Drones: America's New Air Force

60 Minutes' Lara Logan Reports On The Increasing Use Of Drones In The Battlefield

(CBS)  But the most important weapon is the aircraft's million dollar camera. "I don't want them to know that I'm watching their every move. That unseen, unblinking eye is really the effect that I want to give the ground commander. The fact that they don't know that I'm watching them - that's really the magic," Gough said.

The Air Force also has 116 Predators. The Predator is smaller than the Reaper, but it can stay up in the air even longer, 24 hours at a time. It can be miles away from its target, flying undetected through the clouds, while zooming in on an unsuspecting enemy.

We saw that ourselves when the Air Force flew a Predator over our heads, about two miles high in the sky.

From 10,000 feet above, the Predator was able to zoom in and send back a very precise image of Logan and the 60 Minutes team standing on the grounds of Creech Air Force Base. The Predator couldn't be heard or seen by the team, even though they knew the exact whereabouts of the drone.

The Predator's camera even followed the 60 Minutes team as they drove off the base's flight line. It's this ability that makes it difficult for enemy fighters to escape.

Col. Chambliss showed us exactly how these aircraft do that.

In one video declassified for 60 Minutes, a group of insurgents in Iraq had just ambushed a U.S. convoy. They were trying to get away, but the Predator was watching.

"This is a hot gun," he said, pointing on the screen to a moving human figure on the ground, carrying a gun-shaped object that looked white on the screen.

Asked what he meant by "hot gun," Chambliss explained, "Well it's literally, in this scene, white is hot - and that white spot that this guy is carrying is actually a hot gun. So it's been fired - and we already know it's been used. We've met positive identification criteria that these are bad guys, and so now we can go ahead and strikes these targets."

"Do you believe that Predators and Reapers are changing the face of war?" Logan asked.

"When we can take 34 airplanes, and we can have them airborne all the time, and they can look at whatever we need them to look at, that's a huge capability and so because of that, the enemy has to do things differently now. They have to hide more. They don't know when we're looking at 'em. They don't know where we are," Chambliss replied.

The pilots' aerial view of the battlefield often allows them to see the enemy before the soldiers on the ground can. Gough gave 60 Minutes an example of how he once used this advantage to expose a suspected sniper.

"We called down to the convoy and said, 'Hey how about if you start your engines and just move ten meters for me,'" he recalled. "And as soon as they did that this individual reached down and pulled a rifle out."

"We were in short order able to engage that individual successfully," Gough told Logan.

The target was hit with a Hellfire missile.

"What if you get it wrong?" Logan asked.

"We don't," Gough replied.

"Ever?" Logan asked.

"That's a tough question," Gough said after a pause. "Yeah. We have the resources to make sure we're right. In battle, in combat, in the fog and friction of war, there are always gonna be times that your judgment isn't with hindsight, you can see things with more clarity."

"But you're not there in the fog and friction of war. You're sitting here in your cockpit in Nevada," Logan remarked.

"And that's what makes us more powerful and have that clarity, because I'm able to distance myself from the fight and use resources that are otherwise unattainable to the combatants," Gough replied.

[renegadewaiter]

This is a total propaganda piece for the U.S. military and the Air Force drone program. The reporter never comes close to holding them to account for all the civilian deaths they?ve caused in Afghanistan and Pakistan, focusing mainly on the drones surveillance missions. There is no accounting of the many civilian casualties the drones have caused, and the eventual brief mention of the deaths of innocents portrays them as mere allegations of Afghans and Pakistanis rather than verifiable fact. Also never addressed is the morality of sitting in a room outside Las Vegas and deciding who lives and who dies on the other side of the world with the push of a button, the ?bravery of being out of range? as Roger Waters put it:

?What if you get it wrong?? [60 Minutes' Lara] Logan asked.

?We don?t,? [ Lieutenant Colonel Chris ] Gough replied.

?Ever?? Logan asked.

As if she?s not a reporter armed with the facts on civilian deaths attributed to the drones. The Lieutenant continues:

?That?s a tough question,? Gough said after a pause. ?Yeah. We have the resources to make sure we?re right. In battle, in combat, in the fog and friction of war, there are always gonna be times that your judgment isn?t with hindsight, you can see things with more clarity.?

?But you?re not there in the fog and friction of war. You?re sitting here in your cockpit in Nevada,? Logan remarked.

?And that?s what makes us more powerful and have that clarity, because I?m able to distance myself from the fight and use resources that are otherwise unattainable to the combatants,? Gough replied.

In spite of that clarity, unmanned planes and Air Force jets are criticized in Afghanistan for killing innocent civilians.

