, having a lot of drones intercepted sounds like "the good guys" are winning, but it was really a main component of their war strategy. Speaking to the poisoned media ecosystem, I don't believe for a second that a full 90% of Iranian drones have been intercepted. I don't see how anyone, including journalists, could possibly take the claims and statisics coming out of CENTCOM or state-affiliated corporate media like WaPo, NYT and others at face value. Their track records are terrible, and they only start doing real journalism when it's safe and convenient to do so (i.e., the recent WaPo reports on the undercounting of casualties that was first reported LONG ago by The Intercept).
And it doesn't hurt the Iranians' situation that their drones are incredibly cheap (and effective) by American/Israeli standards. That's why Russia has been using Geran and other Iranian drones in Ukraine.
But the TL/DR version of my comment really is that drones are and will be a major component of future warfare, even if the morons at the Pentagon don't seem to understand exactly how, or have the foggiest idea of how to do so cheaply and effectively - especially considering that US foreign military warfighting policy/doctrine has been a wreck stretching back to Vietnam.
I subscribed because I value your opinions but I stopped receiving your notices several months ago in my email & that may have something to do with the drop off. I am a politically busy union member & read from so many sources so didn’t notice for a while.
I nevertheless continue to subscribe for the aforementioned reason.
These drones wont be used by US to fight anyone. They will be given to proxies to fight for us. The stuff is NEVER for us to use. Its for THEM to use to fight OUR wars. So a million drones? Why not. Cheaper than a million 155mm shells per year. We will also make all the other stuff as we never choose, we do all of the above. So dont worry, there is no plan for the US to fight anywhere, certainly not against a peer enemy. We will find some moron country on the edge of Russia or China or Iran or… that is panting for freedom and democracy to immolate ourselves on our behalf. The drones are just there as accessories to this end.
I think it’s going to be somewhere between. Not necessarily Ukraine and not necessarily air warfare that is currently happening. Predator drones and their bigger brothers will have a CAS battlefield capability. Thinking an F-35 can replace the A-10 is lunacy. But CAS will be needed anytime we put troops in the field. And troops on the ground is the only way to win wars. Airpower does not win wars (otherwise Iran would be over by now). Now smaller drones will have their place on the battlefield as a rifle squad’s overflight capability to see what is over the next hill. But attacking fortifications will still go to manned aircraft. Drones will add to but not be removing aircraft any time soon.
Imperial boomerang… incoming
I hate these people.
It certainly ties in with AI which is the perfect thing to coordinate huge swarms of drones that no human could manage.
The sword of Damocles that hangs over the US and it a great threat that could explode at any time is the $40 trillion deficit that this drone-love will only increase. When it comes to the military there is never talk of restraint. Show the flag and go on a spending spree. It would be astounding to hear Hegseth talk about cutting back something to provide money for the drone-love, such as getting rid of one of our carrier battle fleets. But compromise, financial or otherwise, is out of the question.
There was a book written years ago called "The Perils of Dominance" that lead the US into adventures that prove costly and pointless
The last point to make is that no weapon system goes for long without a countering weapon. Think of all the "advancements", tanks, machine guns, aircraft, submarines, ICBM's, nuclear bombs. All have their very short day of tilting the playing field and then it tilts back.
All of this testosterone driven teenage boy bravado that can't be paid for when climate change goes not only unaddressed but deliberately made worse, not even mentioned in the news or the State of the Union address. The only area of restraint in this administration is in regulation...of anything.
Honestly, the US military probably does need a million drones if it were to ever fight a peer enemy, though of course those would end up being used on undefended populations and Americans if history is any guide. Also, it's kind of funny that Hegseth promises every squad will fly drones while also focusing the military on push-ups and testosterone. Neither of those really help in drone warfare. I'm loath to say that US plans are at odds with themselves but...
“Are they crazy?” I assume this is a rhetorical question.
Great piece Ken.
Thanks!
Pretty sure I remember seeing headlines about the younger Trump monsters having some significant interests in companies "producing" these sorta armaments. This is gonna be empty buildings claiming to ship empty crates to phantom military units who will, if necessary, provide reports of the "equipment" being destroyed in training or operations.
Rudimentary dictator nonsense to loot the treasury.
They could at least show some imagination in their fiddling! Stage the weapons on a comet or under the ocean? Parasites.
They want to use them against Americans
No words!
Bravo!
“Where is it likely that such a three-mile range American swarm would even be needed?” I’m thinking Canada, Cuba, and Colombia, for starters.
Or Mexico, or Los Angeles
They definitely plan on using these for martial law domestically
Make no mistake, they want these drones to feed them down through local police and national guard squads. The goal here is to use them on citizens. Where else does it make sense to have such short range weapons?
