It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The usefulness of weapons in decline?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 8 2004 @ 12:22 PM
link   
This is a personal view, so I do expect to get some negative responses, I'm fine with that.

I believe the age of weapons is drawing to a close. Especially the days of building bigger weapons that are more devastating to one-up your nearest competitor. Those days are OVER, O-V-E-R. The United States really needs to come to grips with this because the enemy of the future is not intimidated by large weapons.

AL-Qaeda and other terrorist groups who are the current enemy are nationless and highly integrated into technology. They are increasingly difficult to locate and brutally difficult to destroy.

The United States new army will not require large betallions of soldiers, but only a few soldiers (3-5) armed to the tits with information technology. That's it.

Thoughts?




posted on Jan, 8 2004 @ 12:31 PM
link   


The United States new army will not require large betallions of soldiers, but only a few soldiers (3-5) armed to the tits with information technology. That's it.


No you will always need some to physically take your obbjective and thats been the infrantry from the dawn of time



posted on Jan, 8 2004 @ 12:37 PM
link   
I dont think weapons are going out of style, just changing. I do however agree that information is becoming a larger part of the overall picture. I actually think Al Qaeda isint so involved in technology, because between the UK and US, we have electronic ears all over this part of the globe. Actually I think they have opted for more low-tech methods, because what works better than old tried and true methods. I would say the future of battle is a veritable army of intelligence officers and field agents providing information to a small specialized stirke force able to move in and eliminate targets in a very short ammount of time, rather like how our SEAL teams SHOULD function.



posted on Jan, 8 2004 @ 12:52 PM
link   
The enemy is highly integrated into technology. What if he is able to counter american "sophisticated information technology", can protect himself from virus, troyan, infiltrator attacks? Or even retaliate? Then what you have to do? You find the enemy, plan an attack, send in a squad, annihilate the enemy. With good old guns, even not stuff like the OICW, good old simple solutions.
There's a chance that a tech soldier, capable of things today not imagined, in power armor, armed with computers, even brain-machine interface, would become immobile after an EMP attack (also use of a theoretical EMP grenade). A mujafedin armed only in an AK and a kevlar vest then would finish him off.



posted on Jan, 10 2004 @ 09:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lukefj
This is a personal view, so I do expect to get some negative responses, I'm fine with that.

I believe the age of weapons is drawing to a close. Especially the days of building bigger weapons that are more devastating to one-up your nearest competitor. Those days are OVER, O-V-E-R. The United States really needs to come to grips with this because the enemy of the future is not intimidated by large weapons.

AL-Qaeda and other terrorist groups who are the current enemy are nationless and highly integrated into technology. They are increasingly difficult to locate and brutally difficult to destroy.

The United States new army will not require large betallions of soldiers, but only a few soldiers (3-5) armed to the tits with information technology. That's it.

Thoughts?



this is for right now ONLY.

but when there is going to be a REAL threat.

that QUALITY and QUAITITY REALLY COUNTS!



new topics

top topics
 
0

log in

join