Iran's Loophole to Seize US Navy Vessels

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 ธ.ค. 2024

ความคิดเห็น • 655

  • @fearthehoneybadger
    @fearthehoneybadger 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +923

    There is a US loophole that allows them to shoot holes in Iranian ships.

    • @anirudhnarla4711
      @anirudhnarla4711 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +101

      That aint a loophole. That's just usa playing in creative mode 😂

    • @faizalbarkah2617
      @faizalbarkah2617 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +21

      Whataboutism☕

    • @twixxtro
      @twixxtro 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +18

      its almost like the US is a Minecraft server admin

    • @ThatOldMan2112
      @ThatOldMan2112 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +35

      @@faizalbarkah2617The correct word is sarcasm.

    • @pken9814
      @pken9814 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +27

      ​@faizalbarkah2617
      You are like the man trying to start a wave at a baseball game, but no one stands up because there's noone else in the stadium.

  • @rawchicken3463
    @rawchicken3463 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +182

    I doubt im the first one to saw this but if someone starts seizing enough us ships
    Things will get INCREDIBLY proportional

    • @DS-wl5pk
      @DS-wl5pk 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +17

      Overwhelmingly proportional

    • @Nocturnalverse
      @Nocturnalverse 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +15

      Don't fuck with the boats.

    • @correctionguy7632
      @correctionguy7632 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

      @@Nocturnalverse like USS Liberty?

    • @dixiecyrus8136
      @dixiecyrus8136 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Fat electrician strikes again!❤️🤣

    • @thesh8101
      @thesh8101 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Don't forget the uss pueblo.

  • @miroslavmajer5155
    @miroslavmajer5155 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +149

    Just a quick clarification: the EU hasn't actually banned drones in the vicinity of airports. Rather, they require special approval for operating in these areas. This policy exists because there are scenarios where experimental drones, needing access to the same resources as manned aircraft-such as radio navigation and communication with airport towers-must be tested in these environments.

    • @jackmclane1826
      @jackmclane1826 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      And idiots flying drones over airports is a recipe for a civil aviation disaster.

  • @kamlando3089
    @kamlando3089 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +85

    USA: Hey Iran, remember when we told our Navy to give you a "proportional response"? How did that turn out again?

    • @ahrlj24
      @ahrlj24 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +9

      What happened in Afghanistan? How is Operation prosperity guardian going? Can’t even defeat the Houthis.

    • @corpsman1980
      @corpsman1980 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      Shouldn't you be trying to pressure your cousin into your uncle's van?

    • @valvbl9022
      @valvbl9022 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Don't worry, China has all United States ports. Yes on the land of United States. I don't know what's wrong with you guys

    • @Endwankery
      @Endwankery 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​@valvbl9022 That can't be true. Surely the federal government has laws against that

    • @Get2dahChoppa
      @Get2dahChoppa 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      You mean when they shot down Iranian civilian airliner?

  • @johngordon5295
    @johngordon5295 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +72

    It has been said for decades . Display weakness and you embolden your enemies .

    • @drandersjiang
      @drandersjiang 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Maybe US is just weak, period? Not just displaying it.

    • @mikekahotea8148
      @mikekahotea8148 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Tell that to Ukrainians from start of invasion . Nothing was "said" except the sound kaboom 💥 , look who's talking now .

    • @strokerta1986
      @strokerta1986 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      The US is the king of displaying false weakness to bait an enemy into position...

    • @Auggies1956
      @Auggies1956 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      FJB, is that the proper answer?

    • @ernestkhalimov9368
      @ernestkhalimov9368 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      When Strong, Show Weak
      When Weak, Show Strong - Sun Tzu

  • @jdotoz
    @jdotoz 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +34

    Next up: how to turn a legal loophole into an actual hole in your ship.

    • @mrroman3862
      @mrroman3862 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      😂😂

  • @vicnighthorse
    @vicnighthorse 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +58

    We are entering an era more like the norm where there is no right/law but power. The last 70 years was a unusual time.

    • @hiteshadhikari
      @hiteshadhikari 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      US abused its power in last 70 years but because they live in bubble, they never felt like it was lawlessness
      Today when others do it, its all about power and abuse somehow

    • @brodriguez11000
      @brodriguez11000 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +11

      Right-might is as old as civilization.

    • @warbong9921
      @warbong9921 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      There was no law, it was a world with only weak countries vs US global police.

