3 ms·

These aren't disruptive ideas, they're just bad ideas. > Build drone carriers. You mean like regular carriers will be with N-UCLASS (https://en.wikipedia.org/

These aren't disruptive ideas, they're just bad ideas. > Build drone carriers. You mean like regular carriers will be with N-UCLASS (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_Grumman_X-47B https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_Grumman_X-47B) or the optionally-manned F/A-XX (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F/A-XX_Program https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F/A-XX_Program)? > looks like any other civilian cargo ship until the need arises. This is called Perfidy. It's a war crime. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfidy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfidy > Drone operators can control entire formations of combat drones They have a hard enough time controlling one -- bandwidth requirements and ensuring reliable communication are hard. > point and click interface should be enough with modern tech Right up until your adversary degrades your access to all that modern tech. Military tech needs to be literally bullet-proof. > programmed to proceed with their missions fully autonomously The UN disagrees. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/apr/09/un-urged-to-ban-killer-robots-before-they-can-be-developed https://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/apr/09/un-urged-to-...

mrec 10y ago
> This is called Perfidy. It's a war crime. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfidy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfidy Maybe, but it looks like a bit of a grey area. The WP article you link states that "Ruses of war are not prohibited", and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruse_de_guerre https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruse_de_guerre includes this: disguising a warship to appear to be a neutral merchant vessel, or a merchant vessel on your opponent's side, has traditionally been considered a legitimate ruse de guerre, provided the belligerent raises their own flag to break the deception, prior to firing their guns. This was called sailing under false colors. Both sides during the world wars used this tactic, most famously the Royal Navy's Q ships. and also this: German commando Otto Skorzeny led his troops wearing American uniforms to infiltrate American lines in Operation Greif during the Battle of the Bulge. Skorzeny later reported that he was told by experts in military law that wearing American uniforms was a defensible ruse de guerre, provided his troops took off their American uniforms, and put on German uniforms, prior to firing their weapons. Skorzeny was acquitted by a United States military court in Dachau in 1947, after his defense counsel argued that the "wearing of American uniforms was a legitimate ruse of war for espionage and sabotage" as described by The New York Times.
- krapp 10y ago
  It seems like disguising your fleet as civilian cargo ships as a matter of policy "until the need arises" doesn't really count as a "ruse of war," or at least it shouldn't.
  - atemerev 10y ago
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfXUROw-1i8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfXUROw-1i8 — Russians are already building these.
- cgearhart 10y ago
  It would be different to design our fleet to "sail under false colors" during peacetime; and the US would be reticent about launching a fleet of ships that make civilian ships into targets. We don't have to rely on ruse to project power -- even if our carriers are vulnerable.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - vonmoltke 10y ago
    If it is an American ship flying American colors it is not sailing under false colors. Also, civilian merchants of the belligerents have been legitimate targets of the enemy since the dawn of naval warfare. Whether or not they are armed is irrelevant.
    - douche 10y ago
      Most American merchant vessels are not American-flagged... Liberia, I believe, is the most common flag for US shipping.
vonmoltke 10y ago
> > looks like any other civilian cargo ship until the need arises. > This is called Perfidy. It's a war crime. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfidy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfidy I agree with all of your points except this one. Traditionally, disguising a warship as a neutral or enemy merchant is a legitimate ruse de guerre provided the deception is broken before the vessel attacks. There has never been a prohibition against arming merchants or concealing armaments on a vessel flying its proper colors.
atemerev 10y ago
Human Rights Watch report is not the UN. Running under false flag is not a war crime if proper flags and designations are displayed in combat. Electronic warfare affects drones and modern manned aircraft almost equally.

mrec 10y ago

> This is called Perfidy. It's a war crime. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfidy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfidy Maybe, but it looks like a bit of a grey area. The WP article you link states that "Ruses of war are not prohibited", and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruse_de_guerre https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruse_de_guerre includes this: disguising a warship to appear to be a neutral merchant vessel, or a merchant vessel on your opponent's side, has traditionally been considered a legitimate ruse de guerre, provided the belligerent raises their own flag to break the deception, prior to firing their guns. This was called sailing under false colors. Both sides during the world wars used this tactic, most famously the Royal Navy's Q ships. and also this: German commando Otto Skorzeny led his troops wearing American uniforms to infiltrate American lines in Operation Greif during the Battle of the Bulge. Skorzeny later reported that he was told by experts in military law that wearing American uniforms was a defensible ruse de guerre, provided his troops took off their American uniforms, and put on German uniforms, prior to firing their weapons. Skorzeny was acquitted by a United States military court in Dachau in 1947, after his defense counsel argued that the "wearing of American uniforms was a legitimate ruse of war for espionage and sabotage" as described by The New York Times.

krapp 10y ago
It seems like disguising your fleet as civilian cargo ships as a matter of policy "until the need arises" doesn't really count as a "ruse of war," or at least it shouldn't.
- atemerev 10y ago
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfXUROw-1i8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfXUROw-1i8 — Russians are already building these.
cgearhart 10y ago
It would be different to design our fleet to "sail under false colors" during peacetime; and the US would be reticent about launching a fleet of ships that make civilian ships into targets. We don't have to rely on ruse to project power -- even if our carriers are vulnerable.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- vonmoltke 10y ago
  If it is an American ship flying American colors it is not sailing under false colors. Also, civilian merchants of the belligerents have been legitimate targets of the enemy since the dawn of naval warfare. Whether or not they are armed is irrelevant.
  - douche 10y ago
    Most American merchant vessels are not American-flagged... Liberia, I believe, is the most common flag for US shipping.

vonmoltke 10y ago

> > looks like any other civilian cargo ship until the need arises. > This is called Perfidy. It's a war crime. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfidy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfidy I agree with all of your points except this one. Traditionally, disguising a warship as a neutral or enemy merchant is a legitimate ruse de guerre provided the deception is broken before the vessel attacks. There has never been a prohibition against arming merchants or concealing armaments on a vessel flying its proper colors.

atemerev 10y ago

Human Rights Watch report is not the UN. Running under false flag is not a war crime if proper flags and designations are displayed in combat. Electronic warfare affects drones and modern manned aircraft almost equally.