A gunship is going to be even more expensive to operate. Yes, its firepower will surpass that of UAVs and T-129, but we should ask ourselves this question:
Does the PKK ever concentrate so many terrorists and equipment in one spot that'd make it cost-effective for a gunship mission?
It'd hurt us a lot more to get a gunship with a large crew shut down versus a UAV with no crew.
Yes, the cannon on the T-129 is very useful and yes, UAVs don't have cannons. But we can close that gap by producing and flying
a lot more of them with Cirits and other short-range precision bombs with fragmentation warheads. We can also likely introduce an UAV armed with a cannon, if we really wanted to.
Look. The point should be to take the PKK scum out without risking the life of even a single Turkish soldier. PKK commanders themselves have started talking about how frustrating it is to get killed without having a target to shoot back at. It's making recruitment very hard for them.
Since we can suppress the PKK very effectively AND very economically with UAVs, we should emphasize that more. I'm not saying that we should completely abandon using T-129s, they certainly have their use.
All I'm really saying is that we should prioritize UAV development, production and fielding for anti-terror operations.
All things considered, our counter-PKK operations should constitute about 60% UAV usage, 30% T-129 and 10% land forces/troops on the ground reserved for only the most critical missions and clean ups. This will make it very effective and very economical. A sustained system that risks little or no Turkish lives will demoralize the PKK leadership and bring their end sooner.
When the HDP is whining about our use of UAVs so much, that only means that it must be working!
