We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

Droning on about drones

I know I keep droning on about drones, but this really is a paradigm shift happening in real-time.

TL’DR… 100km from the FEBA is now a persistent danger zone due to the omnipresent threat of drones. Some were sceptical in an earlier post earlier when drones were credited with 70% of battlefield casualties. Well, the number claimed now, based on video confirmation, is 90%.

4 comments to Droning on about drones

  • Patrick Crozier

    FEBA = Forward Edge of the Battle Area. I know because I had to look it up.

  • Flyover Country

    About twenty years ago, I voluntarily deployed to Iraq twice as a civilian. Getting in and out of the country was challenging but once you were on the base, it was relatively safe since I wasn’t the one on patrols. In Baghdad, you had to deal with mortars (handfuls a day) being lobbed into the US base there, but their accuracy was minimum. I remember a large cafeteria (“DFAC” — dining facility in military jargon), huge gym, and all sorts of niceties out there that would make impossibly tempting targets. The work was 16 hour/days every day, but it would not be unfair to call it “safe” since I was not leaving the base. If the US did the same thing today, the casualties due to budget-smart bombs would be astronomical.

    The fact that the USG could watch what is happening in Ukraine and — AFAIK — blithely walk into Iran is beyond infuriating to me (for the record, yes Iran is terrible, but was this the right time and right means? I have doubts).

    Some Twitter wag mention that the US is not ready for 24/7 streamed drone footage of US soldiers getting hit. I agree, and I am not looking forward to what comes next.

  • Paul Marks

    Both sides use lots of drones.

    As for casualty figures – I do not know which side is losing more men (or how many men each side is losing), but Mr Putin is responsible for the casualties on BOTH sides – there was no good reason to invade Ukraine in 2022.

    He may, possibly, achieve “victory” – but it is utterly pointless, indeed it is ashes in the mouth for the Russian people who gain nothing from such a “victory”.

    Russia and Ukraine both face demographic collapse – and Mr Putin sent lots of men, who could have been husbands and fathers, to their deaths – and he did so out of personal vanity, no strategic reason what-so-ever.

    Russians, as the late Mr Navalny warned, also face replacement – Mr Putin is, increasingly, relying on the forces of Islam. Muslims in Russia (who are increasing) and Muslims from the Central Asian Republics.

    To Putin fanboys and fangirls in the West – Mr Putin’s regime pushes the same “Diversity and Inclusion” message regarding Islam as the establishment of Western nations (such as the United Kingdom) do – the idea that he is some sort of saviour or alternative is farcical.

  • IrishOtter49

    Ukraine wins by not losing; Russia loses by not winning.

    Ukraine will win.

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>