Across the border in Pakistan, where the CIA operates, they?re blamed for even more deaths.

60 Minutes lets the Air Force off the hook. They should have said. ?In spite of that clarity, unmanned planes and Air Force jets killed innocent civilians. Across the border in Pakistan, where the CIA operates, they?re caused even more deaths.

Probably the worst thing about this report is reporter Logan?s breathless tone as she marvels at this wonderous program in modern remote control slaughter.

[kemarnell]

I saw the short feature report on 60 minutes and was shocked by the use of drones that can be operated from a base in the Mojave Desert and with operators (former fighter pilots) directing their weapons from a distance of seventy-five hundred miles away. The safety and impersonal nature of the operation seems more like a game since you can go home and have dinner with the family after work. Making war with such weapons adds to the ease in accepting such decisions since you are not directly or personally involved with the results for your actions and the horror and revulsion you would witness. I think this is similar to other long distance bombing from manned planes, artillery or warships, but it adds a layer of security for the operators since you don't know where they might be. Like nuclear weapons, which we have tried to control unsuccessfully, this new weapon should be stopped before it becomes the latest menace to world peace.

[estai777]

It is all very sick. Drones were used on 9/11 also.

[BlackEye77]

America?s New Airfarce ? a 60 Minutes Secret Exclusive!

I have seen some lame shows purporting to be based on news reporting, but this has to be the worst. Hosted by USC song girl wanna be, Laura Logan, who sat with rapt attention in awe and wonder listening to the droning of U.S. Air force personnel, it?s a no wonder the propaganda arm of the USAF gave 60 minutes the red carpet for their ?secret? access. Free advertisement for the ?new? recruits mentioned toward the end of the ?report.?

Gosh, as a taxpayer, I am thrilled to learn of our military ?progress.? Another oxymoron like military intelligence. We should be so proud that such ?innovation? is made in the U.S.A ? after all, arms are our number one export (after torture victims). The further away from man-to-man combat you get, the easier it is to perpetuate the constant ?war? paradigm.

Doesn?t ?fighting wars? by remote control strike any of the brainiacs featured on this episode as sci-fi right out of the Terminator and 1984? Those books/films are written as WARNINGS, not as blueprints for the success of humanity. Is this really the way you want to live? Don?t you find the thinking behind all of this primitive and a bit ironic for you to sell it as ?progress?? The evolution of military hardware is the de-evolution of man. Do you really support endless conflict with ever-newer, more expensive weapons as the resolution?

In our non-democratic system of government run by a duopoly of dupes, why do you celebrate giving these anti-heroes favorable airtime? Both media-sanctioned parties can?t say, ?support the troops? enough. Heroes fight for our freedom? Military personnel of all sovereignties are the lowest common denominator, the last line of defense against corrupt politicians. Glorification of grunts is a con to get the emotionally unstable, financially disadvataged, and politically naïve to enlist. Do you think anyone with the wisdom beyond a 4th grader buys that ?heroic? crap? Only the simple-minded rote-learners. Are they ?warriors? or wimps? What would the invaders of Troy say? Stay-at-home suburban soldiers for a country not under attack. Is this what Al Gore meant by sprawl? Can you imagine what George Washington would think? This is progress?

Do you keep manipulating language so that you believe your own lies? We are at ?war?? We are NOT at ?war.? We are an occupying force. ?Insurgents? and ?enemies? are the patriots of those old civilizations we are so bent on destroying. We are told by you and the drones, like laugh-it-up ?fly?boy, church-going Goff, you that ?those? are ?the bad guys.? Actually, as presented, YOU are the ?bad? guys. You are glorifying detached ethics, not unlike those of Wall Street.

I wonder what Ike would say about your unfettered cheerleading for the expansion of the military-industrial complex. How long before our government starts aiming those million-dollar cameras on their own citizens (if they haven?t already)? Don?t you think Morrow would be sick with this kind of uncritical approach to a story? This embarrassing episode in ?journalism? certainly parallels the rest of the junk reality shows that are paying the bills for your profit-first /civic-duty-last policy. Thomas would be Pained.

On the plus side, after Logan?s breathless ad campaign, Katie Couric seemed seasoned during her pal-around with ?Secretary of War? Gates . Is there a more cynical, vapid, vacuous individual in the ?new? cabinet? Is this who we have become? The press as cheerleaders for mindless, soulless bureaucrats whose only job is keeping their job? Talk about The Ugly Americans.

Maybe you should just let Morley lead with the pap smears and go straight to the sagacity of Andy. In the spirit of reality TV, maybe you will let us mourn while they die live on the air?gosh, ain?t death grand.

