Drone Wars

Drones, unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), unmanned aircraft using primarily for military purposes.

In late August, announced information about killing another important Al-Qaeda leader. Atiyah Abd al-Rahman, Libyan considered the number 2 in the current hierarchy of the organization. His death in the mountains in the north-eastern Pakistan on Aug. 22 was another attack, which however were not real soldiers participate- but the combat drones. 

Until recently, they were associated rather with reconnaissance and espionage actions, with their help have been identifying the area around the house where he was to stay Osama Bin Laden, allegedly killed by Navy SEALS in early May. 

Using unmanned aircraft for intelligence purposes could be read for years. In particular, General Atomics MQ-1 Predator – used in years 1994-2011 . Predators were used mainly to reconnaissance actions, but after the U.S. intervention in Afghanistan came the idea to use drone for combat tasks. Until their withdrawal in March 2011 these drones took part in campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq, but also occurred during the Balkan conflicts in Bosnia and Kosovo . 

His successor became the General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper. Reaper is the first airplane hunter-killer type. Is armed with homing bombs using laser or GPS, as well as 14 missiles AGM-114 Hellfire. 

Peaceful transition to offensive operations 

Despite the fact that from year to year their activity increases significantly, to 2011 it was hard to find official reports of using combat drones. According to the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, which monitors drones activities it was 295 attacks, which killed about two and a half thousand people. Interestingly, these devices have been used 243 times during Barack Obama’s term of office . They operate mainly in the Middle East, and their activity extends from Kenya and Somalia to the Central Asian countries such as Kazakhstan. The area of greatest concentration of drones attacks is Pakistan, remains formally in military alliance with the U.S. 

The ratio of Pakistan authorities to drones had been changed over the last decade. Shamshad Ahmad, former foreign minister and ambassador of Pakistan to the UN told IPS service, that in 2004-2007 President Pervez Musharraf agreed to drone attacks, in an effort to express support for the administration of George W. Bush in the fight against Al-Qaeda. American side had not only autonomy in the selection of targets, but also support Pakistan government propaganda, and after each drones attack spread the information that the explosions were caused by homemade bombs. 

The entire action could not be kept in secret, because as it turned out, drones attacks were imprecise and often instead of the leaders of Al-Qaeda attacked civilians. 

One of the most famous incidents took place in late October 2006 when it killed 82 people. 

In 2004-2007 as a result of the world's drone attacks killed 168 people, including 109 civilians, of whom 82 were minors. Since 2008, activities have become much more intense. Most of attacks in Pakistan focused on the Taliban, but also when a high percentage of the victims were civilians (1091 killed a total of 2134 in 2008-2011). According to Gareth Porter of IPSnews.net until the events of early 2011 altered the position of the Pakistani authorities. 

Pakistan is a country where unmanned aircraft attacks occurs mostly and number of operations with drones constantly growing. For example, since operation “Dawn Odyssey" in March 2011 till the end of June in Libya was up to 42 attacks. 

Also in Somalia, where American army have not stationed since 1993, in June 23, came to attack at two leaders of the Mujahideen Youth Movement. In the words of an anonymous informant, who spoke to the Washington Post, the killed Somalis "planned to carry out attacks in Europe." 

Changing technology 

The beginnings of research on unmanned combat machines controlled by radio waves back started after the First World War. In early 30s showed the British "DH.82B Queen Bee" and the American Curtiss' N2C-2 ". Unmanned planes were using during World War II in small scale. 

In the postwar period the technology was developed on both sides of the Iron Curtain, Anglo-Saxons developed drones from BTT (Basic Training Target) family, such as the "MQM-36 Shelduck," and "MQM-57 Falconer," which were used till 80 s. At the same time Soviet side also sustained research on unmanned aircraft, the first model was built in the 50s and was the Lavochkin "La-17", the test flights took place in 1953. 

Throughout interwar period studies at drones had a two-way directions – the first was standard airplanes size machines designs , and other small devices, which were harder to shoot, and better for spy actions. The most famous modern "Predators" and "Reapers" are drones with relatively large size required for weapons transfer cameras. 

Scientists are working on drones that imitate birds or insects and will be able to act effectively on battlefield. Pentagon has more than 7 thousands pieces of machinery built in the previous decade, is also planning to devote considerable financial resources needed to develop a technology which by 2030 would enable the creation a "spy fly", intelligent robot, very small size. Although according to official reports, this project is still at an early stage, it does all sorts of "leaks" suggest that in many cases are already tested prototypes, such as for example disclosed in February, drone-hummingbird project created by Californian company AeroVironment. 