    • @Aabergm
      @Aabergm 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

      @@brodriguez11000 Some would argue its older.

    • @SonnyDarvish
      @SonnyDarvish 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      Entering? We've always been there.

  • @llYossarian
    @llYossarian 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +40

    Imagine being adrift at sea for days/weeks and finally a ship approaches but no one ever comes to the rail and you can't find anyone even after climbing aboard so you just fend for yourself as bet as you can while the ship sails itself towards what you hope/assume is the nearest port or friendly vessel...

    • @Aabergm
      @Aabergm 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +12

      At that point are you a stowaway a pirate or a legitimate passenger? The mind boggles.

    • @CASA-dy4vs
      @CASA-dy4vs 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@AabergmI mean if you have no bad intentions and the finders don’t find any damage or funny re wiring onboard they’ll probably just question you and send you your way ig

    • @llYossarian
      @llYossarian 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      @@Aabergm ...maybe even just _"flotsam"_ or "marine salvage".

    • @extremeencounter7458
      @extremeencounter7458 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      @@AabergmScallywag

    • @That1ufo
      @That1ufo 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Would hope the ship would follow the law and lower the ladder and give food and water.

  • @ctg4818
    @ctg4818 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +159

    Smells like Iran wants to know what all these "special military operations" are all about

    • @Dariush_Iranban
      @Dariush_Iranban 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

      We knew it already 🇷🇺🇨🇳🇰🇵🇮🇷

    • @Minus2-B
      @Minus2-B 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

      About to see a operation praying mantis all over again, hopefully its a little more "Proportional" this time.

    • @jattjamesbond1122
      @jattjamesbond1122 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​@@Minus2-Bthis is not 1979 b**ch and Iran is not weak either try this time your fleets will reduce drastically 😏💀

    • @GeorgeWashingtonLaserMusket
      @GeorgeWashingtonLaserMusket 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@Dariush_Iranban I love it when weak haters come to youtube. Thanks for signing up to our American corporations terms of service proving our superiority. You don't see people going to a Russian, Chinese, DPRK, or Irunian website for a reason. People don't like your way of doing things it's gross.
      I hope one day you all learn what a government of the people is about, while our system is very flawed compared to the shit hole you call home it's paradise.

    • @greggweber9967
      @greggweber9967 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      ​@@Minus2-BDid that operation stop them? If brute force doesn't work, do you just use more of it?

  • @THE-X-Force
    @THE-X-Force 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +24

    Ahh yes .. that time when Iran wanted to find out what a *_"PROPORTIONAL"_* response from the U.S.A. looks like .. _again._

    • @nelus7276
      @nelus7276 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      Why should responses be proportional anyway? Fuck around and find out is my motto.

  • @ninehundreddollarluxuryyac5958
    @ninehundreddollarluxuryyac5958 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +25

    The ability to jam remote control signals will force artificial intelligence into the role of deciding immediate navigation, collision avoidance, and which targets to destroy.

  • @dabdillon6318
    @dabdillon6318 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +43

    I really like the idea of having a sort of medium/small sized mother ship with a small crew watching over a bunch of smaller drone ships. That way if somebody comes to steal your drones you have them all retreat to the mothership or in a time a war the mother ships give the green light and the drones open fire upon the targets. That way you could have a fleet with a ton of fire power like a traditional fleet but a tiny crew. They could also easily rescue and repair the drones when the break down.

    • @an2939
      @an2939 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      wont they target the mothership then?

    • @dabdillon6318
      @dabdillon6318 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

      @@an2939 yeah, those would probably be thier first choice when launching an attack, but also that central ship will be the most heavily defended because what if each small ship had a cwis and if they are all networked together than its probably gonna be pretty difficult to take out, or atleast it'll cost a lot to destroy a relatively cheap group. The point would be to be invincible but cheap and mass produced.

    • @dabdillon6318
      @dabdillon6318 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @an2939 also I'm just I'm high school and I don't know a whole lot about how all of that would work

    • @michaelstrom2691
      @michaelstrom2691 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      ​@@dabdillon6318 this actually makes allot of sense.

    • @dabdillon6318
      @dabdillon6318 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@michaelstrom2691 thanks

  • @Lazmanarus
    @Lazmanarus 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Just put a plaque on it saying, "This drone is fitted with an anti-tamper device" in several languages, it doesn't have to be an explosive device, a layer of thermite around security sensitive items would probably do the trick.

