3 ms·
You can definitely argue that drones are a proliferation risk, and also risk conflict escalation. Because there is no pilot on board, A is willing to action ris
by angry_octet 8y ago
You can definitely argue that drones are a proliferation risk, and also risk conflict escalation. Because there is no pilot on board, A is willing to action riskier/provocative missions against B. B knows it is a drone, so it can shoot it down without loss of human life, and possibly analyse the fragments. A knows B will do this, so uses disposables to probe air defence capabilities. B sends its own drones to probe A's launch site/platform. Et cetera.
So it allows idiot governments to seriously escalate conflicts. I can totally see this in regional conflicts.
The disposable nature with low local expertise requirements might increase sales to poor countries too. While they might not be willing to risk their air superiority totems (MiGs of F-16s) in a border dispute, drones are qualitatively different.
- mirimir 8y agoYou don't need to argue hypotheticals. This has been the US pattern for decades. Even in Iraq, the US casualty rate was far lower than in Vietnam.