Will the new technology and improved drones will be able to carry out an attack anywhere in the world will make the number of civilian casualties decrease? According to former CIA officer, Philip Giraldi is impossible, because as he said in an interview with Russian television RT "weapon is dependent on espionage which identify terrorist and this is not the best, so I suspect that modern technology will not grand difference ". 

The effects of increasing the presence of drones in warfare 

All indicate that robots will be the future of the military, and as noted James Corbett , an independent analyst and columnist, "the question arises whether the U.S. drone attacks in Pakistan and Yemen are not actually promise a new era in warfare, an era in which military intervention will take place simply because it can be done without any risk for the attacker ". 

In the face of Obama's promised to withdraw 33,000 U.S. troops from Afghanistan until September 2012, using remotely controlled devices to carry out further acts of war seems to be a logical direction. Since the war in Vietnam, which ended with, inter alia, as a result of public pressure, the number of casualties on the side of American soldiers is an important factor in support for the war operations. Reduction of this factor through because of using combat drones may lead to a significant decrease in the number of casualties on the American side, thereby significantly reducing the pacifist sentiment. 

Another important result is that people will make decisions regarding life and death without endangering their own lives. Until now, strongly acted psychological factor, where the soldier through a direct presence on the battlefield was in direct contact with the enemy. This drone pilot direct contact disappears, while the same actions are beginning to resemble a computer game where the character is a virtual enemy. 

Wikileaks - a false myth

Wikileaks portal, as well as its founder Julian Assange, has caused a lot of confusion within last year and has become a specific fight icon for freedom of speech. Is it really so? I have been examining this service for some time and everything indicates that there is a a clear discrepancy among declarations and facts. As a result, Wikileaks inspires restriction of freedom against declarations. 

Julian Assange 

Both a controversial and secret figure. He himself does not want to allegedly disclose information about him due to security reasons. One can understand that things that get out make others think, though. First of all, information about his relations with a scientological church, with which he allegedly broke off. Wikileaks is not Assange only but also some hackers, who are not of anyone’s interest by a strange twist of fate, who do not shine in media. If one asked a question about things that are very inconvenient for establishment, then it would appear that his views do not diverge from popular opinions presented in so-called mainstream, which completely ignore even meetings of the Bilderberg group. 

Who finances Assange is a question which is a matter of much vagueness. His activity and everyday move from and to the hotel, as well as his changes of the phone number cost. The portal is supported declaratively from the voluntary means, indeed but has anyone seen a statement of this voluntariness? 

A lawyer, who represents the company’s problems before the British Court is Mark Stephens, a famous London lawyer, who has become famous for many spectacular cases (among others defending Greenpeace, acting against McDonald's and Royal Dutch Shell but also defending Wall Street Journal and he has represented Charles Dawkinson in the process against Benedict XVI lately), he is also associated with a well-known financier George Soros. Stephens has represented his clients for free many times, so probably his help for Assange is alike. Nevertheless, are all “fighters for freedom of speech” supported in the same way? Does Wikileaks itself defend the oppressed defenders of freedom? 

“Wikileaks” 

The date of creating Wikileaks can be found in Wikipedia and on tens of other websites. However, if one thinks since when we can hear about the portal, then a serious clash appears. It seems to be for a short time. Majority of people heard actually about the portal only last year, after media distributed the alleged scandal when the film from Iraq had been published by Wikileaks, where two Iraqi employees of the Reuters agency die during the attack of the Apache helicopter. 

Other curiosity - Daniel Domsheit-Berg, the former Assange’s employee, started a new Openleaks service in April 2011, which is supposed to be a platform for free placing of different leaks types on them that come from very different sources. How does it differ from Wikileaks? First of all, it is a true portal form, which stopped working for some time in December 2009 and came back in a new form, where data is “verified” by the Wikileaks team and placed on servers later. The information was earlier verified by the readers themselves. Does it build declarative freedom of speech? 

Unusual access to the greatest media in the world 

Criticism of all so-called trackers of conspiracy theories and alternative media representatives is certainly justified in this issue, even if it is caused by jealousy. After all, years of a strenuous work, searches and laborious collection of documentation gives only a Sisyphus’ label to many - a madman or Don Quixote fighting windmills. Doesn’t it verge on the miraculous, when a completely unknown “hacker” representing a niche portal, breaks through to the biggest media concerns? 

A well-known Austrian journalist Jane Bugermeister noticed rightly that when “German journalists such as Harald Schumann state that such magazines as Der Spiegel censor his articles concerning financial crimes and censorship is a common practice, Assange’s face is visible on the Spiegel website main page as a fighter for freedom of speech”. 

Assange himself never wastes an opportunity to give an interview or talk with media. The only thing that misses are T-shirts with an image of a slim grey-haired fighter for freedom of speech. A number of interviews and attention given to the creators of Wikileaks, media already place him on shelves among the most popular celebrities. One can win the world having such support, let’s think who and why stands behind Wikileaks? 

