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.

 

What would the ideal weapon be?

page: 9
0
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 3 2004 @ 06:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
actually a good punch would take like a second and since most masters have reaction times of hockey goal keepers ,the fastest in the world i might add, they would stop you quite effectively


A whole second would be a really slow punch in the martial arts world. A good punch takes but a fraction of a second.

A cinema camera has had 24 fps since around the 60's, bruce's fighting was really shotty on camera, it looked fake with him at full speed, so in order for it to look fake his speed had to be around .03 seconds a punch. That would add up to 8 in 1 second. 8 pictures in 1 second would look hell of crappy. In fact he was probably a bit faster but hey who really knows?

Many people are not as fast as bruce was but most can get well under a sec.




posted on Aug, 3 2004 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Krisboton
Or a weapon that killed the enemy but did no damage to buildings or other people...but thats not going to happen...[edit on 9/6/04 by Krisboton]

You're obviously too young to remember the neutron bomb brouhaha of the 1970s.

www.manuelsweb.com...

[edit on 04/8/3 by GradyPhilpott]

[edit on 04/8/4 by GradyPhilpott]



posted on Aug, 3 2004 @ 07:03 PM
link   
Alot of martial artists ask "what gives you the edge over another skilled fighter?" I can tell you in one word.. speed. Speed in training is what will give you the first strike, the hardest strike, and the ability to evade your opponents attacks. Speed is something we should all strive for in our training.. Wouldn't you like to hit your opponent several times in the blink of an eye. Does speed make you a smarter and more effective fighter? Yes

Jeet Kune Do features the nontelegraphic principles of fencing

The idea of nontelegraphing is to initiate your punch without any forewarning (tensing your shoulders or moving your feet or body) so your opponent does not have enough time to react. If you punch with jut a slight motion of your feet or body, you have "telegraphed" or warned your opponent of your intention.
The secret is to relax your body and arms but keep them slightly weaving. Whip your hand out loosely so your shoulders don't become tense, and clench your hand an instant before contact. And keep a poker face. You don't want to telegraph your intentions.


this is how people can appear to block punches they could in no way have time to react to.Jeet Kune Do nontelegraphing is one way around this



posted on Aug, 3 2004 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by DevilWasp
umm actually a kcik takes longer than a punch so i would guess he would block that as well.
and also what happens if he wears armour?bang ha ha oh crap he's not dead! smack!


Devil I would go for a fake punch then tip him to the ground with a quick kick if that don't work then guns will do. and if you have body armor and I shoot at you its going to disrupt your movement. All I need is a 12 gauge and that body armor wont do him any good.



posted on Aug, 3 2004 @ 08:38 PM
link   
yeah here we go with the cowardly guns.
westy frankly using guns in a duel is cowardly
hand to hand combat is the earliest, most brutal ,sadistic and unhumane kind of combat around.
also that bruce lee thing. he supposedly on a set got asked to kick some one at full speed, he kicked him and the guy then felt his mouth and spat out three teeth then shouted in pain. it was so fast that he didnt even register the pain until a moment later.



posted on Aug, 3 2004 @ 10:53 PM
link   
Gnagnagnagna look et me im teh rokzor with teh guns lol USA zi teh bast in teh world lol duh i got gunz im a 11 yr old nub that wants to go in iruk tyo sav my famly agist teh eval commie muzlin terrarists lol omg


Originally posted by WestPoint23
necro by the time he will be close enough to me to do that, he will be in a pool of blood. Guns are far more superior than any karate move. What would you chose?
The Gun or the Karate moves?


I would choose the karate because here people dont carry desert eagles like in your 3rd world uncivilized warzone. Here we fight like man, not like little faggets with a Counter-strike overdose.

[edit on 8/3/2004 by necro99]



posted on Aug, 4 2004 @ 01:14 AM
link   
Yes necro good choice you'll find out how far you will go in today's world with the karate move. 3d world uncivilized county you surely cant be talking about the US
The US has 80 million armed civilians yet more die of car crashes than guns. If carrying a gun is so cowardly why does every country in the world equip their troops with one? Why don't they go out there and fight like men without one
Plus necro what is that in your avatar could it be a gun


[edit on 4-8-2004 by WestPoint23]



posted on Aug, 4 2004 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
"The deadliest weapon in the world is a MARINE and his rifle!" -GEN. PERSHING, US.ARMY.

[edit on 04/8/3 by GradyPhilpott]

Reminds me of a bumber sticker I saw. "Total destruction in thirty minutes or the next ones free".

Westpoint incase you were unaware our own US Army teaches its soldiers basic hand to hand combat. Nothing fancy but some techniques that are guranteed to work. Anyhow on the battlefield its nessesary to do whats practical which leads to the use of guns when at a range. But unless both oponents use guns in a duel then thats just plain cowardly. Incase you didn't know about half of martial arts is a code of honor and mental training. Its not all about the cool looking moves. Martial arts are for "self-defense" not offensive purposes.



posted on Aug, 4 2004 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Yes necro good choice you'll find out how far you will go in today's world with the karate move. 3d world uncivilized county you surely cant be talking about the US
The US has 80 million armed civilians yet more die of car crashes than guns. If carrying a gun is so cowardly why does every country in the world equip their troops with one? Why don't they go out there and fight like men without one
Plus necro what is that in your avatar could it be a gun


[edit on 4-8-2004 by WestPoint23]

desert eagle is nothing compared to the smith and wessen .500 cal magnum now thats a real hand cannon. every country arms its trooops with guns cause its easier and cheaper to kill folk that way. cause most men die like that and armies want less men to die.
why no its a chicken he has.



posted on Aug, 4 2004 @ 01:14 PM
link   
The ultimate weapon would be a biological agent that killed quickly, cleanly, and ultimately quickly caused the body to disintegrate, but could also be designed as to ONLY kill enemy combatants, and not friendly ones, or civilians or cause any other environmental damage.

