Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[Rukentuts]

We can, but we don't because its a waste of bombs, fuel, and aircraft.

Tell that to the Republican Guard tanks they left on the Highway of Death.

But I thought you were "familiar" with the military.

[petej0]

Similar to how the mental facilities of the majority of the forum members will be frayed after a week without utilities?

Have fun playing soldier. I'll just watch.

I actually was a soldier, so I have no need to play.

- - - Updated - - -

They would systematically destroy all transportation and communication channels in the region is rebelling and just carpet and bunker bomb until they surrender.

You actually think the US Military will carpet bomb major U.S. Cities in an effort to root out insurgents when we havent done it in Iraq? Please.

[Rukentuts]

I actually was a soldier, so I have no need to play.

No, you weren't. But we can all see that.

[Kellhound]

Tell that to the Republican Guard tanks they left on the Highway of Death.

But I thought you were "familiar" with the military.

That was 12 years ago. And most of the vehicles destroyed on the road out of Kuwait City were not tanks. Most of the tanks destroyed in Gulf War I were killed by A10s firing guns and AGM-65s, F111s dropping Paveways, or AH64s firing AGM-114s.

Today, we do not carpet bomb. Hell, a major justification for the reduced number of US military aircraft and the smaller bomb load of the F35 is that the US doesnt drop near as many bombs in combat anymore.

[Rukentuts]

That was 12 years ago.

OoOoOo such ancient history.

If you have a large number of targets in a zone with no collateral, you light it up.

[Kellhound]

OoOoOo such ancient history.

If you have a large number of targets in a zone with no collateral, you light it up.

No you don't. And yes 22 years ago (mistyped number) IS ancient history in airpower. The shift in the amount of guided vs unguided munitions is huge over those 2 decades. But you would know this if you actually studied the US Military.

And you would know we have far fewer heavy and medium bombers now than in 1991.

[Rukentuts]

No you don't. And yes 22 years ago (mistyped number) IS ancient history in airpower. The shift in the amount of guided vs unguided munitions is huge over those 2 decades. But you would know this if you actually studied the US Military.

Then why were we still using cluster bombs in Iraq 2.0? After all, you HAVE studied the military. *giggles*

[petej0]

No, you weren't. But we can all see that.

I enlisted in 95 right out of highschool. Served 4 years. as a 13R

Basic and AIT in Ft. Sill
Station in Baumholder Germany, C-333 1st AD reflagged to C-25 deployed to Bosnia, as part of Operation Joint Endeavor for 10 months
Station in Ft Riley, KS A 1-5 1st ID
Trained at NTC in CA
Trained in Ft. Hood for PLDC.

I didnt need to play, I was.

[Jackmoves]

Vietnam, Somalia, Iraq, Afghanistan

We have the greatest military on the planet, but it can not stand up to sustained guerrilla warfare.

As long as people are ready to die en masse. You need a lot crazy or desperate people for that.

[Naxere]

The military would do exactly what their superiors want them to do. It is their job.

It's their job to just follow orders, right?

[Rukentuts]

I didnt need to play, I was.

Battlefield 3 doesn't count bucko.

[Kellhound]

Then why were we still using cluster bombs in Iraq 2.0? After all, you HAVE studied the military. *giggles*

Oh for the love of Pete! There is a difference between cluster munitions and carpet bombing! And our use of cluster munitions is down, replaced with precision attacks using unitary warheads. I didn't say we never used unguided bombs, we just rarely do.

[Daelak]

I actually was a soldier, so I have no need to play.

- - - Updated - - -



You actually think the US Military will carpet bomb major U.S. Cities in an effort to root out insurgents when we havent done it in Iraq? Please.

Yes I have no doubt in my mind they would if they were ordered to.

[Kellhound]

Battlefield 3 doesn't count bucko.

Well, that's as close as you will ever be.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes I have no doubt in my mind they would if they were ordered to.

Wow, you really have a low opinion of the US Military....

[Daelak]

It's their job to just follow orders, right?

The subordinates could be given false intelligence to convince them that what they are doing is protecting the constitution.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, that's as close as you will ever be.

- - - Updated - - -



Wow, you really have a low opinion of the US Military....

No, I have a realistic view on the military. They are the most well-trained military on the planet and they follow orders.

[Jackmoves]

The Milgram Experiment is pretty interesting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment

[petej0]

Yes I have no doubt in my mind they would if they were ordered to.

No, they wouldnt. Especially if they have family or friends or other personal connections to the city in question. The difference between carpet bombing Baghdad and Philadelphia is that Philadelphia contains Innocent American citizens. I doubt a General would even pass down that order even if it came from the president himself. Not only that but the congressmen and senators from those districts will throw a $hit fit in the media if they caught wind of military orders to occupy let alone carpet bomb their innocent constituents.

- - - Updated - - -

The subordinates could be given false intelligence to convince them that what they are doing is protecting the constitution.
No, I have a realistic view on the military. They are the most well-trained military on the planet and they follow orders.

Not if they felt it was not a lawful order. And dropping bombs and leveling an American City wont be seen as a lawful order in the eyes of many.

[Kellhound]

The subordinates could be given false intelligence to convince them that what they are doing is protecting the constitution.

- - - Updated - - -



No, I have a realistic view on the military. They are the most well-trained military on the planet and they follow orders.

No, you have an uninformed view of the US Military. While it has been shown that lowerer ranks (E1-E4/O1-O3) are inclined to follow orders to attack US citizens, higher ranks are not inclined to do so. That is a major issue because it is the higher ranks that would actually command such ops, and if they say dont shoot the troops will not shoot. This is especially true of E5-E7, the heart of the US military. If the NCOs balk, nothing happens.

[petej0]

No, you have an uninformed view of the US Military. While it has been shown that lowerer ranks (E1-E4/O1-O3) are inclined to follow orders to attack US citizens, higher ranks are not inclined to do so. That is a major issue because it is the higher ranks that would actually command such ops, and if they say dont shoot the troops will not shoot. This is especially true of E5-E7, the heart of the US military. If the NCOs balk, nothing happens.

Exactly and could cause some units to turn against the government. Especially Reserve Units.

[Tinykong]

I think there are some dead students from Kent State that would beg to differ on the opinion that military people won't shoot Americans.