  • @erikk77
    @erikk77 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +13

    12:48 I have that Logitech *off the shelf* game joystick !

    • @edvin_hook
      @edvin_hook 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      thats fking funny, military grade equipment right there.

    • @HurBenny
      @HurBenny 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@edvin_hook which, let us not forget, means cheap and mass produced. And consequently is almost always less performant than high-end civilian gear, unless it is has a special security requirement of sorts.

    • @Dagger920
      @Dagger920 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      @@HurBenny probably still costs like 5x the civilian version

    • @whyjnot420
      @whyjnot420 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@Dagger920 I remember around a decade or two back when the US army ended up using stock xbox controllers made by Microsoft and bought commercially as a replacement for the purpose built controller they were using (it was some robot used for engineering or bomb disposal or something like that).
      The purpose built one was apparently crap in comparison. The fact that it was the gamepad that shipped with the system meant that Microsoft had to develop something that they could mass produce in the millions, be decently reliable and be a good general purpose layout, without breaking the bank (the xbox was and still is a loss leader in and of itself, so I have a feeling that stuff like general purpose controllers were reined in). Not the military or a contractor. It was all done. All that they needed to do was wire it into the system (and presumably some time getting the software to work with them).
      This isn't top shelf/top tier kit. Though nor is it bottom of the barrel either. It is cheap. It is mass produced. It worked. It is already tested and in production. It is actually a nice little microcosm of capitalism.
      addendum: those flight sticks in particular, again not top of the line for flight sticks (my god that market is insane when you start talking about quality). But you are still talking around $100 or more.
      addendum 2: never cheap out on joysticks or throttles. The difference in quality between a $70-$100 HOTAS and $150-$250 HOTAS is vast. Yet people who go all in on the flight kit will probably spend $250 on the platform they mount their stick to. Nevermind the actual controllers.

    • @whyjnot420
      @whyjnot420 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@HurBenny You know, sometimes that special requirement, requires older and less proficient hardware. In a manner of speaking. My favorite example has always been the DF-224 processor that the Hubble Telescope first launched with (was later replaced). Above all else, it needed to be robust and redundant. Quite apt given its operating environment. But in terms of computation ability and physical size, it was garbage in comparison to the stuff being used on the ground. Hubble finally got a 486 in 1999 (yes, a nice shiny new 486, in 1999, service mission 3a, 2nd spacewalk). It was a 25mhz cpu. It was 20 times faster than the original... do the math and laugh... that original processor had a clock of 1.25mhz.)

  • @victorfinberg8595
    @victorfinberg8595 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    1:00
    "american drones could PAVE the WAY ..."
    nice pun
    also why you wouldn't want to try "seizing" any us navy ship larger than a rowboat.

  • @frxsted2457
    @frxsted2457 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Licensed Charter captain here, currently working on my master class, I think one of the reasons the "person on watch" and having a manned vessel is so important, is I don't care what redundancy you have build into that vessel nothing can save it from ocean better than a human, in terms of stopping sinking, you are liable for all of the damages if a vessel sinks. I also think it would become way to disposable as well, think about it oh no our RC boat got crushed 1000M off shore, we better get out there and clean it up.

    • @brodriguez11000
      @brodriguez11000 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Clean up so the enemy doesn't get all our secrets.

    • @frxsted2457
      @frxsted2457 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @brodriguez11000 what secrets, Most of the stuff gets ruined when it gets wet anyway.

  • @THEGREATMOTHERZson
    @THEGREATMOTHERZson 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Listening to media in the USA it’s pretty sick. I’m so glad I woke up and don’t watch mainstream media anymore. Long Live The Resistance 🇵🇸🫡☮️🌎❤️

  • @Brees1986
    @Brees1986 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

    About thirty years ago, the US Navy taught the Iranian Navy what FAFO means. They are free to try again.

    • @fordaith
      @fordaith 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      8 in 88

  • @icekidtvshorts4504
    @icekidtvshorts4504 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    When China and Iran does it, the MEDIA calls it stealing but when the US does the exact things, the Media call it cease or confiscated. Hypocrisy at the best 😂😂

  • @bartman7144
    @bartman7144 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Theory or not. The USN better protect all of their assets!

  • @jomarlefevre5311
    @jomarlefevre5311 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Great video format as always, please cover other topics besides military!

