U.S. Sends the Reaper to Iraq

So sitting in a AC office office in Nevada playing xbox warfare with god mode on is braver than the insurgents actualy going out and digging holes in the road to plant bombs?

LOL get a life sunshine

Still it seems to me like nothing more than over kill, unless the Reaper will target entire villages in order to weed out the enemy regardless if the enemy is within the casualties, I remember that this was done back last year and the casualties of civilians became a great concern within the Iraqi government after numerous complain by the civilian population.

So now it will be done in the death of the night and with minimal noises, that will leave no witnesses.

Either the reaper is been tested in Iraq, or is there because Cheney will get his desire and US will target Iran soon.

[edit on 6-8-2008 by marg6043]

Originally posted by noangels
So sitting in a AC office office in Nevada playing xbox warfare with god mode on is braver than the insurgents actualy going out and digging holes in the road to plant bombs?

LOL get a life sunshine

How naive ...

You think it's a sign of bravery to go out in the dead of night to plant a bomb that is designed to kill many innocents?

Contrast that with a weapon used to stop that sort of activity with a minimum of risk and collateral damage.

Since you're the one making all the xbox references, maybe you should go back to playing - unless you instead want to research the subject of warfare enough to be able to post about it intelligently.

Originally posted by Iblis
Pointing out import-export ratios is a rather uneducated method of saying anything about the U.S.

It is? Does that mean i have to stop pointing out how Dollar inflation is probably running at 10% due to the massive creation of dollars to pay for all the goods and wars that can't be afforded by other means?

It's the sign of a globalized economy --

It's a sign of US industry moving elsewhere.

Which is something most nations would be all the better to strive for.

To move their industries to other countries? I think not?

Stellar

Originally posted by centurion1211
How naive ...

You think it's a sign of bravery to go out in the dead of night to plant a bomb that is designed to kill many innocents?

If they are targeting American soldiers or those who they believe are cooperating with them then they are hardly targeting innocents by their definition or mine.

Contrast that with a weapon used to stop that sort of activity with a minimum of risk and collateral damage.

High explosives always involves collateral damage when it goes off near people; the most accurate 50 kg HE warhead can still kill people many hundreds of meters away.

Since you're the one making all the xbox references, maybe you should go back to playing - unless you instead want to research the subject of warfare enough to be able to post about it intelligently.

This is not a question of intelligence but about compassion and information. You are terribly misinformed and apparently not very compassionate when it comes to the people your country have decided to enslave by means of a puppet government.

Stellar

Originally posted by StellarX

If they are targeting American soldiers or those who they believe are cooperating with them then they are hardly targeting innocents by their definition or mine.

If you watch the news, you'll see that insurgents are primarily targeting Iraqis. There are several attacks a day in Baghdad, and the first US casuality in weeks happened yesterday. The people who get killed are primarily civilians or SoI. Either the insurgents are getting worse or they're not attacking us anymore. Every time there is a religious pilgramige there are VBIED and suicide attacks orchestrated to kill as many innocents as possible.

Hell, the SoI used to be Sunni insurgents. They work for the Government of Iraq now because, well, some of them didn't see eye to eye with AQI on the whole fundimentalist Muslim thing. When that happens the AQI tend to convince you to see things their way with a bullet to the back of the skull. So the SoI weighed their options and chose democracy.

As a general reply to the thread, the UAVs are an excellent survelliance tool. They can hang out and look for stuff constantly, don't need sleep like pilots, just an operator rotation and a stop in for gas. The armed ones are useful in remote areas where you can't quickly deploy boots and in situations where immeadiate deadly force is advantageous (like catching IED drops). Personally I don't like UAVs loitering in my AO. They clog up the airspace for more robust CAS and CCA platforms that can help me a lot more in a firefight. Between a Reaper and an Apache, I'll take the Apache.

