Originally posted by BigDave-AR
You would think that eventually people would realize that this sub forum is for the discussion of weapons systems and tactics, not the politics of using said weapons and tactics.


Back on subject, this system is remotely disarm-able and can be command detonated if the system is no longer going to be used in the field to prevent hazardous un-exploded ordinance accidents.

Thanks for getting back on track about the technicalities of this particular weapon's system.

Yeah, the liberals like to come here to moan and complain. Like they can't get it into their heads that...oh, never mind.

You are right. The idea of this system is that land mines aren't laying around for decades waiting to be accidentally detonated by a camel or a camel herder.

Liberals cry that land mines are cruel after the fact. That they can't be retrieved after buried everywhere. You give liberals a system that is cleaner, and they still cry. But if liberals didn't have something to cry about, they wouldn't be liberals.

By the way, speaking of camels.....the first use of water mines was during the American Civil War, against iron clads, made out of cow udders to keep them afloat.

Some liberals really give liberals a bad rap. I am considered fairly liberal in my family and with some of my friends but I am also a combat veteran, support our troops, I own guns, dislike big gov but I believe the government does play a role in our lives and should, I didn't agree with the Iraq war even though I was there and several other things that kind of contradict what a conservative should be. I think I'm in the middle.

That being said I find myself arguing with liberals on here all the time because I find them ignorant of reality especially dealing with the military. Maybe that is because most liberals have never served their country. I find it so frustrating when they come on here and wine about a weapons system when they have no idea about the military. This weapon system is a great leap forward and like someone said it will keep landmines from laying dormant for years and killing a noncombatant. It's a win-win situation and people are still crying. For those who are crying about this here is a heads up in war the goal is to kill the enemy and strike fear into them.

I swear sometimes liberals really piss me off they would change their tune if they ever have to fight for themselves.

Originally posted by tonycliffs
You are right. The idea of this system is that land mines aren't laying around for decades waiting to be accidentally detonated by a camel or a camel herder.

Liberals cry that land mines are cruel after the fact. That they can't be retrieved after buried everywhere. You give liberals a system that is cleaner, and they still cry. But if liberals didn't have something to cry about, they wouldn't be liberals.

By the way, speaking of camels.....the first use of water mines was during the American Civil War, against iron clads, made out of cow udders to keep them afloat.

It's really just a bad case of liberal ignorance disorder, they like to take there absurdly shallow and incorrect preconceived notions of weapons systems to make categorizations that are nowhere near logical. It's like the "assault rifle" bans in California and places like it. They try to group everything together without the slightest clue of the real uses and details of weapons to try to demonize anything they can. I just don't get how some of these people get off acting like they know everything about anything.

These weapons systems are moving in the right direction and I think they should be supported strongly for there responsibility in protecting against collateral damage and devastating effects to 3rd world populations who don't have the means to deal with the masses of un-exploded ordinance. Just look at Cambodia and Loas they are still to this day ravaged by munitions from 40 years ago.

Perhaps they will see the light some day, once they retreat from there "anal cavity cave of protection from reality" (think head up their arse's).

Originally posted by Grimpachi
I swear military threads attract liberals like flies to #. They can literally do not know what they're talking about.

At least us liberals/progressives don't create threads celebrating weapons of destruction as if they are tools re relish employing against those people that simple give us no option but defending ourselves trough violence.

Sigh..... People have it wrong it's not that there aren't any terrorists simply because we aren't done killing them yet. Their numbers are down but the job isn't done until they're all gone. We will let you know when they're extinct.

If there was a foreign Muslim terrorist threat on the US mainland they could be setting off explosives in city malls without much chance of getting caught. If there were really terrorist that simply hated Americans ( as in regular folks on the street) they would be killing Americans in droves. The fact that this is not happening rather proves that whatever 'terrorist' there truly are are either busy defending their homes in whichever country the US is attacking or occupying today or are otherwise aiming their efforts at fighting the American government and not it's generally mostly decent , if ignorant, voters.