  • @BaronRouge2006
    @BaronRouge2006 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +20

    This calls for a self destruct capability... Prevent reverse engineering and bring value before losing the asset...

    • @YourAverageKriegsman
      @YourAverageKriegsman 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      Hey that's a cool drone, let's steak it.
      * *on the boat* *
      *Beep beep*
      Why is it be- KABOOM!

  • @daveoatway6126
    @daveoatway6126 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +13

    Interesting analysis. COLREGS never anticipated these vehicles. Another new world! Adding AI to them will make it even more challenging.

    • @brodriguez11000
      @brodriguez11000 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Drug subs would be an obvious candidate.

    • @CASA-dy4vs
      @CASA-dy4vs 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Fellas don’t ever make a Wheatley ai and stick it into a drone boat

    • @robertmoody5139
      @robertmoody5139 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      But do warships have to adhere to colregs

    • @daveoatway6126
      @daveoatway6126 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Yes except in battle. Of course the laws of gross tonnage does come into play!@@robertmoody5139

    • @thesh8101
      @thesh8101 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      We are seeing a massive shift in warfare when it comes to drones and their employment and defense from drones.

  • @lyft4238
    @lyft4238 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +21

    US: Laughs in *Preying Mantis*

  • @icey_sickle
    @icey_sickle 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    wait a minute 7 minutes ago?? love your videos dude

  • @Adam-nv9zo
    @Adam-nv9zo 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Don't touch our boats. It's that simple.

  • @archelon-jh7by
    @archelon-jh7by 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    good video as always(also i didn't finish the video yet x)

  • @aterxter3437
    @aterxter3437 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    About the signal jamming issue ? It will never dissapear as long as an operatir needs to press a button to opearte an onboard weapon, which is the US Navy current policy. Without reliable signal communications, a usv won't be able to operate weapons, and will stay stuck at the role of passive defense or acting as a decoy. A sitting duck in a sense

    • @NotWhatYouThink
      @NotWhatYouThink  9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Agreed, which is why we mentioned “autonomous” drones might solve that problem.

  • @RickOShay
    @RickOShay 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Maritime Collision Regulations are decades out-of date and need to be updated. Fifty years ago when drafted they obviously didn't take into account the eventuality of unmanned AI and remote controlled sea-going drones or crafts.
    For safety purposes the prerequisite is the vessel must have onboard collision avoidance, gps and auto navigation tech so that it doesn't present a threat to other vessels.
    This assumes the surface drone's purpose is not hostile like those used by the Iran backed houthi terrorist group.
    The problem is how do ships determine if a drone is hostile - and what protection does it have from remote hacking etc. And does it have active gps and collision avoidance. Complex issues - complex times.

  • @viktorschneider5444
    @viktorschneider5444 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    Nice Video

  • @nebuchadnezzar47
    @nebuchadnezzar47 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    I am not a native english speaker and when you said "seamenship" I was thinking to myself "What on earth is a semen ship?" for a solid 30 seconds until I realized what you actually meant LMAO

  • @criticalevent
    @criticalevent 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +37

    Considering how many MANNED US navy ships have hit fishing and cargo vessels, I can't fault their reasoning.

    • @rudeawakening3833
      @rudeawakening3833 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Yeah ok …
      The US NAVY is the global superpower on the high seas !
      NOBODY - “ takes “ a US Navy ship !
      ( except North Korea in 1968 - but we had a senile Democrat President THEN as well )

    • @felixfeder7106
      @felixfeder7106 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      is there a source for this? i’ve never heard about this

    • @Argosh
      @Argosh 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​@@felixfeder7106these things happen, not often, but they do. Of course this clown is trying to equalize the intentional collisions of chinese ships with whoever they want to evict from international or even foreign national waters they claim.

    • @poorsvids4738
      @poorsvids4738 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@felixfeder7106 There are a lot of things the US military does that doesn't get reported. People are just finding out that US was occupying Syria and they have been there for years.

    • @CASA-dy4vs
      @CASA-dy4vs 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      It’s more like how many russian and Soviet ships have rammed US navy cruisers

  • @MisterSherlock
    @MisterSherlock 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Captain America: "So... you touched the boats. I remember when Japan first touched our boats. I went into the ice knowing Japan as an imperial, colonial, ruthless nation. I came out of the ice seeing they make picture illustrations with tentacles. Don't be like Japan once you find out what happens when you touch our boats."