But the Reaper is just an unclassed UAV. If you think thats cool, just wait a few decades for the classified ones to qualify for public disclosure. We have some crazy stuff up there.

reply to post by WhiteOneActual
if a reaper gets shot down will they
drag a piece of it throguh the streets yelling ''alah akbar alah akbar'' ????

What if Al-Qaeda attacked us and we sent just a unmanned robot army.
would the enemy wonder how to win when his troops got killed and we never lost any.

I could just imagine Al-Qaeda trying to fight a phantom army that they could never kill.

Suicide bombers against unmanned tanks.

What does a suicide bomber do against a armed UAV aircraft.

We used remote controlled Minesweeper drones boats in Vietnam and the VC onetime tried to capture one.
They got it to shore and about 20 VC tried to carry it into the jungle.
WRONG
They had a 35 pound remote controlled demolition charge to keep them from being captured.
brownwater-navy.com...
My unit had the highest kill score for that week and not a shot fired.

They never tryed again.

Sat Cong

Originally posted by WhiteOneActual
If you watch the news, you'll see that insurgents are primarily targeting Iraqis. There are several attacks a day in Baghdad, and the first US casuality in weeks happened yesterday.

Well no, their not, but that's what you would believe if you watched certain popular western news stations. The insurgents are targeting US forces and those they consider to be collaborating but obviously there is/was plenty of sectarian violence. Fact is without the US intervention this level of chaos simple would not have been possible.

The people who get killed are primarily civilians or SoI. Either the insurgents are getting worse or they're not attacking us anymore.

The people who are getting killed are primarily civilians and the majority are dying either by lack of health service delivery or US air strikes/artillery strikes.

Every time there is a religious pilgramige there are VBIED and suicide attacks orchestrated to kill as many innocents as possible.

Sources please. Why are they targeting innocents? Isn't that what you do when you use aircraft to bomb 'insurgents'?

Hell, the SoI used to be Sunni insurgents. They work for the Government of Iraq now because, well, some of them didn't see eye to eye with AQI on the whole fundimentalist Muslim thing. When that happens the AQI tend to convince you to see things their way with a bullet to the back of the skull. So the SoI weighed their options and chose democracy.

Iraqi's chose democracy ages ago which then resulted in the US backing and installing Saddam Hussein to destroy it. What do you think happens to people when the only route by which they can express themselves without getting killed is religious fundamentalism?

As a general reply to the thread, the UAVs are an excellent survelliance tool. They can hang out and look for stuff constantly, don't need sleep like pilots, just an operator rotation and a stop in for gas.

Yup and if it wasn't for the generals ( you need men to actually have authority) we would have had air forces that largely consist of drone aircraft drones decades ago.

The armed ones are useful in remote areas where you can't quickly deploy boots and in situations where immeadiate deadly force is advantageous (like catching IED drops).

They use them in cities as well and you would be well advised to stop making excuses when predators have been known to blow apart numerous wedding parties.

Personally I don't like UAVs loitering in my AO. They clog up the airspace for more robust CAS and CCA platforms that can help me a lot more in a firefight. Between a Reaper and an Apache, I'll take the Apache.

Clog up the airspace? How much loiter time does a Apache have and how regularly do they fly? You can easily deploy ten/ twenty predators for a single Apache and they are certainly going to be able to support you more often.

But the Reaper is just an unclassed UAV. If you think thats cool, just wait a few decades for the classified ones to qualify for public disclosure. We have some crazy stuff up there.

The one's laying the chem trails, yes.

Stellar

Originally posted by ANNED
..We used remote controlled Minesweeper drones boats in Vietnam and the VC onetime tried to capture one.
They got it to shore and about 20 VC tried to carry it into the jungle....

The VCs probably didn't know it was remote controlled. Many of them are farmers. Anyway, UAVs are useless in jungle or forested warfare, or any terrain with heavy covering.

...They never tryed again ...

Throughout the Vietnam Wars the VCs were highly adaptive, and respond with ingenuity when dealing with advance American weapons.

