3 ms·
The nation that can destroy (or otherwise severely impair) the drone manufacturing/supply/operation capabilities of the opponent, wins a war that heavily includ
by adventured 3y ago
The nation that can destroy (or otherwise severely impair) the drone manufacturing/supply/operation capabilities of the opponent, wins a war that heavily includes drones. That's assuming the drones matter that much, which hasn't been demonstrated yet. Drones have not shifted the balance of power in Ukraine v Russia for example. It's no different than blowing up any other kind of weapons supply. You stop the supply, that's how you end the mass drone threat in that kind of war. You don't just endlessly trade hits from drones. That'd be like never targeting your opponents artillery production, or tank production, or cruise missile production, or jet production, or repair facilities, et al.
Of course one side or the other will win a drone war, just like most any other war.
- dist-epoch 3y ago> Drones have not shifted the balance of power in Ukraine v Russia for example. Because both sides use them. They made armored attacks impossible for both sides. A tank is detected in 1 minute and destroyed in 10.
- nerpderp82 3y agoDrones will be the mustard gas of the mid 21st century. We haven't begun to see the massive casualties they will create. Think guided cluster munitions where every 100g payload finds a soft target and you launch 1-5k of them at a time. The Ukraine war is already causing blowback as seen in Gaza. We should make war itself illegal.