  • @shantanusapru
    @shantanusapru 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Fascinating!!

  • @alfredstergaard4660
    @alfredstergaard4660 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    USA befor: dont touch my fuking boats.
    USA now: dont touch any of my naval thing above or below the water.

    • @THE-X-Force
      @THE-X-Force 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      God damn right.

    • @brodriguez11000
      @brodriguez11000 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Is that why boats have a female name?

    • @ripvanwinkle2002
      @ripvanwinkle2002 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@brodriguez11000 what? US navy vessels dont have female names..
      people who name vessels after women are asking for trouble
      for on thing you want them to obey and be reliable under stress..

  • @MrAB-xc9du
    @MrAB-xc9du 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Great informative! Thanks indeed

  • @MDoomhammer
    @MDoomhammer 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    hell , even if a constant connection could be established, just do some braodband jamming, and suddenly the drone isnt maintaining a constant watch, and thus must be removed :p

  • @willdsm08
    @willdsm08 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    If it's unmanned, it's open for salvage. That's the law.

  • @MahdiyarAbdollahi
    @MahdiyarAbdollahi 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    It is Interesting how Americans were unhappy about China seizing a spy drone. but we Iranian should accept that it is legal for USA to steel a Boing 747-300M Cargo Plane.

  • @nimbusnation9584
    @nimbusnation9584 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    I heard you mentioned the T-8 and T-12, but what about the T-800 and T-1000?...all fun and jokes aside. I enjoyed your video... Thanks you.

  • @manuelsalazar875
    @manuelsalazar875 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    If the US drone have a self-destruct. if the enemy stole a drone the vessel will automatically self destruct. That way the drone doesn't get into the wrong hands.

  • @ApolloTheDerg
    @ApolloTheDerg 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I think larger manned ships that are mostly automated is a good direction. Until we have robots that can have similar dexterity along with decision making for navigation while jammed, having 2-5 people on a larger ship that would need hundreds prior would be a significant advancement.

  • @aterxter3437
    @aterxter3437 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Men onboard a usv ? We have the same issue in France, because of maritime regulationd mandating a lookout onboard, everytime we try a usv, there is a saioor onboard with something to rat while doing lookout

  • @cruisinguy6024
    @cruisinguy6024 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I strongly disagree with the claim that the technology doesn’t exist for reliable remote communication with drone ships - the US has been flying drones in the AIR for like 3 decades now.
    The technology and safety exists.
    Also, there’s two key and very different situations when these USVs would be used: time of war where many peacetime rules are no longer a concern (Look at the Ukrainian attack drones taking out Russian ships) and normal peacetime operations in international waters.
    If Iran wants to violate the cardinal rule of “Don’t Touch Out Boats!” then they can reap the consequences of a “proportional response” when the US deletes half their navy……again.
    🦅 🦅🦅🦅🦅

  • @RobSchofield
    @RobSchofield 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    An excellent essay, thanks! Very enjoyable.

  • @kristoffereberius2476
    @kristoffereberius2476 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    How about people signed up to UN conventions on freedom of navigation be responsible for freedom of navigation. Local navies looking after local waters according to agreed conventions. US isn't a signatory and should go home.
    US proportional response is an international war crime.

  • @stareagle5000
    @stareagle5000 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Ya know there is always option C. Just arbitrarily decided that COLREGS don’t apply to military vehicle due to (pick your reason). While it might differ from conventional thinking there is the counter argument of my guns are bigger what do you plan to do about it.
    It wouldn’t be the first time in history something like that happened and it won’t be the last.

    • @jdotoz
      @jdotoz 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      We already do, in particular situations.

  • @Maadhawk
    @Maadhawk 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    In general, I am not a fan of naval drones. I say that as a Navy veteran myself. I do understand the large potential they represent and offer to the Navy though. During a time of war, I'd say damn the rules, you do what you got to do to win. But, during times of peace, all naval drones should be manned for safety reasons. If the Navy needs to remove personnel for testing, then they can do it our own waters. All such vessels, while unmanned, should also be closely monitored as well. Again, for safety reasons during times of peace.

  • @louvendran7273
    @louvendran7273 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    I suppose the only casualities in future combat zones will be the unmanned assets and infrastructure. The most obvious other would those poor/not important enough to have a bunker to hide in. Three cheers for technology 🎉

  • @Levimoi345
    @Levimoi345 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    I know am not American but is it good to tell your enemy your weakness?

