Exploding Drone Used in Assassination Attempt on Prime Minister of Iraq (usnews.com) 60
"A drone laden with explosives targeted the residence of Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi in Baghdad early on Sunday," reports Reuters, "in what the Iraqi military called an attempted assassination, but said Kadhimi escaped unhurt."
The attack, which security sources said injured several members of Kadhimi's personal protection, came after protests in the Iraqi capital over the result of a general election last month turned violent. The groups leading protests and complaints about the result of the October vote are heavily-armed Iran-backed militias which lost much of their parliamentary power in the election... No group immediately claimed responsibility for the attack on Kadhimi's residence in Baghdad's fortified Green Zone, which houses government buildings and foreign embassies...
Security sources told Reuters that six members of Kadhimi's personal protection force stationed outside his residence had been injured.
Security sources told Reuters that six members of Kadhimi's personal protection force stationed outside his residence had been injured.
A weak minded enemy (Score:5, Funny)
Wait until self-driving cars become a reality
Right up until guards realize they can wear stop sign hats to foil any autonomous driving foes.
Re: (Score:3)
"But can it beat liberals?"
Nothing can beat liberals, they don't live in the past.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: When until self-driving cars become a reality (Score:2)
It'll raise serious employment issues for Islamist organisations. Low-tech jihad operators, such as driving car bombs, provide employment for unskilled jihadis. There'll need to be comprehensive training programmes to provide the skills that'll ensure continued employment.
Re: (Score:2)
There'll need to be comprehensive training programmes to provide the skills that'll ensure continued employment.
So nothing new under the sun, then. [darwinawards.com]
Re: Why bother with the complexity? (Score:2)
Ok genius, how does a jihadist load it with bacon?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You know The Bible says not to eat pigs, right? (Leviticus 11)
(It also says a lot of other stuff that Christians do every single day, but that's religion for you - only the foreign religions are "wrong", eh?)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Jebus is quoted as saying he came to confirm god's law. He was a Jew, get it?
Re:Why bother with the complexity? (Score:5, Informative)
Going a bit further, Jesus was a apocalyptic preacher who believed that G-d was about to establish his kingdom here on Earth (not it the sky as modern Christianity believes). Apocalypticism grew in Jewish circles about 150-100 years before Jesus when Jews wondered what the hell they did to deserve the Romans. If they were the Chosen People, how could G-d let this happen. So they came up with a philosophy to get around the issue, i.e., G-d will get them shortly. Jesus also never claimed to be the Messiah, which to him and other apocalypticists meant the fellow who would kick Roman butt, and then the Son-O-Man, yet another figure (also not Jesus), would do the actual Butt Kicking and the Messiah would be crowned King.
When Jesus caused stir, the Romans took notice figuring he was fomenting insurrection. Jesus apparently thought he would become the Messiah and hence King and appears to have told his disciples this. Their number twelve is for the twelve tribes of Israel. It is possible he told them they'd be rulers of the twelve tribes. So much for his seer abilities, Judas was one of the twelve.
So when Jesus was ratted out to the Romans, the big charge was he was claiming to be a future King. This was clearly insurrection, there was only one Emperor, the Roman one. So they nailed him. Oops, how could he be the Messiah if the Romans offed him. It only took one or yokels to claim they'd seen him after death to get the cult going. People see their dead loved ones after death all the time, today as well as then.
Anyhow, Paul was the fellow who goosed the religion really hard. He thought he'd see Jesus return and modded Jesus' theology a bit to call him the Son-O-Man. Calling someone a son-o-god was a common Jewish saying, even King David was called a son-o-god. After years, the saying morphed into Son-O-God. Then Paul realized he would die before Jesus would return, so he altered the theology a bit so it had no horizontal time axis, it now had vertical axis. Us schmucks were down here, G-d and Jesus were up there.
Paul was also schooled in Greek thought, the Greeks has conquered the Mid-East before Romans. He glommed onto the notion of a soul, which was popularized by Plato. Jesus, having no Greek training and being thoroughly Jewish, had no notion of a soul. So the current Christians can thank the Greeks for their notion of a soul.
Time crept forward, more Christian embroidery ensued, and now Christians do not even believe in the actual Jesus but one of their own imagination.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
"Going a bit further, Jesus was a apocalyptic preacher who believed that G-d was about to establish his kingdom here on Earth (not it the sky as modern Christianity believes)."
That's why he was executed for high treason and still morons celebrate the false birthday of that criminal.
Re:Why bother with the complexity? (Score:4, Insightful)
"Going a bit further, Jesus was a apocalyptic preacher who believed that G-d was about to establish his kingdom here on Earth (not it the sky as modern Christianity believes)."
