Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Armies are re-learning how to fight in cities

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 92 posts

Re: Armies are re-learning how to fight in cities

#31

Post by truffdog »

t6jvcereio wrote: post #6
snapcaster wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are misremembering. Not really your fault, if you're american like me you were only exposed to absurd quantities of propaganda. Worth looking into what things the US did again you'll probably be pretty upset

Instead of saying "it happened", it would be a lot more persuasive if you'd spell it example. What cities did the USA raze in Iraq? Be specific, give me names so I can look it up.

Fallujah and Mosul (post occupation, but they provided artillery and air support, so...)

Re: Armies are re-learning how to fight in cities

#32

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

gonzo41 wrote: post #17
Sakos wrote: post #2

Quoted post unavailable.

You should look into the US's use of white phosphorus in Fallujah. It was pretty rough going there for a few years.

Wikipedia says it was used against insurgents when conventional munitions didn't have the desired effect. White phosphorus is not recognized as a chemical weapon under the Chemical Weapons Convention.

Re: Armies are re-learning how to fight in cities

#33

Post by Eric_WVGG »

t6jvcereio wrote: post #6
snapcaster wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are misremembering. Not really your fault, if you're american like me you were only exposed to absurd quantities of propaganda. Worth looking into what things the US did again you'll probably be pretty upset

Instead of saying "it happened", it would be a lot more persuasive if you'd spell it example. What cities did the USA raze in Iraq? Be specific, give me names so I can look it up.

No post body was provided.

Re: Armies are re-learning how to fight in cities

#34

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

TrackerFF wrote: post #28

If there's anything I've learned from the conflict in Ukraine, as well as 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war, it is that small-explosives drone usage has become a first-class citizen weaponry / tactic against ground troops. There's a daily stream of footage from Ukraine, where you see Russian ground troops getting bombed by DIY drones dropping grenades / mortar rounds / etc. Drones are also becoming invaluable tools as forwar…

Civilian drones can be jammed. Jammers are used to counter remotely detonated IEDs already.

Re: Armies are re-learning how to fight in cities

#36

Post by dontlaugh »

snapcaster wrote: post #3
Sakos wrote: post #2

Quoted post unavailable.

You are misremembering. Not really your fault, if you're american like me you were only exposed to absurd quantities of propaganda. Worth looking into what things the US did again you'll probably be pretty upset

The Blowback podcast is pretty good on this topic https://blowback.show/Season-1

Re: Armies are re-learning how to fight in cities

#37

Post by gpderetta »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #34
TrackerFF wrote: post #28

If there's anything I've learned from the conflict in Ukraine, as well as 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war, it is that small-explosives drone usage has become a first-class citizen weaponry / tactic against ground troops. There's a daily stream of footage from Ukraine, where you see Russian ground troops getting bombed by DIY drones dropping grenades / mortar rounds / etc. Drones are also becoming invaluable tools as forwar…

Civilian drones can be jammed. Jammers are used to counter remotely detonated IEDs already.

Yes, but now you need to have jammers everywhere you have troops.

Re: Armies are re-learning how to fight in cities

#38

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

gpderetta wrote: post #37
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Civilian drones can be jammed. Jammers are used to counter remotely detonated IEDs already.

Yes, but now you need to have jammers everywhere you have troops.

The IED jammers were man-portable backpacks.

Re: Armies are re-learning how to fight in cities

#39

Post by meheleventyone »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #27
shaftoe444 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> razing a city to the ground or wiping out most of the population of entire towns. In Fallujah the US destroyed over half the homes, displaced 100,000s of people and admitted to using white phosphorus. You are misremembering.

The second battle of Fallujah where the US, British, and Iraqis fought against insurgents? The insurgents that fought from civilian homes and used civilians as shields? How many civilians were killed? I'm seeing estimates of only 500-800.

Isn’t that because beforehand the city was surrounded and the population displaced. Then a lot of people who stayed behind were automatically counted as insurgents irregardless of why they stayed. And you also ignore the incredible destruction of civilian property during the course of the battle.

Re: Armies are re-learning how to fight in cities

#40

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

truffdog wrote: post #31
t6jvcereio wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instead of saying "it happened", it would be a lot more persuasive if you'd spell it example. What cities did the USA raze in Iraq? Be specific, give me names so I can look it up.

Fallujah and Mosul (post occupation, but they provided artillery and air support, so...)

Raze means to completely destroy. Please cite a source that they were completely destroyed.
Post reply on HN