It's true that US arms manufacturers/R&D have massive budgets, come-up with extraordinary 'toys', but does that make better soldiers/military?While the latest 'toys' may influence outcomes in battles, does a reliance on high-tech take the 'skill'/'disciple' out of soldiering?Is a reliance 'high tech' another weakness to exploit?
Murphy's right - WW2 radar can pick up stealth planes, while modern radar can't for instance.Just because you have "toys" doesn't make you the best.Proof of the pudding is Iraq, where toys aren't what you really want, numbers are.
The Australian military learned a valuable lesson in Vietnam, (even with anti-lift/anti-tamper measures) Australian (and other nation's) mines helped arm the enemy. A good number of VC IED's were made from captured mines.Coincidentally, the first VC to 'lift' a mine without the anti-tamper grenade underneath going off (dud grenade), was made a 'People's Hero' (VC award), because he was the person who lived after 'lifting mines', and pioneered a whole new offensive (and to lesser degree defensive) strategy.Even something as low tech as a mine can be technology that can come back to haunt you.A 'successful terrorist' (loathed to use those two words together) will find a way of using the elements they are presented with, be it jet plane, land mine, or 'combat system'
Post a Comment
Copyright © 2011 Right-Wing & Right Minded
Design by Design Disease
| Blogger template by Blog and Web