Middle East revolution - example 1 

Information published by Wikileaks concerning local leaders’ corruption was the ignitor of Middle East revolutions, especially in Northern Africa (Tunisia, Egypt). It led to protests, and as a result made Ben Alego leave Tunisia and Hosni Mubarak fled from Egypt. These countries belonged to the fiercest opponents of the USA or Israel. However, people who did not have much in common with Egypt itself came to the country during the revolution but especially such people as Mohammed ElBaradei were active on the international arena. As a result, there is still nothing of democratization on the horizon and the only result is that these countries became de facto dependent on the West countries. 

Chip for every European - example 2 

A surprising coincidence took also place in case of publication of witnesses’ testimonies who were kept in the Guantanamo base. They were disclosedmore or less a week before the alleged killing of Osama bin Laden and they contained among others the assassins’ announcement in Europe in case of the Al-Kaida leader’s death. This information constitutes a pretext for sharpening of control in the area of European Union that is plunged in crisis. As a result, it is a step towards mass but very “justified” surveillance of the Europeans. 

Nuclear domino - example 3 

Wall Street Journal referring to Wikileaks wrote: 

“Just after the Americans withdrew missile defense shield from the project and after the Washington - Moscow talks about disarmament system, Russia has located an atomic warhead in the Kaliningrad Oblast.”  

As a result, Wikileaks inspires spreading the information, which strengthens existing dependencies in which Poland remains, via one of the most opinion-forming newspapers in the world. 

Seemingly reliable information acts against declared freedom. 

Importance of information 

The last thing that indicates that Wikileaks and Julian Assange are not these as they are created, is the fact that their activity has brought almost nothing that would not already be known to more curious researchers. In principle, these are only details, additions to information which was earlier written about. 

There are lots of arguments, I will allow myself to quote these that were stated by George Friedman (STRATFOR): 

“Everyone, who was close to battles or who read history of the II World War, will be surprised not by the presence of war crimes but by the fact that there is so few of them among documents concerning this subject available on the Wikileaks servers. A war is controlled violence and when control fails - as it happens without any doubt - uncontrolled and potential criminal activities appear. In the meantime, the publicized cases published by Wikileaks do not clearly show criminal actions of the American soldiers as much as it happens in case of consequence on the part of the insurgents, who break the Geneva Convention”. 

(..)”A similar situation concerns diplomatic leaks. There was much disclosed information that was known to the informed observer. For example, everyone who reads analyses seriously, knows that not only the Israelis but also the Saudis were especially anxious about Israel’s power and pressed the USA to do something in this case. While media treated it as significant news, in fact it required deep ignorance of the Persian Gulf’s geopolitics to treat the American diplomatic notes concerning this subject as surprising”. 

Summary 

The organisation that postulates the implementation of complete transparency in international relations, which let’s be honest, is completely undoable, remains itself extremely mysterious. Instead of dealing with information, it conducts propaganda above all and the question is for whom? 

I am listing the examples of Wikileaks and Julian Assange’s activities today, which do not have much in common with its declarated, how very noble mission - protection of freedom. 

100-year-old cartoons

Some time ago I wrote about RPG cards where the authors had predicted future events that have occurred or are likely to happen in the future. Today, I present something interesting and in a similar vain; nearly 100-year old cartoons published in American press. These drawings, as it turns out, are still very relevant. How come - you may ask - hasn't the World become a safer and richer place over these hundred years? Maybe for someone to have an iPhone and a laptop means security and wealth, but the truth is that the world is governed, to a large extent, by the United States and the United States are still managed the same people: 

Lever of political war 

As you can see, the continuous tug of war between supporters of both parties has not change at all, people wrestle, fight in election campaigns, but the real power belongs to those who are chosen outside the democratic process - the big bankers and financiers of Wall Street. They firmly hold the "lever", which tilts to this or that side. 

Coming money trust 

Octopus - the federal reserve system, comprising a network of private banks, which by drainage of virtually all spheres of economic and politics suck money out of them. 

Perhaps it has never been so evident that central banks play a key role in the economy of a country. It was the result of an irresponsible (and perhaps intentional?) Fed policy that in 2008 the soap bubble of the real estate market burst and then the crisis escalated on the rest of the economy. Whenever we look at the roots of any crisis or conflict in a country, we can see that they are directly connected to the policy of the local central bank. The independence of the local was, among other things, the cause of the "intervention" of NATO troops in Libya earlier this year. 

Rothschilds 

Planned economy and planned destruction? 

This cartoon is much later, at the bottom we see the date 1934. In the far right the image of Stalin and the Kremlin appears.