[edit on 9/25/2008 by coolieno99]

[edit on 9/25/2008 by coolieno99]

reply to post by StellarX


Sorry, I misspoke. I do not watch the news so much, I watch daily GRINTSUMs (graphic intelligence summeries) coming out of Baghdad. Most people would not have access to the same level of information on a daily basis, but you could deduce largely the same conclusion from the news.

The insurgents are not primarily targeting the CF. Sadr has pretty much excommunicated anyone still focusing their energies on the CF, not too mention most of them ran to Iran because we were killing or capturing everyone during the surge. Insurgents are targeting the refugees that are trying to resettle. When everyone left Baghdad, those that stayed behind took over all the real estate. Six years later when everone is trying to move back in.... its not going over so well.

We have not conducted air or arty strikes within Baghdad for a long time. Collateral damage limits us to .50 cal or under. If you're really tied up, you might get authorization for 30mm from a Longbow, but I haven't seen that in literally years. And we provide as much health care as we can, so they are not dying by that means.

As for my sources reguarding attacks on civilians during religious pilgramiges, you will have to refer to historical trends. My personal sources are classified.

Predator drones don't attack in urban areas, I promise. I don't know what numerous wedding parties were blown apart by Predators, but I do not recall hearing about it. We used to get upset about weddings because they like to utilize automatic weapons to celebrate, but we know better now. We have shot up weddings in the past, but we definately have not made a habit of it.

About UAVs clogging up airspace, they render the area they are flying in pretty much a no-fly-zone for manned aircraft. UAVs are small enough that they don't always show up on radar and pilots have a hard time visually identifying them, but big enough to seriously mess up another aircraft. They can't "swarm" an area- their required airspace is pretty much the same as a manned aircraft. Its not ten/twenty Predators to one Apache, its one Predator to one Apache. An Apache has a slightly reduced loiter time depending on home station, but carries a crapload more armament. I'll take 16 Hellfire and 1200 30mm over just 2 Hellfire any day.

And no, our classed UAVs do not spread chemtrails or any chemicals other than those resulting from their internal combustion engines.

Originally posted by WhiteOneActual
Sorry, I misspoke. I do not watch the news so much, I watch daily GRINTSUMs (graphic intelligence summeries) coming out of Baghdad.

Lucky you then? Care to comment about the Lancet study and their conclusions as to who were responsible for the majority of deaths?

Most people would not have access to the same level of information on a daily basis, but you could deduce largely the same conclusion from the news.

So basically your claiming to know more without being able to prove that you do? You realise that i don't have much reason to take your word for it don't you?

The insurgents are not primarily targeting the CF. Sadr has pretty much excommunicated anyone still focusing their energies on the CF, not too mention most of them ran to Iran because we were killing or capturing everyone during the surge.

So who killed the twenty US Soldiers that have so far died this month? Why are there now more Us troops in Iraq than before the surge? Why did Sadr 'declare war' ( again) just six months ago?

Insurgents are targeting the refugees that are trying to resettle.

Why would they do that? Is this like how the Vietcong just randomly killed South Vietnamese for living in South Vietnam? Why do you believe such nonsense?

When everyone left Baghdad, those that stayed behind took over all the real estate. Six years later when everone is trying to move back in.... its not going over so well.

Because the Shia took back Baghdad in 2006-2007 and they are not letting the Sunni back in hence the 4-5 million refugees in a country that is supposedly more and more 'at peace' .

We have not conducted air or arty strikes within Baghdad for a long time. Collateral damage limits us to .50 cal or under. If you're really tied up, you might get authorization for 30mm from a Longbow, but I haven't seen that in literally years.

www.washingtonpost.com...

www.reuters.com...

www.washingtonpost.com...

Please stop presuming that i can't read and don't know that the US is still using missiles and bombs as much as they can to prevent CF casualties.

And we provide as much health care as we can, so they are not dying by that means.