    • @ripvanwinkle2002
      @ripvanwinkle2002 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      bait on the hook my friend..
      we are FAFO fishing..

    • @Levimoi345
      @Levimoi345 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@ripvanwinkle2002 they say a risk brings great rewards but risking foolishly brings chaos

    • @ripvanwinkle2002
      @ripvanwinkle2002 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@Levimoi345 and HISTORY says fcking with America's boats brings annihilation..

    • @rustyshaklford9557
      @rustyshaklford9557 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​@@ripvanwinkle2002
      Israel strafed, napalmed, and torpedoed USS Liberty, what were the consequences for them?

    • @ripvanwinkle2002
      @ripvanwinkle2002 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@rustyshaklford9557 wtf has that got to do with this thread..?
      they paid.. or did you not read the full history?
      has israel fucked with our boats since?
      i swear you could talk about the shape of a gumball and one of you ITZ DA JOOZ idiots will show up..

  • @caleblarsen5490
    @caleblarsen5490 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +12

    DON'T TOUCH OUR BOATS!

    • @AbsoluteTruth-vm1zb
      @AbsoluteTruth-vm1zb 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Immature

    • @caleblarsen5490
      @caleblarsen5490 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@AbsoluteTruth-vm1zb you seem really mature yourself. Super mature. The MOST mature. Every meaning of the word mature.

    • @Eastern_Egale
      @Eastern_Egale 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Not us
      Our Missiles Will Touch

  • @DS-wl5pk
    @DS-wl5pk 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Idk if anyone’s played Insurgency Sand Storm but a certain voice line comes to mind
    “Do you RRREALLY want to do this!?”

  • @hermanosamuel8744
    @hermanosamuel8744 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Where I generally support the use of drones anyway, the Overload fleet are particularly great. Like towing a supply barge (regardless of what the "supplies" are), but safer. For now, they still remain relatively close to the flotilla, while not restricting vessel maneuvering. 👍

  • @randybentley2633
    @randybentley2633 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    The Starlink system should render the continuous part irrelevant.

    • @Frankon81
      @Frankon81 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      unless Elon shuts it on the whim.

    • @giantroboteye5371
      @giantroboteye5371 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      ​@@Frankon81Even Elon isn't stupid enough to mess with the US military industrial complex.

    • @dioniscaraus6124
      @dioniscaraus6124 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      ​@@Frankon81He would get Kennedy'd in less than 24 hours

    • @randybentley2633
      @randybentley2633 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​@@Frankon81SpaceX is currently developing a military version of Starlink called Starshield.

  • @Mike-NP
    @Mike-NP 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Iran or China "seizing" a US Navy ship with the "least" amount of trouble possible sounds like somewhere between a drastic understatement and the worst instance of "f*** around and find out" that I can possibly think of.

  • @illesizs
    @illesizs 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I thought, these unmanned ships would be considered *derelict,* but treating them as *navigational hazard* is probably more reasonable.

  • @KirenKK-te7pb
    @KirenKK-te7pb 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    It will self destruct just in time after achieving proximity. Consequences?

  • @pt3513
    @pt3513 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    “Go ahead. Take it from me.”
    -brock sampson

  • @paulletchworth2036
    @paulletchworth2036 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Iran , that’s what would happen if just once the US would unleash their full military might without rules or lines , then everyone would see , Iran would do just that RUN right into the sea

  • @piasafaris1233
    @piasafaris1233 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Iran has a right to defend itself

  • @MrCaiobrz
    @MrCaiobrz 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Doesn't seem there is any loophole. If a vessel is against the maritime law, it is against the maritime law, period. Either Maritime Law changes (not likelly until we have AI, since communications can always go down), or people reach the obvious conclusion that yes, unmanned ships can be a hazardous. First time a Iranian or Chinese unmanned ship gets close to the US, tell me US won't take it because it is not safe ... no it is not a loophole, it is NOT safe.

  • @Bennie2.0
    @Bennie2.0 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    So would you say that what @rctestflight is doing is illegal

  • @SnakeEyes.MP4
    @SnakeEyes.MP4 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Anytime I think of “unmanned boat vessels” I can’t help but think of the Robot Navy Ship from Fallout 4 lmao

  • @koharumi1
    @koharumi1 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    So your telling me I can go ahead and "borrow" usa drones and there will be no consequences?! Noice

  • @joshuapieper8579
    @joshuapieper8579 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    @sandboxx We gonna see a SeaPower on this at sometime?

