High Tech vs. Low tech - Page 2

::Major_Baker:: · 06-14-2007, 01:24 PM

[quote=Michael_Denmark]

Quote:

So just to understand you correct, low tech can under the right circumstances beat high tech on today’s battlefield?

Potentially, yes.
Although we all know there can be many meanings to the word 'beat' in this context.

Quote:

And in addition to that question, do you think that low-tech winning fights/battles vs. high tech actually will an effect on the short future development of high tech?

Potentially, if low-tech success begins to attrit the high tech force, draining them of resources to invest into continuing high tech weaponry research.

~~ArmedDrunk&Angry~~ · 06-14-2007, 01:29 PM

Insurgents make their most notable impact with high tech.
Namely video, their own and the news crews.
Their most important weapon is the television and the images it brings.
So while their low tech war is not going to well against our high tech army, the same is not true on the homefront.

::Major_Baker:: · 06-14-2007, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArmedDrunk&Angry

Insurgents make their most notable impact with high tech.
Namely video, their own and the news crews.
Their most important weapon is the television and the images it brings.
So while their low tech war is not going to well against our high tech army, the same is not true on the homefront.

You are right, their propaganda is quite extensive. Have a look on liveleak and you'll see what i mean.
But i would beg to differ in that they have managed to develop a strategy which is proving pretty effective against an army as advanced as ours--low tech bombs are still bombs. Hit and run, stay hidden, rinse and repeat.

Michael_Denmark · 06-14-2007, 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArmedDrunk&Angry

Insurgents make their most notable impact with high tech.
Namely video, their own and the news crews.
Their most important weapon is the television and the images it brings.
So while their low tech war is not going to well against our high tech army, the same is not true on the homefront.

So just to get you right AD&A, a military organisation using low tech weapon systems, but high tech TV-warfare/Propaganda-warfare actually can beat another military organisation without having to annihilate it or force it to surrender on the conventional battlefield it self?

And all this due to television used properly as a propaganda-tool aimed at the taxpayers/voters behind the opposing military force using high tech weapons?

Cost/benefit speaking it sounds that "simple" TV-Stuff is beating a very strong military force without having to fight it enough to annihilate it, right?

If correct it sounds like cheap and useful warfare.

~~ArmedDrunk&Angry~~ · 06-14-2007, 01:55 PM

Since the beginning of the war the media have proclaimed it can not be done.
Every major outlet has a negative tone on the war.
Democrats declare the war "lost".
They have done an incredible job manipulating the media, not even mentioning the horrible reporting by the AP and others in Lebanon.
@MajorBaker.... their low tech bombs do not result in very many US casualties and are not effective and denying any area to US forces.
The VC did a good job with low tech but they were supported by a nation that had the most sophisticated air defense system known to man at the time.
Low tech, standing alone, will always lose to high tech.

SiN|ScarFace · 06-14-2007, 02:16 PM

It's easier to hide in the jungle.

The_motivator · 06-14-2007, 02:18 PM

http://www.d-n-i.net/fcs/4th_gen_war_gazette.htm

ryan d ale · 06-14-2007, 02:51 PM

Tactics, Training and Timing.

Everything has it's advantages and disadvantages.

::Major_Baker:: · 06-14-2007, 03:52 PM

[quote=ArmedDrunk&Angry]

Quote:

Since the beginning of the war the media have proclaimed it can not be done.

what can't be done? Invading a volatile multi-sect country hapahazardly and expecting things to be a cake walk? That's because they studied history.

Quote:

Every major outlet has a negative tone on the war.

Can you really have a positive outlook? We are losing troops steadily while the Iraqi government treads water.

Quote:

Democrats declare the war "lost".

Or more accurately, 'unwinnable under its current course.'

Quote:

@MajorBaker.... their low tech bombs do not result in very many US casualties and are not effective and denying any area to US forces.

Really? How many of the 26000 wounded or 2000+ double amputees do you think were wounded by AKs?

Quote:

The VC did a good job with low tech but they were supported by a nation that had the most sophisticated air defense system known to man at the time.

true, many aircraft were lost in vietnam. About 605 sound right?
If we figure 2 pilots per plane, 1210 US servicemen killed in this manner. And the other 56,790? Low tech casualties.

~~ArmedDrunk&Angry~~ · 06-14-2007, 05:36 PM

in reverse order ..... I said Vietnam had high tech AA so we did well against that.
Yes, we have an enormous amount of very injured soldiers that no other war ever had in such numbers.
But you quote the numbers as if they have meaning all their own.
What is an acceptable level of casualties ?
Do you think those guys feel better about their sacrifice when a former presidential candidate calls them terrorists ?
or when another congressman compares them to Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge ?
Or more accurately, 'unwinnable under its current course
That's a load of shit. That may be your studied opinion, but your alone because the Democratic leadership has it plain they feel the war is lost and we must surrender.