That's why he was executed for high treason and still morons celebrate the false birthday of that criminal.
Not quite. The Jews wanted him executed because he was interfering in their money making while at the same time claiming to be their king. This was after Jesus rampaged through their money exchange and used a whip against them.
But yeah, Christians celebrating the false birthday of this hippie socialist is odd. I mean, the guy didn't even means test the poor he gave food to. He just gave it to them, free of charge.
Re: (Score:2)
"I mean, the guy didn't even means test the poor he gave food to. He just gave it to them, free of charge."
Yes, buckets of scampi and rolls.
Re: Why bother with the complexity? (Score:2)
Can you source any of this in scriptural references.
Personally I like a lot of your argument and I myself find most of Paul's position a bit ironic. Nonetheless, the references make it clear your not just regurgitating an interpretation.
Re: Why bother with the complexity? (Score:4, Informative)
https://www.google.com/search?... [google.com]
Read literally any of that stuff
Re: (Score:2)
Jesus apparently thought he would become the Messiah and hence King and appears to have told his disciples this. Their number twelve is for the twelve tribes of Israel. It is possible he told them they'd be rulers of the twelve tribes. So much for his seer abilities, Judas was one of the twelve.
I doubt Jesus did any of this. You forgot: foremost he was a fisher, and later became a scholar/preacher.
the big charge was he was claiming to be a future King.
Nope.
This was clearly insurrection,
Nope.
there was o
Re: (Score:3)
Jebus is quoted as saying he came to confirm god's law. He was a Jew, get it?
Yep. The part where it's suddenly OK to eat pigs is in "Acts", which we know was written by the Romans to get the Jews and Gentiles from arguing over the Bible.
Re: (Score:3)
that the jewish bible moron
Last time I went to a Christian church the Bibles all had Leviticus in them.
Re: (Score:3)
What do you suggest the US and Biden do? Get the Congress to declare war? A conventional war with Iran is unwinnable and would not be in the US's long term interests. Despite all the "Death to America" blathering that goes on in Iran a good sized majority of people in Iran are pro-American.
Re: Officer Biden asleep at the wheel (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that the inmates are developing nuclear weapons. Once they finish, they will be a massive danger to people outside the asylum.
Re: (Score:2)
Same as every other country with nukes. China is building a shedload more nukes and they have models of US warships on their missile testing range. Good times.
Re: (Score:2)
A conventional war with Iran is unwinnable and would not be in the US's long term interests.
Since when has that stopped them?
Re: (Score:1)
It will take a long time to get that war started, and it will need bipartisan approval.
Joe Biden and Mike Lindell - Dream Team 2024!
Re: (Score:3)
I believe many people are missing the joke. Let me make it clearer:
"The U.S. must interfere in Iran to stop it from interfering in the politics of other nations."
Re:Officer Biden asleep at the wheel (Score:4, Insightful)
I understand.
But of course it is not a joke. Previous US interference (with help from the UK and other suspects of course) in Iran removed a secular government, not particularly different from many others across the world. The new administration of 1953 then went on to suppress most of the remaining secular opposition. When the puppet regime went, it was replaced by what opposition there was left. That current regime is religious and anti-western, because that is what the previous regime taught it to be, over a generation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:3)
To the contrary towarischtsch .. (Score:2)
"The russia" must intervene to stop U.S. from interfering in the politics of other nations ..
Did you get the joke?
Or just express it directly: .."
"The US needs to bomb Iran to stop it from interfering in the interfering of US politics in other nations
Did you get the joke now?
"The one with the bigger guns is always right. But we are always right because we are the good. .. oh and btw, human rights"
or like "Jack Bauer" I need to kill, torture, and mame you to protect the human rights.
Come on this was really f
Re: (Score:1)
Dictatorships are just large hostage situations, and have no ethical legitimacy. There is no "practicing self-determination" there.
Whether free nations choose to invade is one of practical concerns, not ethical. It is no more unethical than ending a bank robbery hostage situation.
Re: (Score:3)
That is a bullshit argument and you know it a hostage situation is a direct threat while living in a dictatorship isn't
So to the contrary it is of an ethical concern, because invading will lead to unnecessary casualties - meaning more casulties the dictatorship would have cost.
So essentially what you are proposing is storming into the bank killing alll robbers and some of the hostages.
And btw. a violation of international laws and aggrements - these are things for what the Nuremberg trails were held and it
Drones are not great weapons (Score:3, Informative)
As this example shows, drones are not as great weapon as you might think at first.