  • @miketan4803
    @miketan4803 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    How many times manned pln vessels clash with ph coast guard vessels going to supply their people on their own territory as confirmed by international courts

  • @andrewleber1871
    @andrewleber1871 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    They have precedent for operating USVs completely unmanned. furgro is operating USVs inspecting oil rigs and sup sea structures using Sea-kit built boats they are controlled from a office in Aberdeen UK. the vessels are flagged by the UK MCA and have a constant lookout with a chief mate and a captain manning the cameras and equipment remotely so they are COLREG compliant

  • @GaryCameron
    @GaryCameron 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    I wonder if they have a self destruct feature

    • @JM-lk6wo
      @JM-lk6wo 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      They certainly could/should be so equipped.

  • @chuckdog7901
    @chuckdog7901 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    This is inaccurate. Any vessel in neutral waters is free to operate within international law without any military interference. Any such hostility towards these vessels is an act of war. There are laws that supersede the laws that you are citing in this video.

  • @xjdisuehd
    @xjdisuehd 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    The push for including unmanned naval vessels won't come from the navies, but rather shipping. The aviation regulations for drone operations came from airlines, airports and drone operators to avoid them being hassled and harassed by local law enforcement agencies.

    • @NotWhatYouThink
      @NotWhatYouThink  9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Interesting.

    • @ashaman81
      @ashaman81 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      There are already ships like that being used. I think it was Norway that actually sent a cargo ship like that between two ports. It's only time before it becomes normal for commercial shipping and colregs is forced to change.

  • @killman369547
    @killman369547 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    That's why i don't expect drone vessels to stay unarmed for very long. At some point the navy is going to put self defense weaponry on these ships like Phalanx CIWS and or a deck gun. The only issue would be modifying the Phalanx to increase it's magazine size or give it an auto reloader that can feed it more ammo from a main magazine inside the ship every time it runs out. Because as it sits right now the Phalanx doesn't have enough ammo capacity to repel more than a small boarding party or drone swarm etc.

    • @keviomorningstar146
      @keviomorningstar146 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Yyaahh it's Purdy and oui say is okie mon eih.... And still no pay in my account or on any of my cards mon eih....

  • @wolfgangemmerich7552
    @wolfgangemmerich7552 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Last year there was a lot of unknown drones in action around oil fields in the european parts of the northsea . Nobody knows where this drones cames from !

  • @toddcarter1032
    @toddcarter1032 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    A captain should not have to get permission from a president to sink enemy threats.

  • @hclau218
    @hclau218 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Legal loophole my behind! All you need to do is pass a Law in your own country, allowingvyou to seize those ships, just like the USA. Then just seize tgem legally. It js just a matter of guts. If it us "legal" for USA, then it is "legal" for other countries. You do not need loopholes!

  • @orusandornots1915
    @orusandornots1915 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I think we should consider the autonomous defense system loopholes.

  • @legion5648
    @legion5648 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    they should use it to build more logistics ships with one main ship so you can have one ship with weapons and one with fuel so the ships can be smaller and be multiple targets instead of just one big one thats easier to hit. thoughts

  • @cameronsienkiewicz6364
    @cameronsienkiewicz6364 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    We are literally engineering our own extinction.. most militaries around the world are integrating all their systems, so jets can talk to command structures, tanks, assets on the ground, satellites, war ships, drones etc.. every system is able to communicate with each other.. just the helmet the F35 pilots wear has more sensors and processing power than almost every 4 gen aircraft as a whole ..
    due to how much raw data that’s coming from forward deployed assets like jets, tanks, soldiers, artillery positions, warship positions and armaments etc., we can just have humans sitting through all this data, so in comes Artificial Intelligence to process all the raw data coming in, into a coherent picture that can be presented to command structures so they’re able to make informed decisions about what’s happening on a second by second basis, but pretty soon even the top command structures will be replaced with an artificial intelligence system that can process all the data it collects from multiple sources and will just go ahead and make the decisions itself, because it’s already calculated every single outcome and what their percentage of success will be ..
    In my life time, pilots will become obsolete, warship captains will become obsolete, tank crews, drone operators, hell, even our nuclear response capabilities will be controlled by artificial intelligence.. it’ll be able to calculate what the enemy response will be, how long it takes for travel time of ICBMS, what will happen and how many people will die if nukes land in certain areas.. it’ll have ALL the information that we give it from sensors in cell phones, satellites, personal vehicles, as well as information from other systems the AI is able to hack and breech..
    If we let this cat out of the bag, we are FUCKED

  • @myc0p
    @myc0p 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Japanese kamikaze aircrafts were also planes on auto-pilot.