Since terrorism is a strategy, mostly practiced by governments, and not a type of person you can not make it 'extinct'. Perhaps once you have familiarised yourself with the difference you can come back and tell us more about why all governments in human history painted their enemies as subhuman and or 'terrorist' who do unspeakable things to us we would never do to them?

Thanks for posting this thread I like seeing the new technologies. There was another weapons system I saw myself that was a smart landmine I will try to find a link to a video of it.

I am afraid to ask but here goes, " does it only kill terrorist?"

You can actually turn them on and off and they will find their way to the target.

Facial recognition? Scent? What does terrorist smell like?



Stellar

Originally posted by BigDave-AR
You would think that eventually people would realize that this sub forum is for the discussion of weapons systems and tactics, not the politics of using said weapons and tactics.

Perhaps if the author did not so gleefully talk about this weapon and what it would do to 'terrorist' the rest of us could focus on the weapon instead of ridiculous posturing that so deserves the collective ire of fair minded people.

Back on subject, this system is remotely disarm-able and can be command detonated if the system is no longer going to be used in the field to prevent hazardous un-exploded ordinance accidents.

Fantastic theory but they are more expensive and the pentagon does not count enemy civilian dead so why would they pay top dollar for this feature.

Stellar

Originally posted by StellarX
I am afraid to ask but here goes, " does it only kill terrorist?"

You can actually turn them on and off and they will find their way to the target.

Facial recognition? Scent? What does terrorist smell like?


Stellar

So are you trying to insinuate that this system is no better than a traditional "dumb" mine? I mean really can you not concede that this technology is a massive improvement and should be treated as such and supported as much as possible. I mean there will still always be collateral damage with the fog of war and enemy combatants purposefully hiding within civilian populations to try to cause as much mayhem as possible but this is about as good as it gets.

Originally posted by StellarX

Originally posted by BigDave-AR
You would think that eventually people would realize that this sub forum is for the discussion of weapons systems and tactics, not the politics of using said weapons and tactics.

Perhaps if the author did not so gleefully talk about this weapon and what it would do to 'terrorist' the rest of us could focus on the weapon instead of ridiculous posturing that so deserves the collective ire of fair minded people.

Back on subject, this system is remotely disarm-able and can be command detonated if the system is no longer going to be used in the field to prevent hazardous un-exploded ordinance accidents.

Fantastic theory but they are more expensive and the pentagon does not count enemy civilian dead so why would they pay top dollar for this feature.

Stellar

In my first post in this thread I said that I did not agree with how the OP was worded but you guys are taking wayyyy to the other side of spectrum.

The whole reason for this system to be developed with a command link is to prevent unintended damage. If we support this system as being the best option the chances of it being deployed in the real world are much greater. Of course it would be cheaper to lay dumb mine fields and the such but look at the billions upon billions our government spends improving systems like this to save lives.

The 40 Skeets scan an area of 1,500 feet (460 m) by 500 feet (150 m) using infrared and laser sensors, seeking targets by pattern-matching. When a Skeet finds a target it fires an explosively-formed penetrator to destroy it. If a Skeet fails to find a target, it self-destructs 50 feet (15 m) above the ground; if this fails, a back-up timer disables the Skeet. These features are intended to avoid hurting civilians later, and result in an unexploded-ordnance rate of less than 1%.

Going back on-topic, the video interested me (though maybe my concentration was due to having to penetrate the sales-pitch with its seven score of the word 'module'..) and I've been thinking it through:

1) Presumably the bomblets fired are contact-fuzed, so there should be a 0% munition littering (the main problem with cluster munitions and civilian deaths).

2) Even assuming that it won't always be a 1:1 bomblet/tank ratio, it would still result in a muuuuch lower amount of leftover munitions compared to 'carpet-bombing' methods of cluster dispersal (see above)

3) While I don't have any evidence for/against other than this video, I'd be interested to see anything that would detail the weaknesses potentially present in this kind of area defence and how they're covered by the force present - because presumably they don't expect these things to be the ONLY method of defence in such a scenario.