Does work involve bourbon? On Apr 4, 2016 12:44 PM, "Faisal Imtiaz" <fai...@snappytelecom.net> wrote:
> Let's get back to work !.... > > > :) > > 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 1:39:52 PM > *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] [ot] battleship engineering > > Faisal, you're really ruining all my fun today. I haven't had enough > bourbon for this discussion. > > On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 12:33 PM, Faisal Imtiaz <fai...@snappytelecom.net> > wrote: > >> Aren't they all connected ? >> >> You are presenting a technical argument, which does not match up to >> factual data from the field is put next to it... >> >> The comment about war and profiteering was in reply to your comment >> regarding 'all life '. >> >> Regards >> >> 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 1:06:52 PM >> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] [ot] battleship engineering >> >> There's quite a bit of strawmen in your post Faisal. We went from talking >> about weapons systems to civilian casualties, and then when the points >> about the strides made in minimizing civilian casualties was brought up, >> you turned it from there to a political and philosophical rant on the >> nature of warfare and those who profit. >> >> On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 12:03 PM, Faisal Imtiaz <fai...@snappytelecom.net> >> wrote: >> >>> 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. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