Of course, this is a pie in the sky dream, but you did say the IDEAL weapon...



posted on Aug, 4 2004 @ 01:18 PM
link   
Well Gazrok I remember reading about the Isrealis new nano-computer made from DNA. They say it has the power to perform similar to what you just described.



posted on Aug, 4 2004 @ 01:32 PM
link   
A low wavelength beam which stops all biological processeswhen it comes into contact.



posted on Aug, 4 2004 @ 04:22 PM
link   
These should be rid of. The ring clogs with water,sometimes dirt.It destroys your sight picture. Open sights are good enough.
One thing you didn't know: You CANNOT aim with aperature sights during full auto.Um,the FNC2,the M15,and the MINIMI all had aperatured did they not?
"Best to walk the ground bursts to target (rattattat) till you get the range (rattattat) then I usually aim for the rear of the standup targets (rattattat) there goes another one (rat tat tat) then if any fall short Rat tat tat) everything in front catches it.(rat tat tat)...best machine gun We ever tried? (rat tat tat) was an old MG 15 in the final weeks of the war.Saddle drum,all self contained.Even catches the old links.
The MG42? One trigger pull and you are empty.The MG34 better.Put it on a tripod,some with a scope..then you have something phenomennal."


[edit on 4-8-2004 by stgeorge]

[edit on 4-8-2004 by stgeorge]



posted on Aug, 4 2004 @ 04:53 PM
link   
na the best weapon would have to be a nitrogen charge.



posted on Aug, 5 2004 @ 06:35 AM
link   
The same vet said, "The G43 German rifle? We we looked at that,10 rounds with a scope,we said 'The Germans are ahead of us again.' "

"Their pistols?Why do you think everyone,especially NCO's,wanted these german pistols? We had only a few. The Browning P35's, everyone wanted their hands on one.Nicknamed The Inglis,after the manufacturer.
Better than my Sten for house to house,said one."


[edit on 5-8-2004 by stgeorge]



posted on Aug, 5 2004 @ 06:46 AM
link   
Now comparing the Bren to the Czech Brno,from which it was decended ...

"We captured a Brno,and used it.The Germans came at us in numbers,all different uniforms and units.They listened on the radio signals,and when one operator simply said 'We are out' some keen Kraut knew that that meant we were almost out of ammunition.But we had the brno,with one clip,which we kept reloading with captured german ammo,right off their bodies.
We made the sacrifice but held near Falaise.
The Brno was a lighter weapon than the Bren,having a thinner barrel.This made it rear heavy,while the Bren had a thick barrel,making it front heavy.The Brno jumped all over the place,the bren was more stable.
The Brno was more reliable.The Bren was OK,when it worked.
The German MG's had the same problem with the light barrels.And I don't see how their soldiers managed to carry the things.Some put it over their shoulder like a bindle. But they all get hot.Not just the barrel...right down to the trigger group."



posted on Aug, 6 2004 @ 06:32 AM
link   
The Iraqis captured a US general it was reported today. Wonder if they will use him as a propaganda weapon.I doubt there is any useful intelligence information they would need from him. www.rense.com

"He will be found beaten to a pulp." 2IC

"What,he just sat there?I assume it was a convoy."

"Stunned."

"Wait a minute.Didn't he have an armoured command vehicle? Wasn't that standard for chiefs of staff in wartime?"

"Hot box."

I guess the climate is a weapon.

[edit on 6-8-2004 by stgeorge]

[edit on 6-8-2004 by stgeorge]

[edit on 6-8-2004 by stgeorge]



posted on Aug, 6 2004 @ 07:18 AM
link   
is this BS or legit?
frankly how they got the general is what i am wondering. i mean a general has like 30 men at least around him at all times.



posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 10:01 AM
link   
I am finding that most sites talking about modern or new US small arms have been taken off. The future combate systems one is still there,but that brand new compact assault rifle was taken off.
I know it was probably too small,but is that the reason for it? Might have had possibilities. Perhaps those big gorrillas you have in uniform now are finding things "too small" like the old fashioned Jeep came to be? Or standard rations?



posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 11:53 AM
link   
What? When? Link, Quickly!


Originally posted by stgeorge
The Iraqis captured a US general it was reported today. Wonder if they will use him as a propaganda weapon.I doubt there is any useful intelligence information they would need from him. www.rense.com

"He will be found beaten to a pulp." 2IC

"What,he just sat there?I assume it was a convoy."

"Stunned."

"Wait a minute.Didn't he have an armoured command vehicle? Wasn't that standard for chiefs of staff in wartime?"

"Hot box."

I guess the climate is a weapon.

[edit on 6-8-2004 by stgeorge]

[edit on 6-8-2004 by stgeorge]

[edit on 6-8-2004 by stgeorge]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join