  • @WraithAllen
    @WraithAllen 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    "Continuous lookout" doesn't necessarily require a person if the drone is truly autonomous with it's own AI and sensor array with redundancies to ensure 24x7 continuous operations. So, the notion that they require a human presence, or a continuous remote human monitor, will eventually just be an archaic notion relegated to history... that day is coming.
    Also, packing them with an explosive charge to self-destruct if boarded or an attempted towing would prevent they from being seized, and teach those doing so to NOT try either. Such a self-destruct mechanism could be made as tamper-proof as possible with a code needed to be received to deactivate it by US personnel.

  • @Thinksmartlivelonger
    @Thinksmartlivelonger 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I’m sorry America I won’t do it again !!! 😂

  • @Herodotus__
    @Herodotus__ 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    The drone sumbarine was "in international waters" of course it was😂😂

  • @ratzfatz6880
    @ratzfatz6880 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Some Japanese would tell them: 'Don't touch their boats!'

  • @davidvavra9113
    @davidvavra9113 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +10

    I had a collision on Puget Sound with a guy adrift and asleep down below.
    His dark green boat was invisible against the forest beyond.
    Jerk

    • @ripvanwinkle2002
      @ripvanwinkle2002 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      well TBF your boat was too quiet and he couldnt hear you..
      jerk..

    • @andresmartinezramos7513
      @andresmartinezramos7513 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@ripvanwinkle2002 True, mandatory raves on all sailing boats in order to avoid mishaps

  • @technomad9071
    @technomad9071 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    the rise of the machines

  • @peymanjvn8955
    @peymanjvn8955 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    It's Persian gulf not Arabian, please correct your map next time!!!

    • @NotWhatYouThink
      @NotWhatYouThink  9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      We said Arabian Sea. That is different from Persian Gulf. Two separate things.

  • @anotherbacklog
    @anotherbacklog 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    So sooner or later ships will only have humans on them just to sign paperworks

  • @jeffclarke1540
    @jeffclarke1540 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    If it got taken, they can self-destruct the boat

  • @mwmentor
    @mwmentor 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I am inclined to think that AI could answer a lot of the legal issues in the not too distant future. AI will also allow USVs to operate completely autonomously once their mission was made known to them.

  • @mikemyshka1472
    @mikemyshka1472 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    The loop whole allows the U.S. Navy to take IRAN Navy ships too

    • @MistaDobalina
      @MistaDobalina 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Iran outsources it's Navy to Yemen terrorists. Cowards.

  • @jaythomas3224
    @jaythomas3224 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    How many times will the media justify US medeliing using the word Brasingly

  • @ValidatingUsername
    @ValidatingUsername 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    If you question if something is legal, it is not a red line politically for your moral compass.

  • @ChonkyFish_1
    @ChonkyFish_1 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    It’s ironic that Iran and China are worried about shipping vessels when both of them terrorize them

  • @hotlanta35
    @hotlanta35 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Dude if any captain of the U.S. Navy allows their ship to be captured then they should be ashamed

  • @Angstbringer18B
    @Angstbringer18B 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Okay so why not just have *mostly* automated ships that minimize the disadvantages of both and enhance their advantages?

  • @pedrojcolonallende3768
    @pedrojcolonallende3768 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Very fictitious movies vinculing the meaning of this article.😮

  • @bobfognozzle
    @bobfognozzle 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Go ahead….make my day.

  • @StickPeopleAndPuff
    @StickPeopleAndPuff 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    The last time something happened to US Naval ship, that country lost its privilege to have an army

  • @oscarlund8820
    @oscarlund8820 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Friday commute home is saved ❤

  • @greggweber9967
    @greggweber9967 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Man it with HAL-100, which is a predecessor of HAL-9000.
    Install a very powerful explosive or a biological system not to be opened?

  • @armistice_front
    @armistice_front 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    one step towards Skynet