[replycbsnews]

nova carried a story of the history of space where kennedy(?) was unsure of how others would accept overflights in their space. sputnik answered that (soveign territory 200mi up) ironically. when powell in the u2 was shot down, it resolved the issue "just because you can voilate airspace doesn't mean it will be accepted". the west has for too long presented new rules to which I doubt, they won't appreciate being applied to themselves. I would not like to see cheney's fear mongering come to pass, but the new precedent of easy foreign invasion of air space (by such low 50k flying uav's) really beggs the question and escalates the realm of acceptability of cruise armament and icbms. What can be the complaint then? Look, when bush said "we won't stand for iran closing the straits of hormuz " he didn't mention that the shipping lane went though THEIR territorial water. It was like saying the us has to allow russian travel up the Mississippi. When rumsfeld/senior officials said "the moment they used the mosque to fire, it became a legitimate target". in the iraq invasion, soldier stateside communications utilized one transponder of a satellite that handled 199 other broadcasts (from telephone to tv) and the implications are clear (so too for gps constellations used for civilian and military uses). Oddly karzai was right on this one, the west has such lousy morals (and principles) that they can't operate under the same rules they impose on others.

[replycbsnews]

I'll second that motion that he is a coward. Just because he can kill and not get a scratch brings to mind eric rudolph who also thought he was on god's mission. from falluja, they said "why don't they stand and fight toe to toe". you know the British rughby players think the heavily padded football players are sissys. u.s. miiitia expect to get protected by body armor, get urgent care, and survive. when they have the balls to go on a 100% assured suicide mission to die defending their country from a foreign invader, then I'll call them just as brave. Until then just because they can kill by remote control, invade foreign soil to control resources (similar to hitler/hirihito), they deserve to be called cowards. Face it, much of what is unjust in this world is the mismatch of opponents: eg big banks vs small homeowner or credit card user, big insurance vs ill policy holder, etc. examples of fair competition: boeing vs airbus, us drug co vs swiss drug co, ge turbines vs siemens, or hitachi, pratt and witney vs rolls royce, toyota vs gm. we don't pit a high school basket ball team against the nba, we have weight classes in boxing and wrestling. So yes, just because technology allows one an advantage over a less developed opponent LIVING IN HIS OWN COUNTRY, in his own home, doesn't make it right.

[replycbsnews]

this story just goes to show how hijacked my christian religion has become when this controller kills by remote control. If anyone should be allowed to have a "red hot barrel" it is a national guard defending their country from a foreign invasion and invasion of their airspace. If we were there for PURE humanitarian purposes (like kosovo) and not for the less apparent hidden agenda of brezenski's "grand chessboard" (written before 2nd iraq invasion) and the real agenda to find a oil path from the rich caspian region via turkmenistan, afganistan, pakistan to the coast. then it might be more palatable. As it stands, rumsfeld/unocal were rejected by the taliban when they proposed the pipeline and rumsfeld to which rumsfeld said we'll take it anyway. our agenda in iraq and afganistan are as corrupted as all the past overthrows covered in "100 years of regime change" and "confessions of an economic hitman". Afgans have every right to kick out foreign forces be they soviet or us. after all that's what we promoted to kuwait - or is the real agenda resource control and adhoc rules made up as appropriate. that sad uav operator should spend less time getting indoctrinated in church and more time learning about hypocrisies of his actions and that of foreign policy.

[replycbsnews]

What is missing from your report are snippets from past network broadcasts: 1) abc's evening news covering the same control center where the soldier talks of how he can go to work in the morning and then meet his wife and children for dinner in the local mall 2) rumsfeld/senior officer narrating a video saying "watch the fighter as he sets he props his gun at the door and enters his house and the missile follows shortly" (mindful his country, his home we invade their airspace)- 3) cheney/military replying to a question of how many innocent are allowed to be killed for one hvt -30. so the question is, in light of these types of apparent rules, do you see the parallel when that uav soldier takes off his uniform and now believes he is just another citizen in his own country and how the west behaved in iraq?

[briancooney]

Here is an interesting book about drones and new military technology:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1594201986?ie=UTF8&tag=coonefinan-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=1594201986

[ddaryl1]

unmanned drones is just the begginning... It will only be a matter of time before givernments will depend upon robotic / artificial intelligence to fight its battles... AND we all kow where this leads. Once you have a few people controlling armies of robotic soldiers the humans in this world will be slaves.... eventually humans will develope artificial intelligence to the point to which is can understand self preservation, and then from that point we will have a scenario that has played out in hollywood many times...

yep... humanity is well on its way to developing its own cylons