Skip to main content

Terrorist Drone Attacks Are Coming To A City Near You

When a small, $400 remote-controlled quadcopter drone landed on the grounds of the White House in February 2015, Obama administration officials were in full freak-out mode. Just 10 days before that incident, officials from the Department of Homeland Security, the U.S. military, and the FAA huddled for a “summit” regarding a danger that they had been contemplating for years: Terrorists’ use of weaponized drones for attacks or assassination.
As reported by Wired, while the conference was open to the public it was not open to the press, but one attendee told the online tech magazine it was an eye-opening experience:
The officials played videos of low-cost drones firing semi-automatic weapons, revealed that Syrian rebels are importing consumer-grade drones to launch attacks, and flashed photos from an exercise that pitted $5,000 worth of drones against a convoy of armored vehicles. (The drones won).
However, the attendee noted, the most impactful visual aide was sitting on a display table outside the auditorium among a collection of other low-cost drones that had been converted to carry explosives. “One quadcopter, strapped to 3 pounds of inert explosive, was a DJI Phantom 2, a newer version of the very drone that would land at the White House the next week.”
Scary.
As it turns out, the quadcopter that landed on White House grounds simply got away from its owner, who was goofing around with it in the wee hours of the morning. But the fact that it landed there at all, coupled with mounting evidence that groups around the world are increasingly weaponizing drones of all shapes and sizes, is alarming.
In April, Fox News reported that the use of weaponized drones has caught the U.S. off guard, even though the CIA was the first to use a weaponized Predator drone to kill six al Qaeda suspects in Yemen in 2002:
Over the last six months, ISIS has increased its use of weaponized and surveillance drones against Iraqi and U.S. forces. U.S. Central Command told Fox News coalition troops have as many as 30 encounters a week with unmanned aerial vehicles. These drones are inexpensive ones modified to drop grenades or to surveil troop movements.
In those preceding months, the U.S. military reported destroying at least five ISIS drone facilities — one factory and four storage areas. This new emerging threat has led some experts to question aloud whether the U.S. is prepared to adequately defend against weaponized drones.
“Unfortunately, I don’t think we’re ready right now,” Michael Waltz, a former commander of U.S. Army Special Forces, told Fox News. “We don’t have the technology — both the detection technology and the counter-measure technology — in place yet.”
As drone technology improves and people begin to figure out new ways to make them deadly, Waltz says the U.S. government will need to figure out how to secure its critical infrastructure — military bases, nuclear plants, standard power plants, dams, air traffic control, water treatment facilities, and the financial sector.
“I do think it’s just a matter of when,” Waltz said when discussing the future possibility of attacks on the U.S. homeland. (Related: A British defense firm has developed a weapon that can disable micro-drones.)
“A nightmare scenario could be 20 to 25 of these drones that you could buy over the counter that have been weaponized with explosives that you can put on a timer with GPS coordinates to a military base or a nuclear facility or Capitol building that could attack in a swarm-like fashion,” Waltz told Fox News.
Drone makers like Phantom are taking voluntary steps to prevent their products from becoming weaponized. For instance, Wired noted, the China-based company began adding a “mandatory firmware update” for its Phantom 2 that prevents the drone from flying within a 15.5-mile radius of the White House.
But clearly, U.S. officials are concerned that terrorist use of weaponized drones is not just a concept but a practice being used more and more — in and out of conflict zones.
It’s just a matter of time before they come to our cities and towns.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why States Still Use Barrel Bombs

Smoke ascends after a Syrian military helicopter allegedly dropped a barrel bomb over the city of Daraya on Jan. 31.(FADI DIRANI/AFP/Getty Images) Summary Barrel bombs are not especially effective weapons. They are often poorly constructed; they fail to detonate more often than other devices constructed for a similar purpose; and their lack of precision means they can have a disproportionate effect on civilian populations. However, combatants continue to use barrel bombs in conflicts, including in recent and ongoing conflicts in Africa and the Middle East, and they are ideally suited to the requirements of resource-poor states. Analysis Barrel bombs are improvised devices that contain explosive filling and shrapnel packed into a container, often in a cylindrical shape such as a barrel. The devices continue to be dropped on towns all over Syria . Indeed, there have been several documented cases of their use in Iraq over the past months, and residents of the city of Mosul, which was re

Russia Looks East for New Oil Markets

Click to Enlarge In the final years of the Soviet Union, Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev began orienting his foreign policy toward Asia in response to a rising Japan. Putin has also piloted a much-touted pivot to Asia, coinciding with renewed U.S. interest in the area. A good expression of intent was Russia's hosting of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in 2012 in Vladivostok, near Russia's borders with China and North Korea. Although its efforts in Asia have been limited by more direct interests in Russia's periphery and in Europe, Moscow recently has been able to look more to the east. Part of this renewed interest involves finding new export markets for Russian hydrocarbons. Russia's economy relies on energy exports, particularly crude oil and natural gas exported via pipeline to the West. However, Western Europe is diversifying its energy sources as new supplies come online out of a desire to reduce its dependence on Russian energy supplies . This has

LONDON POLICE INDIRECTLY ENCOURAGE CRIMINALS TO ATTACK RUSSIAN DIPLOMATIC PROPERTY

ILLUSTRATIVE IMAGE A few days ago an unknown perpetrator trespassed on the territory of the Russian Trade Delegation in London, causing damage to the property and the vehicles belonging to the trade delegation , Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said during the September 12 press briefing. The diplomat revealed the response by the London police was discouraging. Police told that the case does not have any prospects and is likely to be closed. This was made despite the fact that the British law enforcement was provided with video surveillance tapes and detailed information shedding light on the incident. By this byehavior, British law inforcements indirectly encourage criminals to continue attacks on Russian diplomatic property in the UK. Zakharova’s statement on “Trespassing on the Russian Trade Mission premises in London” ( source ): During our briefings, we have repeatedly discussed compliance with the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, specif