I feel Tanks are no longer useful, but Russia's most advanced Tank

Rogue1,

>>>
The line has already /been/ drawn. When a LOSAT went in the front slope and out the back engine grill of an M1A2 'with all the addon extras'. And Shaliksvelli held up his hand and waved a 'Jaded' video tape under the noses of the Armor Folks as he said:
>>>

First of all, I made a mistake. It was Shinseki, not Shaliksvelli.

>>
A LOSAT was used against an M1 ? Just where did you here this and where did your quotes come from ?
>>

And the discussion in question was here-

www.jerrypournelle.com...

Ctrl-F keyword: Video.

Believe it or not Ripley. But if LOSAT was truly a 60MJ delivery kinetic killer, it's no wonder that CKEM is 'half as good'. Because that was 'the deal' to keep men in charge of men solely for their own gain.

CONCLUSION:
War is an obscenity against the very principles which make us human. 'Warriors' who live by the principle "Only the dead have seen the last of war..." are thus also obscenities. Because they exist to sustain their profession rather than achieve the final victory of enduring peace.

_IF_ man could be proveably removed from the battlefield as an obsolete appendix to a 'purer' form of (cheaper, faster, more lethal, more /effective/) warfare. If 'the rest of us' existed in a terror by which we could not slay that which slaughtered us because _the ultimate tool of war was never alive_ (no cheerleader effect, no coup effect, no _driving psychology_ by which man dehumanizes himself to the mechanical roboticism of war).

THEN by damn, we would see an end to the stupidity of organized conflict.

"Only the dead have seen the end of war." is an exercise in venal arrogance. For war is brought about when too many competing for too few resources see no alternative but to find a 'moral umbrage' by which to reduce the fraction to a lowest common denominator.

So by _over investing_ in the tools of war 'without acknowledging the inevitable' as a foregone outcome from the depletion of resources-> that leads to desparation-> that leads to engineeed conflict.

We end up creating our own epitaph:

"Only the dead have seen the end of war." "Then we are all surely dead."

I refuse to walk into that setup under the 'pure and tender mercies' of a warrior elite in a militarist society hell bent on reducing itself to the lowest common denominator of poor-dumb-dead.

Not without sending up a hey-wait-a-minute-BS-in-progress-here flare, every chance I get.


KPl.

Lanton,

>>
They've apparently tested the LOSAT platform against sitting T-72s and M60s, but not against an M1A2.
>>

Prove it. Then prove to me why the Army didn't want the 'sheep test' in the Bradley live fire exercises.

No. They are NOT 'stupid' in the sense of ignorant. They are _STUPID_ in the sense of not seeing the outcome of their total /corruption/.

In guarding the priveleges of the latter existence they test _everything against everything_. Internally.

So that they can know who, what and when to head off at the pass lest their pathetic operational paradigms collapse upon, not the lowest common threat. But the highest possible dollar value.

>>
Weapons systems like the LOSAT (and the increasing number of sophisticated and intelligent anti-tank missile systems) will, i believe, in any future conflict between the major powers, result in the multiplication of force wielded by the average grunt on the ground, at the expense of most types of amour; hence the need to develop lighter, faster and intelligently-networked armoured weapon's systems.
>>

Which doen't mean diddly dip if you don't create the enforced _amalgamation_ of society by which everyone is equal under the law.

Ironically, we, 'the decent' who work hard so that our military can rob us of the funds needed for obsolete-on-conception weapons platforms, are thus _to embarassed by our success_ to apply that success as a Darwinian model by which to share our existence, our standard of living, our PEACE with the warring moronic masses that make up the rest of the world.

With the resultant danger that a man who knows his government will 'disappear him' if he speaks up against his horrid existence in most _richer than god_ ME nations. Has no problem turning against the West when his Mullah says 'hate them instead!'.

While we, who would never suffer overt slavery _here_ allow other nations to drive their workers like drey beasts. Setting up an economic fault line by which true totalitarianism DEFAULTS DEMOCRACY. On the basis of false capitalism.

If a man could yell out his own government for making him poor in a pisshole climatic extreme. If a man could ensure that he had a living rather than a slave wage. WE would not be the subject of /his/ angst.

Because he could enjoy the good life.

Instead we apologize for others base stupidity (allowing /cartoons/ to incite rioting, pillage, murder _of their own people_). And then, panicky, spend yet more on the tools of war without EVER INTENDING TO WIN A FINAL VICTORY.

Because then there would be not profit for the industrial base. No /job/ for the militarist elite. No hostaged oil to power it all.

Such is wrong. No matter how you spin it. It is conflict as a seasonal entertainment event by which 'short wars' really means /sport wars/. Like sport blanking, it's all about the wham-bam but there is no attachment inherent to thank-/you/-ma'am.

For giving we and our bloodline a future beyond the moment.

Why should we all pay so much for front row seats 'as a privelege' of watching our government abase _us_ before such an obscene altar as desultory conflict /for no real gain/?


KPl.

Originally posted by ch1466
Lanton,

>>
They've apparently tested the LOSAT platform against sitting T-72s and M60s, but not against an M1A2.
>>

Prove it. Then prove to me why the Army didn't want the 'sheep test' in the Bradley live fire exercises.

No. They are NOT 'stupid' in the sense of ignorant. They are _STUPID_ in the sense of not seeing the outcome of their total /corruption/.

In guarding the priveleges of the latter existence they test _everything against everything_. Internally.

So that they can know who, what and when to head off at the pass lest their pathetic operational paradigms collapse upon, not the lowest common threat. But the highest possible dollar value.

