You have to admit that it does make for a really neat Powerpoint presentation.Dilbert_X wrote:
Wiki wrote:
Britain regarded the war as a slideshow
infantry could maintain a defilade positionDilbert_X wrote:
No.
How is a pilot more vulnerable to a SAM than an infantryman is to a tank round?
If you're deploying ground troops to protect civilians wouldn't it make sense to vapourise every enemy tank, in their base, deployed or whatever?
Tu Stultus Es
Dormant and ostensibly unused tanks don't pose an immediate and unavoidable threat if activated, unlike an air defense system.Dilbert_X wrote:
No.
How is a pilot more vulnerable to a SAM than an infantryman is to a tank round?
If you're deploying ground troops to protect civilians wouldn't it make sense to vapourise every enemy tank, in their base, deployed or whatever?
"ostensibly unused"
w t f
w t f
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
lol i love how anytime i post here i cant count on you to play language nazi.Uzique wrote:
"ostensibly unused"
w t f
anyways dilbert says that you dont conclude military hardware is active until its shooting at you already hence "ostensibly unused" makes perfect sense in the sentence. 'dormant' describes the proximate state, 'ostensibly unused' describes the perceived reason for this state, namely reluctant or cautious assumption that it is not intended to be utilized for any military action.
honestly i don't see how it is in anyway confusing and complicated.
just stop typing.
or take a writing class.
or take a writing class.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
It was all over the news, and not just western news. It's not my fault that you'll dismiss it all as pro-Obama propaganda either. If you couldn't be bothered to follow this before it became a fucking warzone that isn't my fault.11 Bravo wrote:
wake up mekstizzle11 Bravo wrote:
11 Bravo wrote:
was like never seen before?
ok now you need to show me some proof. have had about enough of this crap being tossed around with no solid proof.
Shit, read the wiki on it if you must. I'm sure the article has plenty of citations/links about it all. Like I said, you're just going to dismiss everything as propaganda anyway, so why ask?
was like never seen before?
no sorry mek. never heard that. please explain. im sure most people on this board might not agree with your statement.
no sorry mek. never heard that. please explain. im sure most people on this board might not agree with your statement.
k dawg u gonna have 2 explain dat cuz i never learn nothin like it dawgUzique wrote:
just stop typing.
or take a writing class.
How many more times/ways does it need to be explained? Tank rounds don't maneuver or have guidance systems; tank rounds generally aren't cued by C2 centers...the list goes on and on. And has been provided. Repeatedly. And yet you persist as if it hasn't. Like English is a second or third language for you or something. It's getting ludicrous.Dilbert_X wrote:
No.
How is a pilot more vulnerable to a SAM than an infantryman is to a tank round?
No, unless they move to within a certain distance of your position (usually referred to as a "red line").Dilbert_X wrote:
If you're deploying ground troops to protect civilians wouldn't it make sense to vapourise every enemy tank, in their base, deployed or whatever?
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
The speech Obama gave tonight sounded a lot like the one Bush gave 8 years ago...
The primary difference was in tone. Obama sounded defensive. Bush sounded like he was a cowboy.
The primary difference was in tone. Obama sounded defensive. Bush sounded like he was a cowboy.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
yee haw
I want a picture of Bush in a cowboy outfit on a horse with an M16 slung behind his back and an american flag in one hand as he charges Baghdad.
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
how does a clown become president on the usa?
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
So what? None if this is relevant.FEOS wrote:
Tank rounds don't maneuver or have guidance systems; tank rounds generally aren't cued by C2 centers...the list goes on and on.Dilbert_X wrote:
No.
How is a pilot more vulnerable to a SAM than an infantryman is to a tank round?
Anti-personnel rounds don't have guidance systems or C2 centres, they're pretty effective though, and can be fired from 'ostensibly dormant' tanks pretty quickly.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Its a two party system, they take turns.Shahter wrote:
how does a clown become president on the usa?
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
I think George H. W. Bush was the last president to serve one term. Who was preceded by a republican.. no they don't take turns.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Turkey blocks no fly zone. France wants a non-nato body to lead operations. Quagmire
Xbone Stormsurgezz
11 Bravo wrote:
was like never seen before?
no sorry mek. never heard that. please explain. im sure most people on this board might not agree with your statement.
We're not at war. We're just meeting with rebel leaders, building ties with the opposition, and bombing targets at their request. http://twitter.com/AP/status/52657692845670400
Xbone Stormsurgezz
JHTDC. It's absolutely relevant. It's the very nature of the threat. If something is non-maneuverable or less maneuverable than its target, it's easier to defeat, the opposite situation makes it less so. The chance for survival of infantry vs tank is much higher than plane vs IADS.Dilbert_X wrote:
So what? None if this is relevant.FEOS wrote:
Tank rounds don't maneuver or have guidance systems; tank rounds generally aren't cued by C2 centers...the list goes on and on.Dilbert_X wrote:
No.
How is a pilot more vulnerable to a SAM than an infantryman is to a tank round?
Anti-personnel rounds don't have guidance systems or C2 centres, they're pretty effective though, and can be fired from 'ostensibly dormant' tanks pretty quickly.
Seriously. You know not of what you speak. Just stop.
Last edited by FEOS (2011-03-29 03:19:12)
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
gayKmar wrote:
We're not at war. We're just meeting with rebel leaders, building ties with the opposition, and bombing targets at their request. http://twitter.com/AP/status/52657692845670400
Careless
Xbone Stormsurgezz
ok that word works also