I don't think Iraq was the right theater at the right time but again people want to think about " what if " when the job to be done is plain and simple.
WIN
That does not mean that the military will provide all the answers but the constant barrage of negative coverage does not encourage people to think that there is a middle ground.
The argument has been presented as either we win by October with the rather small amount of troops we have in country or we must declare victory and retreat.
We can win and we will win because smart people will keep trying and failing until they find a solution.
They won't cry to mommy about how it's not fair and they will persevere in the worlds toughest job.
Part of what makes them do that is support from their loved ones and Al-Queda et.al. have made it trendy to hate America but support the troops.
Too many people find their identity in criticism and over time that has shown through.
Enlistment rates should be up in a time of war.
People should feel confident that we can win a war against a country far smaller than our own but they don't and they don't join and they wear Che t-shirts and say " F the government " and " Bush Lied ".
If you want the war to stop and really mean it, get out and participate, make a difference.
I think you are wrong but I support your right to have your opinion and express it.

But, if you like to sit on the fence and make value judgments but not really do anything to stop it and you clearly recognize what will happen if we lose, and yet you still want to sit on the fence and quibble over details then it's high time you picked a side.
It's time you did what seems such an anathema to many and see something in black and white, win or lose, live or die...which is how the world works in many cases, no reset button, no respawn.
Choose to support your country in a time of war and support victory for our causes.
Freedom and democracy may not be the reason we invaded but it is the reason we are there now.

View Poll Results: Do you think high tech has the advantage in present days warfare?
Yes	63	65.63%
No	18	18.75%
Not sure	15	15.63%
Voters: 96. You may not vote on this poll

06-14-2007, 02:18 PM	#17
The_motivator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 600	http://www.d-n-i.net/fcs/4th_gen_war_gazette.htm
The_motivator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 600	Reality is what we take to be true. What we take to be true is what we believe. What we believe is based upon our perceptions. What we perceive depends upon what we look for. What we look for depends on what we think. What we think depends on what we perceive. What we perceive determines what we believe. What we believe determines what we take to be true. What we take to be true is our reality.

06-14-2007, 02:51 PM	#18
ryan d ale Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: The Cock Rock Capital Of Britain: Nottingham Posts: 558	Tactics, Training and Timing. Everything has it's advantages and disadvantages.
	I rock so you don't have to.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

06-14-2007, 01:29 PM	#12
~~ArmedDrunk&Angry~~ Banned Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Long Island Posts: 6,971	Insurgents make their most notable impact with high tech. Namely video, their own and the news crews. Their most important weapon is the television and the images it brings. So while their low tech war is not going to well against our high tech army, the same is not true on the homefront.

06-14-2007, 01:55 PM	#15
~~ArmedDrunk&Angry~~ Banned Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Long Island Posts: 6,971	Since the beginning of the war the media have proclaimed it can not be done. Every major outlet has a negative tone on the war. Democrats declare the war "lost". They have done an incredible job manipulating the media, not even mentioning the horrible reporting by the AP and others in Lebanon. @MajorBaker.... their low tech bombs do not result in very many US casualties and are not effective and denying any area to US forces. The VC did a good job with low tech but they were supported by a nation that had the most sophisticated air defense system known to man at the time. Low tech, standing alone, will always lose to high tech.

06-14-2007, 02:16 PM	#16
SiN\|ScarFace Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Colorado Posts: 4,447	It's easier to hide in the jungle.

06-14-2007, 05:36 PM	#20
~~ArmedDrunk&Angry~~ Banned Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Long Island Posts: 6,971	in reverse order ..... I said Vietnam had high tech AA so we did well against that. Yes, we have an enormous amount of very injured soldiers that no other war ever had in such numbers. But you quote the numbers as if they have meaning all their own. What is an acceptable level of casualties ? Do you think those guys feel better about their sacrifice when a former presidential candidate calls them terrorists ? or when another congressman compares them to Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge ? *Or more accurately, 'unwinnable under its current course* That's a load of shit. That may be your studied opinion, but your alone because the Democratic leadership has it plain they feel the war is lost and we must surrender. I don't think Iraq was the right theater at the right time but again people want to think about " what if " when the job to be done is plain and simple. WIN That does not mean that the military will provide all the answers but the constant barrage of negative coverage does not encourage people to think that there is a middle ground. The argument has been presented as either we win by October with the rather small amount of troops we have in country or we must declare victory and retreat. We can win and we will win because smart people will keep trying and failing until they find a solution. They won't cry to mommy about how it's not fair and they will persevere in the worlds toughest job. Part of what makes them do that is support from their loved ones and Al-Queda et.al. have made it trendy to hate America but support the troops. Too many people find their identity in criticism and over time that has shown through. Enlistment rates should be up in a time of war. People should feel confident that we can win a war against a country far smaller than our own but they don't and they don't join and they wear Che t-shirts and say " F the government " and " Bush Lied ". If you want the war to stop and really mean it, get out and participate, make a difference. I think you are wrong but I support your right to have your opinion and express it. But, if you like to sit on the fence and make value judgments but not really do anything to stop it and you clearly recognize what will happen if we lose, and yet you still want to sit on the fence and quibble over details then it's high time you picked a side. It's time you did what seems such an anathema to many and see something in black and white, win or lose, live or die...which is how the world works in many cases, no reset button, no respawn. Choose to support your country in a time of war and support victory for our causes. Freedom and democracy may not be the reason we invaded but it is the reason we are there now.

Sponsored Links

Sponsored Links