That’s not the only stealth drone we have. And the Israelis are making great strides in drone technology, as well. It’s a fairly good bet that we’ve got things on the drawing board, if not deployed covertly, that are bleeding edge tech. Well, covertly until someone in the Obama administration feels like talking to the press…
Or someone shoots one down or electronically hijacks it, and parades it in front of the press.
If we do, then we kill them with surgical strikes.
If we don’t, then we force them to go to ground and degrade C&C capabilities while making them seem weak and afraid at a time when they’re doing their damnedest to project strength and firm resolve.
But hey, if your suggestion is targeted assassinations without warning, I could get behind that too.
The Avenger hasn’t been cleared for actual service yet. I’m sure we’ve got lots of stealthy drones in the works, but it would be a really bad idea to test the drone in Syria. The Afghans have nothing more lethal than Stingers; the Syrians have lots and lots of modern anti-aircraft weapons.
Please; when we are talking about such a huge mismatch, hiding from American weaponry doesn’t look weak, it looks like the person in question has a brain bigger than a pea.
If our most advanced weapons systems can’t deal with Syria, it’s time to hammer our swords into plowshares, because our military is no longer effective against fairly minor nations.
F-22s can certainly deal with Syria. The question is whether our unmanned weapons systems can. Sure, they’re advanced, but they’re also (by design) cheaper and less effective.
If your argument is “use F-22’s instead of drones to assassinate Syrian regime officials and military leadership”, I could get behind that too.
The threat alone (at this point) might be enough to finish toppling the regime. While I doubt we could get ALL the important generals and officials (let alone Assad), I’m pretty sure that if we decided to do it we could take out much of their C&C and military infrastructure, which alone would give the rebels an overwhelming advantage they have lacked so far.
I’m still uneasy about the US getting involved in yet another rebellion in the region leading to yet another regime change. I think this is a bad idea for us to get involved directly, and at this point can only hope it works out as well as possible.
There are also issues which we didn’t face in Libya or Iraq. How Hezbollah reacts to this will be an x factor that can’t be ignored. Unless we’re really, seriously ready to go all in, this may turn out to be a very poorly thought out leak.
My argument would be that if we’re going to do it at all, we should do it properly. I’m not saying we should get involved at all, because I’m not sure it would accomplish anything and it would provide the Republicans with all sorts of ammunition - and to be honest, I just don’t care about Syria that much.
What is this talk of fielding armed drones over Syria? Did someone disband the Syrian Air Force and not tell me?
Try new Stealth brand Combat Drones today and see the difference.
Warning: drones not actually able to enter combat, void where enemy defenses present, intended for novelty use only.
… for external use only?
I have to say, I don’t understand Finn’s point at all. Covert action is rarely covert to those on the receiving end. Do you think Iran thinks its nuclear scientists are tripping into the path of speeding bullets? No, they know targeted assassinations are being carried out by Israel. Finn seems to think that just because Bibi doesn’t brag about this, that there is plausible deniability and no repercussions. Bullshit.
And ironically, it’s the very electoral pressure the (right-wing) Israelis are putting on Obama that makes these leaks necessary. Netanyahu wants Mitt “Carte Blanche” Romney so bad he can taste it, so Obama has to reassure everyone that his administration is being tough enough on Iran to take that talking point away from Romney.
Bibi has brought these leaks on himself. And they’ll be totally worth it to him if he can get Mittens in the White House.
Wait, what? You think Netanyahu is responsible for the leaks?
Well, that’s clear.
Yet again: Stuxnet. It was thought to be an Israeli weapon for quite some time among many circles. Turned out it was a United States project and was authorized by both Bush and Obama. Yes, the source of covert action can indeed stay covert in many situations. And your “knowing” that Israel is behind the attacks on Iranian scientists is interesting, given that there’s no real proof and many, many nations who have vested interests in stopping Iranian nuclear proliferation.
Your claims about the “necessity” of the leaks is sillier than that, however.
RNATB: he seems, I think, to be arguing that Netanyahu somehow necessitated the leaks and/or it’s his attempt to influence (?) American politics which has put Obama on the defensive and caused his administration to leak information. I’m not aware of any polling data to back up this interpretation of American internal politics, but I’m sure it will be provided post haste.
No, I’m saying Netanyahu has been purposefully undermining Obama at every turn to help Romney (who is clearly much more amenable to Netanyahu). The Obama administration, thus having been painted as anti-Israeli and soft on Iran, has to leak info (like StuxNet) to the press to prove that, no, they aren’t soft on Iran or letting Israel down.
We’ll be welcomed as liberators!
I’m also not seeing the problem with leaking StuxNet, from the American or Israeli point of view. Finn already claimed that Iran was retaliating against Israel for StuxNet, so the Israelis should be glad that the Americans finally fessed up. As for the American point of view, I doubt we can slip any lower in the esteem of the Ayatollahs. They may sponsor some retaliatory attacks, but they don’t seem to need any extra incentive to do that anyway.
So what exactly is the problem with leaking StuxNet? The centrifuges got bricked regardless.