Not true as the million odd casualties in Iraq indicates so clearly. I suggest you read the various lancet studies.

www.boston.com...

www.ft.com...

www.usatoday.com...

www.counterpunch.org...

news.independent.co.uk...

en.wikipedia.org...

www.washingtonpost.com...

As for my sources reguarding attacks on civilians during religious pilgramiges, you will have to refer to historical trends. My personal sources are classified.

Sure they are and you will probably misrepresent them as badly as you have almost everything else thus far.

Predator drones don't attack in urban areas, I promise.

You promise?

blog.wired.com...

www.usatoday.com...

I don't know what numerous wedding parties were blown apart by Predators, but I do not recall hearing about it.

Like you would admit it. Let us know what you find...

We used to get upset about weddings because they like to utilize automatic weapons to celebrate, but we know better now. We have shot up weddings in the past, but we definately have not made a habit of it.

Any pilot that thinks he is being engaged by automatic rifle fire at that height need's his head examined.

About UAVs clogging up airspace, they render the area they are flying in pretty much a no-fly-zone for manned aircraft. UAVs are small enough that they don't always show up on radar and pilots have a hard time visually identifying them, but big enough to seriously mess up another aircraft.

And we all know that they don't show up on radar which is suppose is why Mig-25's can shoot them down with 1967 era weaponry. How can they clog up airspace so badly when they can be tracked and communicated with being flown as they are by remote control? Is real time communication between USAF assets still as pathetic as it was back in 1999? Sad stuff.

They can't "swarm" an area- their required airspace is pretty much the same as a manned aircraft. Its not ten/twenty Predators to one Apache, its one Predator to one Apache

It really isn't but since you are clearly into believing exactly what you want it may be pointless for me to argue.

An Apache has a slightly reduced loiter time depending on home station, but carries a crapload more armament. I'll take 16 Hellfire and 1200 30mm over just 2 Hellfire any day.

The newer Predators can carry the same 16 missile hellfire load than the Apache's and they can loiter at least ten times longer and fly far more often and can support troops far more efficiently in real time.

And no, our classed UAVs do not spread chemtrails or any chemicals other than those resulting from their internal combustion engines.

You copy pasted that from the text book, right?

Stellar

Nice post centurion. The Reaper sure looks alot more impressive than the predator. I thought the X-45 program was cancelled though? didnt Northrops x-47 win the contract instead?

Originally posted by WhiteOneActual
We have not conducted air or arty strikes within Baghdad for a long time. Collateral damage limits us to .50 cal or under.

I think you're being misinformed here!

No shortage of airstrike in Baghdad this year -
daily.iflove.com...

And no, our classed UAVs do not spread chemtrails or any chemicals other than those resulting from their internal combustion engines.

Their WHAT engines?
Sorry, I don't think you're for real.

Let me start by saying the MQ-1 & MQ-9 are not exactly drones. They are remote controlled aircraft flown by operaters at various air force bases across, such as Creech AFB, in the Nevada desert. These aircraft are pretty much exactly what they need. They are relatively cheap aircraft, that are relatively fuel efficient, and while they cannot carry much, they can loiter over the 'battlefield' for upto 28 hours nonstop. See an IED emplacement team? Take them, and the explosives, out [1][2][3][4]. Nonstop, 24/7 surveillance. And that is something no Apache can match. Certainly, if the US decides to continue this illegal occupation, then these aircraft are a step in the right direction.

MQ-1 Predator:
img231.imageshack.us...

MQ-9 Reaper:
img231.imageshack.us...

