It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why is the US/Coalition not targeting ISIS with drones?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 01:46 PM
link   
This has been on my mind for some time now. With the technology and advancements we have, especially drones capable of bombing innocent civilians/women/children in such areas of Pakistan and several other countries for the last few years at least....why are these drones not being used against ISIS as they seem to be roaming free, unfazed, in the deserts of Syria and Iraq. I mean, we have all seen by now the incredibly generic looking "firefights" on CNN that shows a mere handful of alleged ISIS fighters involved in firefights with the coalition fighters(sorry, the whole thing looks very staged to me), and the US and other nations of the coalition are sending in fighter jets, that by ISIS own account are doing nothing to hinder them. My question to you ATS is WHY NOT send in the drones to handle ISIS? Also, yesterday it was reported that ISIS was 1 hour, then 1 mile away from Baghdad. Knowing this and their exact position, why were there no airstrike on ISIS at that time. I mean, surely we have the capability/technology to hit them from anywhere, why is/has this not been done?
edit on 1-10-2014 by thesmokingman because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 02:00 PM
link   
I think they have, I'm sure ISIS released pics of a drone they shot down.

Maybe they are just using them for targets out of the way of civilians, and using manned craft for more precise strikes as to avoid civilian casualties?


edit on 1/10/14 by woogleuk because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 02:08 PM
link   
I'm not sure about this, but I think they are trying out those fancy new fighter jets that they have been developing
F-35 I think it is.
But who knows...



posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 02:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: woogleuk
I think they have, I'm sure ISIS released pics of a drone they shot down.

Maybe they are just using them for targets out of the way of civilians, and using manned craft for more precise strikes as to avoid civilian casualties?


I guess that is my point..the US had no problems killing innocent civilian in Pakistan and other countries, ISIS is supposedly a much greater threat than the other countries that US drone strikes killed innocents. I guess I have not heard about ISIS downing a drone?



posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 02:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: woogleuk
I think they have, I'm sure ISIS released pics of a drone they shot down.

Maybe they are just using them for targets out of the way of civilians, and using manned craft for more precise strikes as to avoid civilian casualties?


Just went on a google ride and found nothing about ISIS shooting down a US drone. Found a few articles of ISIS claiming to have drones that were seized from the Iraqis, nothing in US drone being shot down by ISIS though.



posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 03:05 PM
link   
I suppose it depends on the type of intel required, if you can get it from a spy sat then why send something shootable down to take a photo that will scare the natives since they know they are being watched and thus change their plans

and if you want to watch something in its native environment you don't jam a camera in its face



posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 03:08 PM
link   
Isn't there a shortage of Drone pilots.....?

Maybe there's no one available ..?

PDUK



posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 03:14 PM
link   
a reply to: thesmokingman

We dont know that theyre not using them already. We know for sure they are using them for recon so.....



posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 03:35 PM
link   
I would have to guess the reason being that drones cannot carry the armament that a fully armed fighter jet carries. I could be way off on that though.

And if they fly by remote control could several drones in the same area get their signals messed up? Like can a squadron of drones fly in formation?



posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 03:59 PM
link   
they are

www.cnn.com/2014/08/08/world/iraq-options/



posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 04:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Maxatoria
I suppose it depends on the type of intel required, if you can get it from a spy sat then why send something shootable down to take a photo that will scare the natives since they know they are being watched and thus change their plans

and if you want to watch something in its native environment you don't jam a camera in its face

We are not talking about drones to spy, we talking about drones to kill



posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 04:13 PM
link   
As you haven't posted a link whats makes you believe that we AREN'T using attack drones I guess you mean?



posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 04:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: TDawg61
As you haven't posted a link whats makes you believe that we AREN'T using attack drones I guess you mean?

Because I have not heard of it. Also, last time I checked the US can shoot a missile where the sun dont shine on any creature on gods green earth, yet I see nothing but pictures of these "fighter" nomadically wandering through vast open areas. That has led me to believe they have not. At least not as much as they should be perhaps.



posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 05:19 PM
link   
The US has been using a mix of fighters, TLAMs and Predator and Reaper drones. This is no secret. If you will recall Predators were being spotted before the attacks in Syria over Syrian airspace. So they are in use. Why would you think they are not?
edit on 1-10-2014 by MrSpad because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 05:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: MrSpad
The US has been using a mix of fighters, TLAMs and Predator and Reaper drones. This is no secret. If you will recall Predators were being spotted before the attacks in Syria over Syrian airspace. So they are in use. Why would you think they are not?

Because they do not seem to be nearly as effective as they were a few years ago in killing terrorists, I mean women and children within Pakistan and some african nations that I cannot recall right now.



posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 05:51 PM
link   
I've wondered the same thing, OP. My thoughts are they are allowing them to roam about as a way to force boots on the ground from the ME countries. (Good luck with that.)

CNN showed a group of IS on the ground fighting a few days ago, and it seemed to be maybe eight to ten of them. Perhaps nobody wanted to use a half million dollar bomb and exercise for so few. They want boots on the ground.

Just a guess of course.



posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 06:03 PM
link   
Things might turn a bit nasty.
www.military.com...


Highway of death nasty.
6th century meet the Hog.
edit on 1-10-2014 by cavtrooper7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 06:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: thesmokingman

originally posted by: MrSpad
The US has been using a mix of fighters, TLAMs and Predator and Reaper drones. This is no secret. If you will recall Predators were being spotted before the attacks in Syria over Syrian airspace. So they are in use. Why would you think they are not?

Because they do not seem to be nearly as effective as they were a few years ago in killing terrorists, I mean women and children within Pakistan and some african nations that I cannot recall right now.


You talking about almost 13 years of drone strikes vs a few weeks. Although I think your just confusing yourself.



posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 09:24 PM
link   
a reply to: thesmokingman

You seem kinda anti American or something. We don't kill civilians like you make us out to. When we do we own up to it. You can this throughout the Iraq and Afghanistan conflict. We have used them against ISIS, especially over parts of Syria. But listen why use a limited drone when you have fighters in the air twenty four seven, you get my drift. They are slow, easily shot down and can only carry small amount of ordinance.

Drones are generally used for Intel in places you can't use fighters or to strike a target where you can't use them etc.

We don't need them there now, waste of time.

The Bot



posted on Oct, 2 2014 @ 06:05 AM
link   
a reply to: thesmokingman

because they might be too successful
because then they won't need the assistance of vassal states
because allegiances in the conflict are changed it might lead to relevations about the technology from the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
because it might cause the masses to think about the implications of the technology.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join