Given the maniacal dreams of taking over all of North and South America - plus all the enemies we're making - not surprised they are afraid, hence stockpiling war gear, and building bunkers.
Couple of points that a lot of people get wrong, due entirely to the fact that our media ecosystem is so poisoned on the topic of any 'hostile foreign power' like Russia, Iran, China, Cuba, etc.
1. Re: the NATOKraine war with Russia - "These are a lot of drones, but this isn’t necessarily the future of warfare. Russia has been resorting to the use of so many drones because it has been unable to conquer its smaller and weaker neighbor and because it is afraid to fly its airplanes over Ukraine (or when it does so, it can’t coordinate or carry out a sustained attack). Ukraine, by contrast, has been the model of self defense. Yet despite the use of these millions of drones, neither side has been able to shift the stalemate...."
This is a deceptively correct looking incorrect take. Yes, Russia (and Ukraine) have used a lot of FPV drones, primarily to take out soldier or tank positions on the other side of the respective line(s) of contact. But the premise rests on a falsehood - Russia does not want to "conquer" Ukraine and never has. This misunderstanding stems from the first days of the war when Russia used a multi-prong offensive that came from the north and east and advanced to the outskirts of Kyiv before pulling back. The goal was never to take Kyiv, a city of millions of people with a total combined force of 40,000 troops. I could go on about this in depth, but the topic is drones and an accurate understanding of the war itself. Saying Ukraine has been the model of self defense is also incredibly misleading if not just mistaken - Ukraine has never been 'on its own' in this war - OR - in the leadup to this war. This isn't the Russia-Ukraine war - it's the NATO Ukraine Russia war. Ukraine would never have been able to defend itself if it wasn't for the copious NATO affiliated minders, equipment operators, advanced ISR, and of course billions of dollars of weapons that the US, UK and NATO flooded into the country.
So it's very incorrect to frame this as a simple situation of poor little Ukraine defending itself, by itself, against a big evil aggressor who wants to conquer it.
2. Regarding "90%" of Iranian drones having been intercepted, again this is misleading without a lot of further context. First off, a large percentage of the drones Iran has launched into its neighbors' airspace and at the US and Israel were **intended** to be intercepted with the aim of identifying the air defenses - AND - depleting them so that later rounds of increasingly more advanced and accurate missiles could be used. This applies to many of the drones launched at US naval assets.
So yeah, having a lot of drones intercepted sounds like "the good guys" are winning, but it was really a main component of their war strategy. Speaking to the poisoned media ecosystem, I don't believe for a second that a full 90% of Iranian drones have been intercepted. I don't see how anyone, including journalists, could possibly take the claims and statisics coming out of CENTCOM or state-affiliated corporate media like WaPo, NYT and others at face value. Their track records are terrible, and they only start doing real journalism when it's safe and convenient to do so (i.e., the recent WaPo reports on the undercounting of casualties that was first reported LONG ago by The Intercept).
And it doesn't hurt the Iranians' situation that their drones are incredibly cheap (and effective) by American/Israeli standards. That's why Russia has been using Geran and other Iranian drones in Ukraine.
But the TL/DR version of my comment really is that drones are and will be a major component of future warfare, even if the morons at the Pentagon don't seem to understand exactly how, or have the foggiest idea of how to do so cheaply and effectively - especially considering that US foreign military warfighting policy/doctrine has been a wreck stretching back to Vietnam.
I subscribed because I value your opinions but I stopped receiving your notices several months ago in my email & that may have something to do with the drop off. I am a politically busy union member & read from so many sources so didn’t notice for a while.
I nevertheless continue to subscribe for the aforementioned reason.
These drones wont be used by US to fight anyone. They will be given to proxies to fight for us. The stuff is NEVER for us to use. Its for THEM to use to fight OUR wars. So a million drones? Why not. Cheaper than a million 155mm shells per year. We will also make all the other stuff as we never choose, we do all of the above. So dont worry, there is no plan for the US to fight anywhere, certainly not against a peer enemy. We will find some moron country on the edge of Russia or China or Iran or… that is panting for freedom and democracy to immolate ourselves on our behalf. The drones are just there as accessories to this end.
I think it’s going to be somewhere between. Not necessarily Ukraine and not necessarily air warfare that is currently happening. Predator drones and their bigger brothers will have a CAS battlefield capability. Thinking an F-35 can replace the A-10 is lunacy. But CAS will be needed anytime we put troops in the field. And troops on the ground is the only way to win wars. Airpower does not win wars (otherwise Iran would be over by now). Now smaller drones will have their place on the battlefield as a rifle squad’s overflight capability to see what is over the next hill. But attacking fortifications will still go to manned aircraft. Drones will add to but not be removing aircraft any time soon.