I would suggest doubters of this technology to understand, this aircraft is not fully designed for Close Air Support, it's armed reconnaissance. It would be almost worthless at invading Iran with - presently, you bomb with fast jets, not 70 knot light aircraft carrying a couple of missiles - LOL. Furthermore, I would suggest you look at the 'successes', of these vehicles:

MQ-9: The California Office of Emergency Services requested NASA support for the Esperanza Fire, and in under 24 hours the General Atomics Altair (NASA variant of the Predator B) was launched on a 16 hour mission to map the perimeter of the fire. The Altair had just returned from a test mission a day before the Esperanza Fire started. The fire mapping research is a joint project with NASA and the US Forest Service.[25][26]
*Picture: www.defenseindustrydaily.com...

As of October 2007 the USAF is flying Operational missions in Afghanistan.[6] As of March 6, 2008, according to USAF Lieutenant General Gary North, the Reaper has attacked 16 targets in Afghanistan using 500-lb bombs and Hellfire missiles. On 4 February 2008 the Reaper dropped a bomb on a truck carrying an insurgent mortar and team near Kandahar.[29]

en.wikipedia.org...

Further reading: [1].

MQ-1:
During the initial phases of the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq, a number of older Predators were stripped down and used as decoys to entice Iraqi air defenses to expose themselves by firing.[2][32]

From July 2005 to June 2006, the 15th Reconnaissance Squadron participated in more than 242 separate raids, engaged 132 troops in contact-force protection actions, fired 59 Hellfire missiles; surveyed 18,490 targets, escorted four convoys, and flew 2,073 sorties for more than 33,833 flying hours.

On February 4, 2002, an armed Predator attacked a convoy of sport utility vehicles, killing a suspected al Qaeda leader. The intelligence community initially expressed doubt that he was Osama bin Laden.

On March 4, 2002, a CIA-operated Predator fired a Hellfire missile into a reinforced al Qaeda machine gun bunker that had pinned down an Army Ranger team whose CH-47 Chinook had crashed on the top of Takur Ghar Mountain in Afghanistan. Previous attempts by flights of F-15 and F-16 aircraft were unable to destroy the bunker. This action took place during what has become known as the "Battle of Robert's Ridge", a part of Operation Anaconda. This appears to be the first use of such a weapon in a close air support role. [21]

en.wikipedia.org...

Further reading: [1]

I've heard about jet jockeys (F-16) who've lost friends due to IEDs - they 'volunteered' to fly the Predator / Reaper specifically so they can target IED & their emplacement teams - saving our troops lives. Furthermore, while civilian casualties can and have occured with these aircraft, they are still, much better than other platforms in this respect as you can survey the situation & area, which may not be possible using other platforms.

'Cockpit':
img231.imageshack.us...

Regarding the X-45 & X-47 programmes - they are infact demonstrator aircraft, designed to do a completely different role compared to the Predator & Reaper. The X-45 / 47 are high flying, gas guzzling, completely autonomous, stealthy jets designed to do roles like Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses (SEAD); Electronic Attack; Precision Targeting & Strike; and Intelligence & Surveillance. X-45 programme was cancelled in 2006 as was the X-47.

X-45A:
img227.imageshack.us...

X-47A:
img231.imageshack.us...

Further reading:
X-45: [1][2]. X-47: [1][2].

Hope this is of some use...

Oh yeah, and please spare me of any anti-war hate stemming from this post. This is not about the politics of the war in Iraq, this is about Reaper, so stick to it. I know as well as you know this war shouldn't of happened. I am anti-war. But if it's UAV's or other platforms in Iraq? No questions - I'll predominantly take the UAV.


[edit on 28/9/2008 by C0bzz]

reply to post by C0bzz


Thanks for the info Cobzz, i agree the Reaper is a great recon tool for the missions in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Regarding the x-45 and x-47, are there any other similar programs that have succeeded them?

A excuse for mock American Triumphalism when the'yr obviously on the back foot in Afghanistan against bearded 50-something year old Mujahasbeens ??

reply to post by theblunttruth


The only ones that I know of are further developments of either the X-45 or X-47, I forget, I think, for the Navy. Check the 'further reading' links in the previous post.

[edit on 29/9/2008 by C0bzz]