From a peasant army that got its butt kicked in 1950 to this, what a progression of their fighting capability.

Kansas Kid said:

---

Anyone that thinks warfare won't be totally different with drones is stuck in the past like the French thinking the Maginot line would save them in WWII because it would be trench warfare again like WWI.

Gone are the days where tanks and big defense systems dominate the battlefield. South Korea is adopting to this new style of war.

---

I would say that anyone thinking this statement is offering a unique insight is stuck in the past.

Like the US engaging Iran back in March for example…

This is common knowledge at this point.

Wait until we have sufficient automation in drones for them to be released without direct hunan oversight to patrol and engage based on predetermined conditions, and allowed to problem solve with AI independent of direct oversight? Imagine swarms of automated drones roving the battlefield targeting enemy fighters, drones, vehicles, infrastructure, etc, all networked together to instantly pick the best tactic and weapon to deploy against any detected target.
In 10-15 years a battlefield might not be survivable without extreme defense measures.
In parallel with this, no human being will be safe from targeted attack in the near future. All that ScivFi stuff is going to happen.

CrackerJackAg said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

Anyone that thinks warfare won't be totally different with drones is stuck in the past like the French thinking the Maginot line would save them in WWII because it would be trench warfare again like WWI.

Gone are the days where tanks and big defense systems dominate the battlefield. South Korea is adopting to this new style of war.

---

I would say that anyone thinking this statement is offering a unique insight is stuck in the past.

Like the US engaging Iran back in March for example…

This is common knowledge at this point.

---

I see a lot of Texags posters still saying Iran isn't a threat because we took out their Navy and Air Force and we can force open the Strait because of the lack of a Navy. A number of people also think it is easy to take out drone operators and launch sites as if they were traditional missile launch platforms.

The US is still are looking to invest billions into large defense systems as a country of course a lot of that is being done to protect jobs. There are some major systems still needed like ballistic missiles and interceptors against those but I have a hard time seeing why we should build another tank, close support manned aircraft, towed artillery, etc.

Scary stuff.

It's coming, though there is intense debate about the mix between high-end/low-end AI drones/drone swarms at this point.

The US military is going to have an arsenal of really cool stuff though in 10 years, absent something incredibly destructive happening. This is clearly an ongoing RMA (revolution in military affairs). I think with things like Starfall the DoD will be able to drop autonomous capabilities from space depots (orbital starships) wherever they 'want' to do so.

Shield AI has unveiled the X-BAT, a fully autonomous jet-powered aircraft that can take off and land vertically without a runway.

The aircraft can fly at altitudes of up to 50,000 feet and has a range of around 2,000 nautical miles.

Powered by Hivemind AI software, X-BAT is… pic.twitter.com/zqwmiQwsMq

— Space and Technology (@spaceandtech_) June 25, 2026

All that being said, no drone that I have seen would pass the 'GI-proof' standard I'd expect the US Army to apply to make it ruggedized enough to give to each 11B etc as the South Koreans are doing, but whatever. I also didn't think the army would give each infantryman an $8K site on a $3K rifle, so what do I know?

Kansas Kid said:

---

CrackerJackAg said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

Anyone that thinks warfare won't be totally different with drones is stuck in the past like the French thinking the Maginot line would save them in WWII because it would be trench warfare again like WWI.

Gone are the days where tanks and big defense systems dominate the battlefield. South Korea is adopting to this new style of war.

---

I would say that anyone thinking this statement is offering a unique insight is stuck in the past.

Like the US engaging Iran back in March for example…

This is common knowledge at this point.

---

I see a lot of Texags posters still saying Iran isn't a threat because we took out their Navy and Air Force and we can force open the Strait because of the lack of a Navy. A number of people also think it is easy to take out drone operators and launch sites as if they were traditional missile launch platforms.

The US is still are looking to invest billions into large defense systems as a country of course a lot of that is being done to protect jobs. There are some major systems still needed like ballistic missiles and interceptors against those but I have a hard time seeing why we should build another tank, close support manned aircraft, towed artillery, etc.

---

Yeah, I think there's a lot of cognitive dissonance regarding Iran.

We didn't lose. No objective person can think that.

It was pyrrhic & very expensive.

We also walked away when we wanted to. We could have ended Iran entirely but because of our own good nature and population we chose not to in order to not overly harm the citizenry of Iran.

We could have destroyed energy plants, infrastructure, production, storage, rail. We CHOSE not to.

It was actually a lesson well learned. You learn fighting conflicts and this one isn't over.

It was a battle not a war.

I would think that the advantage of personalized drones and drone warfare will be relatively short lived.

The advantage will last as long as it takes to develop and implement reliable personalized directional focused EMP.

Kansas Kid said:

---

Anyone that thinks warfare won't be totally different with drones is stuck in the past like the French thinking the Maginot line would save them in WWII because it would be trench warfare again like WWI.

Gone are the days where tanks and big defense systems dominate the battlefield. South Korea is adopting to this new style of war.

---

Reminds me of this

This is the way. Get drones in there to take bullets rather than soldiers. Or at least help them.

CrackerJackAg said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

CrackerJackAg said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

Anyone that thinks warfare won't be totally different with drones is stuck in the past like the French thinking the Maginot line would save them in WWII because it would be trench warfare again like WWI.

Gone are the days where tanks and big defense systems dominate the battlefield. South Korea is adopting to this new style of war.

---

I would say that anyone thinking this statement is offering a unique insight is stuck in the past.

Like the US engaging Iran back in March for example…

This is common knowledge at this point.

---

I see a lot of Texags posters still saying Iran isn't a threat because we took out their Navy and Air Force and we can force open the Strait because of the lack of a Navy. A number of people also think it is easy to take out drone operators and launch sites as if they were traditional missile launch platforms.

The US is still are looking to invest billions into large defense systems as a country of course a lot of that is being done to protect jobs. There are some major systems still needed like ballistic missiles and interceptors against those but I have a hard time seeing why we should build another tank, close support manned aircraft, towed artillery, etc.

---

Yeah, I think there's a lot of cognitive dissonance regarding Iran.

We didn't lose. No objective person can think that.

It was pyrrhic & very expensive.

We also walked away when we wanted to. We could have ended Iran entirely but because of our own good nature and population we chose not to in order to not overly harm the citizenry of Iran.

We could have destroyed energy plants, infrastructure, production, storage, rail. We CHOSE not to.

It was actually a lesson well learned. You learn fighting conflicts and this one isn't over.

It was a battle not a war.

---

A proxy one at that. One that had as much if not more to do with US vs China hegemony as it did with Israel and Iran. Oddly not discussed that much around here.

South Korea knows all about it. Will be interesting times in the next 25 years.

ts5641 said:

---

This is the way. Get drones in there to take bullets rather than soldiers. Or at least help them.

---

Thinking drones will reduce human casualties...



I guess possibly at first.

Probably not even at first. To counteract drones you'll either have to spend an absurd amount of money and production capability on counter drone technology, which gets circumvented almost as soon as they're made, or have enough infantry to absorb the damage and take the territory where they're being made.

Unfortunately for the future, Zerg rush is probably the most effective strategy.

nortex97 said:

---

I also didn't think the army would give each infantryman an $8K site on a $3K rifle, so what do I know?

---

I think the rifle's days are numbered as well. Why expose yourself to the enemy's line of sight sensors when you can send a drone and never leave cover.