>>
Weapons systems like the LOSAT (and the increasing number of sophisticated and intelligent anti-tank missile systems) will, i believe, in any future conflict between the major powers, result in the multiplication of force wielded by the average grunt on the ground, at the expense of most types of amour; hence the need to develop lighter, faster and intelligently-networked armoured weapon's systems.
>>

Which doen't mean diddly dip if you don't create the enforced _amalgamation_ of society by which everyone is equal under the law.

Ironically, we, 'the decent' who work hard so that our military can rob us of the funds needed for obsolete-on-conception weapons platforms, are thus _to embarassed by our success_ to apply that success as a Darwinian model by which to share our existence, our standard of living, our PEACE with the warring moronic masses that make up the rest of the world.

With the resultant danger that a man who knows his government will 'disappear him' if he speaks up against his horrid existence in most _richer than god_ ME nations. Has no problem turning against the West when his Mullah says 'hate them instead!'.

While we, who would never suffer overt slavery _here_ allow other nations to drive their workers like drey beasts. Setting up an economic fault line by which true totalitarianism DEFAULTS DEMOCRACY. On the basis of false capitalism.

If a man could yell out his own government for making him poor in a pisshole climatic extreme. If a man could ensure that he had a living rather than a slave wage. WE would not be the subject of /his/ angst.

Because he could enjoy the good life.

Instead we apologize for others base stupidity (allowing /cartoons/ to incite rioting, pillage, murder _of their own people_). And then, panicky, spend yet more on the tools of war without EVER INTENDING TO WIN A FINAL VICTORY.

Because then there would be not profit for the industrial base. No /job/ for the militarist elite. No hostaged oil to power it all.

Such is wrong. No matter how you spin it. It is conflict as a seasonal entertainment event by which 'short wars' really means /sport wars/. Like sport blanking, it's all about the wham-bam but there is no attachment inherent to thank-/you/-ma'am.

For giving we and our bloodline a future beyond the moment.

Why should we all pay so much for front row seats 'as a privelege' of watching our government abase _us_ before such an obscene altar as desultory conflict /for no real gain/?


KPl.

ch1466's using one of those 'essay'-writing programs...ya know, the ones where you enter the subject or topic you want and it writes a whole 'essay' for you. 99% of the content of his posts is composed of that 'essay' stuff (stuff not pertinent in the least to the subject matter we're discussing), and the other 1% (basically a line or two) consists of unsubstantiated claims like the LOSAT being tested, successfully, on an M1A2.

Maybe one of the mods'll twig onto what he's doing and ban him for spamming the forum.

Essay programs?

Where and how much

Originally posted by chinawhite
Essay programs?

Where and how much

Well technically they're not 'essay' programs, as such. They're simple programs that will produce for you a page (or more) of nonsensical drivel once you've chosen what subject or topic you want written about.

I repeat

Where and how much !!!!!

Originally posted by chinawhite
I repeat

Where and how much !!!!!

Google's your friend

Thanks

No more long hours on the computer anymore

---------------------

Edit: I forgot the main point. The program which i found just made up hard to understand words while ch1466 post have a different more personal feel.

[edit on 21-2-2006 by chinawhite]

Originally posted by chinawhite
Thanks

No more long hours on the computer anymore

---------------------

Edit: I forgot the main point. The program which i found just made up hard to understand words while ch1466 post have a different more personal feel.

[edit on 21-2-2006 by chinawhite]

PM him and ask what prog he's using. They're are dozens out there; some better than others.

Essay programs just add extra words not come up with opinons. Just read his writing and their is a opinoin in there while in essay programs there is no definate opinion

Originally posted by chinawhite
Essay programs just add extra words not come up with opinons. Just read his writing and their is a opinoin in there while in essay programs there is no definate opinion

No they don't, they have structure. They're much more sophisticated than they used to be.

Plus he's copied random material from the strategypage.com forums. There was another person, on this forum, who made a thread about the F/A-18 Super Hornet (in the aircraft section) wherein he just copy and pasted material from the strategypage.com forum. Someone had authored a thread over there and this guy came along and copied the thread title and the post material.

[edit on 21-2-2006 by Lanton]

ch1466 made 300+ post.

Knock yourself out I read all his post



[edit on 21-2-2006 by chinawhite]

Originally posted by chinawhite
ch1466 made 300+ post.

Knock yourself out I read all his post



[edit on 21-2-2006 by chinawhite]

Your point is? Most of the stuff isn't his material. He's simply copy and pasted random posts from other forums (probably even this forum too).

Please refer me to one

Originally posted by chinawhite
Please refer me to one

You ever had a look over at the strategypage.com forums?

Yes, they are a load of crap

Originally posted by chinawhite
Yes, they are a load of crap

How so, too high-brow for your liking?

No, to much imature threads. And the layout leaves a lot more to be desired.

Originally posted by chinawhite
No, to much imature threads. And the layout leaves a lot more to be desired.

Fair enough, the layout leaves a lot to be desired, but saying that it's full of too many immature threads is a bit rich when you look at this forum...a conspiracy theory forum.

There're whole sections of this forum chock-full of rubbish (like the 9/11 and 7/7 section).

Like you said a conspiracy theory forum.

While other things like weaponary are secondary things. But strategypage has no excuse because it promotes itself as a professional forum. But your right, there are good and bad parts but as a overall percentage i would have to say 90% crap from strategypage and about 1~2% crap here

conspiracy theories are formulated pretty much on speculation with some logical thought but have not been known for it