posted on Apr, 20 2006 @ 06:56 PM
I think the best invention was the shield, and all the adaptations and variations on it since.
The idea is, if you can prevent your opponent from striking you, winning the conflict is only a matter of time. Assuming there isn't a wide skill or
fitness gap on either side, the defense always wins. It's simply less tiring to turn aside blows than it is to deliver them.
I too think the warthog is neat, but against a purely defensive military similarly equipped, it's just another useless expenditure of energy.
Picking off tanks and turnip trucks at night is one thing, engaging a layered defensive line, complete with an air force and electronic/visual attack
capabilities, be they dazzlers or scramblers or circuitboard-frying lasers, is a completely different proposition.
The warthog, in that scenario, becomes simply another vehicle for a warm body, which must be thrown en masse with thousands of similar bodies, into a
meat grinder of certain death, in the hopes of clearing a small path through the defenses, so that strikes to remove defensive positions can begin.
Would you rather be attacking or defending? That's like asking shirts or skins, in the Sahara at noon, I think.