Yes they are maneuverable, but that agility drops a lot with weight, and without much explosives being able to be carried your destructive force is drastically reduced.
If you just have a block of C4 (or realistically with a drone part of a block of C4) with no containment you lose a lot of force even several feet away, and you don't get effective shrapnel (which is what really kills people from most military explosives meant to target troops) without a lot of added weight.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You make it.
https://pastebin.com/pkckvAa8 [pastebin.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't need any.
Re: (Score:3)
fun fact, C-4 is so incredibly stable you can lite it with a match and use it like sterno. Needs a special grade of blasting cap to reliably detonate.
Back in 'Nam some would use a small glob of C-4 in their stoves to heat food. Worked great and burned with very little smoke IIRCC.
Re: (Score:2)
I would not recommend following that recipe...
One has to wonder whether the writer did that deliberately to ensure the potential wannabe terrorist gets taken care of automatically...
Re: (Score:2)
Was just some shit I found laying on the floor of the internet. It wasn't meant to be taken seriously. I just don't like adding slash s to my posts.
Re: Drones are not great weapons (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That some idiot could do it in an apartment complex with dozens of people blowing up alongside with him.
If you just wanna do it in Hicksville in a shed behind your barn 1000 miles from the next living soul... carry on, have fun!
Re: Drones are not great weapons (Score:2)
The other thing is that they are loud as hell, honking vuvuzela would be more stealthy.
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, so now we know why someone is developing a weapon that remotely causes hearing loss (see Havana Syndrome [wikipedia.org]) -- now targets won't hear the drones coming!
Re: (Score:3)
You are incorrect because you are measuring efficiency poorly. Efficiency is actually a ratio of success vs X, where X can be anything.
You can measure efficiency vs
$ cost
resources used
time spent building
per use
per solider at risk
Drone suck at the first 3. They cost more than a bullet, take too much resources to build, take too much time to build, are unlikely to kill on the first use.
But they risk zero of your own soldiers. Which means their efficiency per friendly life lost is infinite.
You perso
Wrong on two counts (Score:2)
But they risk zero of your own soldiers.
Somebody has to fly it, and they have to be close enough to direct it effectively. That means they either are in direct line of sight to a target, or have a lot of signal traffic that can be detected.
Also however they originally acquire the drones means someone is at risk once you track down who purchased the drone (if you don't think they can identify each and every drone origin from many of the parts you are nuts).
Lastly if the effective rate is near zero you have
Re: (Score:2)
Somebody has to fly it, and they have to be close enough to direct it effectively. That means they either are in direct line of sight to a target, or have a lot of signal traffic that can be detected.
Most drones are RF driven, meaning no line of sight is needed. I've seen countless friends and kids "lose" their drone on the other side of the hill, but they still have the video feed and can keep flying them. It works much better than you seem to think.
Re: (Score:2)
Most drones are RF driven, meaning no line of sight is needed
Video feed is not enough to be able to target something effectively, perhaps demonstrated by this very attack. If you are not using line of sight then you have a lot of signal traffic back to your position and from the drone, making it much more likely to be destroyed or jammed by countermeasures (you don't think the very first thing to be jammed by any kind f base in frequencies that commonly transport video feeds from drones?)
An effective drone
Drones in series (Score:2)
What you need to do is have a number of drones in series, spaced maybe 20 feet apart. Each drone explodes on impact, so you can basically blow through multiple walls/doors/whatever.
Sure you lose a lot of explosive power, but you make up for it in quantity.
If you want to be even more effective you can have multiple streams of drones.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
This has been reported as a missile strike also (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It would be classified as a cruise missile, I suppose.
Tech Saga (Score:2)
Flying Blender (Score:2)
You know, a drone is basically just a flying blender. Some of these assassinations would have been more successful if they had just driven the drone into the target at neck height and decapitated them – in fact decapitations are notorious in model helicopter accidents already.
I’ll see your “flying ginsu” Hellfire R9x and raise you a $2000 model helicopter controlled via a $100 cellular phone from halfway around the globe.
Re: (Score:2)
You know, a drone is basically just a flying blender. Some of these assassinations would have been more successful if they had just driven the drone into the target at neck height and decapitated them â" in fact decapitations are notorious in model helicopter accidents already.
Helis have enough prop for that to be a real hazard. Not that multicopters aren't dangerous, but since they have more props no individual prop has as much energy as a heli blade and it's much harder for that to happen, as evinced by the relative lack of decapitations in multicopter accidents.
If you want to make manhacks they're gonna have to be singlecopters, realistically. I suppose there's no reason you couldn't use them, but their big downside is cost. Sure, an arduino can fly a singlecopter as well as i