Yes, yes, yes... you can make any argument you like, it is easy to justify the weapons and their efficiency on a relative scale...
However, if you take into account the views from the other side, on the ground and a dose of reality.... even the most sane person has to rethink the argument... this is just one example of what I am talking about..... http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2012/09/25/national/drones-terrorising-pakistan-civilians-experts/ (read the expert opinion.... and ask yourself the question of who were, are the other 98% killed ) And when these nut cases come back and kill kids in schools as a retaliation... the folks there pay the price, again for so called 'precision bombs'. > If you want to make an argument that all life is precious, I disagree - there > are some individuals out there that the world would be better off had they > not been born... a lot of them, sadly. It is tragic when non-coms get caught > in the crossfire. Ok, lets go with this argument, the question is who is going the be judge and jury for them ? Whose laws are you going to judge someone by, ours ? Theirs ? .... If we are so right and correct in everything we do ....Then why is it that we simply cannot allow open public trial of the detainees in Guantanamo ? War is a dirty business, everyone looses .... except for those who profit from it ! Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > From: "Josh Reynolds" <j...@kyneticwifi.com> > To: af@afmug.com > Sent: Monday, April 4, 2016 11:35:58 AM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [ot] battleship engineering > " The point is, modern fighting machines are much more destructive, and are > indiscriminate killing machines .. they don't know the difference between > solders and civilians... It might be sexy to talk about their destructive > power, but one has to realize that destructive power is far more reaching to > human beings....... and this is why we don't officially keep track of civilian > deaths.... > " > Indiscriminate killing machines, yes. Always have been, and likely always will > be. More destructive? Not necessarily. The initial Call For Fire for artillery > given a map and compass has a "mean error" of 500m. It's still just as bad now > as it was during World War I, maybe with slightly better numbers due to better > mapping data. Fire a single Excalibur round out of one of the said artillery > pieces however, and you can place the round inside a window multiple stories > off the ground floor and even have a good understanding of possible building > and collateral damage before the round is ever fired. > Which one would you rather fire in a city? > The same goes for carpet bombing. It's vastly fallen out of favor due to it's > expense and mass damage, and the fact that for point targets a single > 500-2000lb JDAM can have the precise effect. For moving targets, they now have > laser guided JDAMS - GPS until near target, then switches to IR tracker. This > means you're much more likely to have positive effects on target (EOT) than > using a shotgun approach. > Basically, CEP (Circular Error of Probability) went from 500m to single digit > meters to centimeters now, depending on the weapons system. Understanding of > collateral damage (persons / structures) is also much better. > TLDR: Yes, we have some weapons systems capable of massive destruction. We've > also come a long way in creating systems that have outstanding accuracy to > lower round expenditures, create positive EOT, and minimize civilian and > structural casualties. > If you want to make an argument that all life is precious, I disagree - there > are some individuals out there that the world would be better off had they not > been born... a lot of them, sadly. It is tragic when non-coms get caught in > the > crossfire. > On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Faisal Imtiaz < fai...@snappytelecom.net > > wrote: >> >> Perspective is a powerful thing. >> Agreed.. >>>>. Not as high as the loss of life would have been if we were running at one >>>>another with swords and bows, not as high as lining up in front of one >>>>another >>>>taking turns to load and shoot, and not as high as it would be had we been >>>>forced from our trenches into the waiting maw of the enemy with the dull >>>>smell >> >>of onions in the air behind us. >> Hmm... opinion based on which account one has read... Most of those battles >> ended in one day or within a short amount of time, the battle field was >> always >> contained .... to soldiers. >> The point is, modern fighting machines are much more destructive, and are >> indiscriminate killing machines .. they don't know the difference between >> solders and civilians... It might be sexy to talk about their destructive >> power, but one has to realize that destructive power is far more reaching to >> human beings....... and this is why we don't officially keep track of >> civilian >> deaths.... >> Faisal Imtiaz >>> From: "Josh Reynolds" < j...@kyneticwifi.com > >>> To: af@afmug.com >>> Sent: Monday, April 4, 2016 10:03:07 AM >>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [ot] battleship engineering >>> Not as high as the loss of life would have been if we were running at one >>> another with swords and bows, not as high as lining up in front of one >>> another >>> taking turns to load and shoot, and not as high as it would be had we been >>> forced from our trenches into the waiting maw of the enemy with the dull >>> smell >>> of onions in the air behind us. >>> Citizens of London, Stalingrad, Berlin, Nagasaki and Hiroshima would >>> appreciate >>> how "civilized" we have become from a certain point of view. >>> Citizens of cities who have been invaded by ISIS/ISIL... Probably not so >>> much. >>> Perspective is a powerful thing. >>> On Apr 4, 2016 8:09 AM, "Faisal Imtiaz" < fai...@snappytelecom.net > wrote: >>>> No offense meant to anyone.... >>>> But let me ask you one question:- >>>> What was the cost in human lives paid for that adventure ? >>>> (Both sides, good, bad, ugly...... human cost ?) >>>> Regards >>>> Faisal Imtiaz >>>>> From: "David Milholen" < dmilho...@wletc.com > >>>>> To: af@afmug.com >>>>> Sent: Monday, April 4, 2016 8:24:36 AM >>>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [ot] battleship engineering >>>>> I got to sit between two units on my M1A1 tank that had a fire mission >>>>> into >>>>> Kuwait and Iraq. >>>>> The unit I called the BIg Ear sat up on the forward berm to identify >>>>> targets of >>>>> opportunity. >>>>> These so called targets were other artillery that were firing on its own >>>>> troops >>>>> for desertion. >>>>> By late evening the star clusters that littered the sky soon died down to >>>>> one or >>>>> two after the MRLS missions were done. >>>>> On 4/4/2016 12:11 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote: >>>>>> My dream fire mission was MLRS :) >>>>>> On Apr 3, 2016 10:23 PM, "Cameron Crum" < cc...@wispmon.com > wrote: >>>>>>> I'm all for precision guided munitions, but nothing says we've come to >>>>>>> kick some >>>>>>> ass like shelling an enemy position with the 16in guns from a >>>>>>> battleship. Talk >>>>>>> about demoralizing the enemy. >>>>>>> On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 10:50 AM, Josh Reynolds < j...@kyneticwifi.com > >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> Systems like that don't exist so much... At least, there are no guns >>>>>>>> of that >>>>>>>> size on a battleship that I'm aware of (16"). >>>>>>>> I know there are much smaller systems now for certain classes of >>>>>>>> warships. When >>>>>>>> I was going through my joint fires naval training we talked about a >>>>>>>> bunch of >>>>>>>> systems (that are now public knowledge). One of the newer naval guns >>>>>>>> has a 40+ >>>>>>>> nautical mile range and GPS guided round - similar to the Excalibur >>>>>>>> artillery >>>>>>>> round. Those are mostly automated systems. >>>>>>>> If I remember right, a full battery salvo from an Iowa class >>>>>>>> battleship on a >>>>>>>> surface target could spread out the round impact locations to create a >>>>>>>> 1Km x >>>>>>>> 1Km "casualty box". I always wanted the opportunity to employ that >>>>>>>> system :P >>>>>>>> On Apr 3, 2016 10:23 AM, "David Milholen" < dmilho...@wletc.com > >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> What an AWEsome piece of history. >>>>>>>>> I wonder how many of those systems are completely automated and how >>>>>>>>> much faster >>>>>>>>> reload time is ? >>>>>>>>> On 4/3/2016 1:59 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote: >>>>>>>>>> https://youtu.be/_wT1xkRpCKk I love this stuff. >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>> --
