Google earth doesn't update its maps that frequently to be of real military use. It can show the basic location and layout of a base, but cannot provide reliable up-to-date IMINT about vehicle type and location, personnel, etc. Anyone using it as insinuated in the article isn't too bright...

Posted by: Tedly at January 15, 2007 9:58 AM

>I don't see why this is a huge deal. Its not like Google Earth is offering something that was
>never on the market before. Isn't there an expectation that insurgents will recon their
>targets with whatever means they have in hand?

It's all about planning and preparation, plus minimum but additional information about the details of the area from the image. You might also be able to make guesses what the building is from the image which maps may not, such as mosques, hangar of an airstrip, etc. Not all insurgents are local, and some may be foreign, or at least from other areas within the country. You might be able to search for key buildings not on normal maps, blind spots to hide for ambush, structure of the surface, and height of buildings. If you are not local, you will be able to have advantage to have an image what the area looks like from above, and that even adds onto recon that follows.

Posted by: pedestrian at January 15, 2007 7:32 AM

I don't see why this is a huge deal. Its not like Google Earth is offering something that was never on the market before. Isn't there an expectation that insurgents will recon their targets with whatever means they have in hand?

Libraries of comsat photos have been available for at least a decade. All Google did was increase accessibility to it by handing the software out for free.

I like to collect locations of nuclear weapons facilities around the world. You can learn a lot about a nuclear program from good overhead photos.

Posted by: Robot Economist at January 14, 2007 10:37 AM