This reminds me of this low tech magazine article: What if We Replace Guns and Bullets with Bows and Arrows? https://solar.lowtechmagazine.com/2022/11/what-if-we-replace...
[dead]
Lasers or Longbows? A Paradox of Military Technology (2010)
41–50 of 72 posts
Re: Lasers or Longbows? A Paradox of Military Technology (2010)
#42The license terms of the article seem contradictory in a way. When I download the PDF it includes an appendix stating: > Copyright of Full Text rests with the original copyright owner and, except as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, copying this copyright material is prohibited without the permission of the owner or its exclusive licensee or agent or by way of a license from Copyright Agency Limited. For inform…
Thats odd, I can't see any reference to Creative Commons in my copy. The copyright rests with the Australian Defence Force Journal and is administered by Copyright Agency Ltd as far as I understand.
First I clicked on "View PDF". Then on the PDF page I clicked on the Download button in the upper right corner. This gives me a PDF with the Creative Commons notice in the left margin of every page.
Re: Lasers or Longbows? A Paradox of Military Technology (2010)
#43Isn't it easy enough to make ammunition for modern rifles? I'm not a gunsmith or gun engineer, but it doesn't sound difficult to reuse casings and make ammunition. Of course, one would still need to make: * pointy bullets with steel scraps and some cast/mold and some coal-powered oven (you see a lot of youtube guys melting metal with not that much equipment) * gunpowder and a primer, and might not require a lot of ch…
[dead]
Re: Lasers or Longbows? A Paradox of Military Technology (2010)
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
Russian genocidal war against Ukraine is not yet settled and the weapons used there are in constant evolution. If anything it is the response of Israel to the 7th October genocide that shows that expensive weapon systems in the hands of competent military still triumph any low cost approaches.
I see that many downvoters don't like that the things are named properly by their intent - I take it as showing support to the genocide in both cases. It still remains a fact that the genocidal war started by Russia has not yet been decided and both, attacking and defending sides are trying to figure out the weapon systems to accomplish their military goals and these weapon systems are going through rapid development…
The only side accused of Genozid in the current Gaza war is Israel. October 7th was a terror attack, not Genozid.
What Russia does in Ukraine is a conventional war, not Genozid neither.
Re: Lasers or Longbows? A Paradox of Military Technology (2010)
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
Asymetric warfare is very different from the near-peer conventional warfare we see in Ukraine. One cannot occupy a region milotarily if a large enough portion of the local population is hell bent to oppose that accupation. That's what happened in Vietnam and Afghanistan. Ukraine is what happens ofnthe imvasion force is met by defenders capable of stopping the invasion. And the war in Ukraine cannot be fought with low…
Actually no, it is not what happened in Vietnam and Afghanistan. In Vietnam there was constant foreign infiltration by the enemy and they used quite nasty "tactics" to gain local influence. Afghanistan is not much different. In principle the side that was more willing to instill more terror into local populace won. The same problems of logistics also do apply to the local opposition. If you run out of weapons or ammu…
I think you're right in so far that the US never really wanted to do what it would take to convert the whole of Afghanistan to a friendly state, like say Japan after WWII.
Urbanization statistics for Afghanistan place them at something like 20-25% with most of the population being rural. So even if you occupy the cities and stay for a generation (19.9 year according to https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/field/mothers-mean-ag...), you haven't really won the war. The first source I found says that in 2017 about 50% of the population was still under Taliban control or where Taliban openly moved about.
Re: Lasers or Longbows? A Paradox of Military Technology (2010)
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
In both cases, Vietnam or Afghanistan, US won, until it lost its sight and pulled out, leaving everything on the shoulders of a demoralized and ill-equipped local governance. Now this was unfair fight because this replacement was not willing nor capable to project any actual force and they crumbled fast. This is what I was talking about. Afghanistan government resistance failed because they were terrified about the p…
The US lost in Vietnam, in fact the Paris treaty came as close to unconditional surrender as it gets without using the term. Same in Afghanistan, NATO lost hard after being slowly kicked out of the country. In both cases, none of the US or NATO strategic goals were achieved, while almost all of the opposing sides were. If you think the US won in Vietnam, Iraq won the Gulf War (number two, in the 90s).
[deleted]
Re: Lasers or Longbows? A Paradox of Military Technology (2010)
#47Isn't it easy enough to make ammunition for modern rifles? I'm not a gunsmith or gun engineer, but it doesn't sound difficult to reuse casings and make ammunition. Of course, one would still need to make: * pointy bullets with steel scraps and some cast/mold and some coal-powered oven (you see a lot of youtube guys melting metal with not that much equipment) * gunpowder and a primer, and might not require a lot of ch…
"Normal" powder will clog your automatic rifle real fast. No problem if you're doing single shots with it, I guess.
Is an additive or something used to help with lubrication?
Re: Lasers or Longbows? A Paradox of Military Technology (2010)
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Normal" powder will clog your automatic rifle real fast. No problem if you're doing single shots with it, I guess.
Is an additive or something used to help with lubrication?
The problem is that "normal" powder produces a lot of residue, which does not have any easy way out so it will remain somewhere in your gun until it interferes with any subsequent firing.
A musket would need to be thoroughly cleaned after every hunt (or battle), so obviously after a few shots were fired.
Re: Lasers or Longbows? A Paradox of Military Technology (2010)
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
In both cases, Vietnam or Afghanistan, US won, until it lost its sight and pulled out, leaving everything on the shoulders of a demoralized and ill-equipped local governance. Now this was unfair fight because this replacement was not willing nor capable to project any actual force and they crumbled fast. This is what I was talking about. Afghanistan government resistance failed because they were terrified about the p…
The US lost in Vietnam, in fact the Paris treaty came as close to unconditional surrender as it gets without using the term. Same in Afghanistan, NATO lost hard after being slowly kicked out of the country. In both cases, none of the US or NATO strategic goals were achieved, while almost all of the opposing sides were. If you think the US won in Vietnam, Iraq won the Gulf War (number two, in the 90s).
The parent is claiming "the US won until they lost", which I guess doesn't contradict your post lol.
Re: Lasers or Longbows? A Paradox of Military Technology (2010)
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see that many downvoters don't like that the things are named properly by their intent - I take it as showing support to the genocide in both cases. It still remains a fact that the genocidal war started by Russia has not yet been decided and both, attacking and defending sides are trying to figure out the weapon systems to accomplish their military goals and these weapon systems are going through rapid development…
The only side accused of Genozid in the current Gaza war is Israel. October 7th was a terror attack, not Genozid. What Russia does in Ukraine is a conventional war, not Genozid neither.
> What Russia does in Ukraine is a conventional war, not Genozid neither.
Scholars of genocide disagree with your assessment. Russian actions against Ukrainians, from massacres to kidnapping of children and burning Ukrainian books, not to mention declarations that Ukrainians don't exist at all, are obvious signs of genocial intent and genocide itself. https://newlinesinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/English-Rep...
Articles like the infamous "What Russia Should Do with Ukraine" also leave no doubt: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Russia_Should_Do_with_Ukr...
After all, why does Putin have so much trouble travelling internationally? Because the International Criminal Court has issued an arrest warrant for kidnapping of children, which he openly boasted about, apparently not understanding that rest of the world sees that as a form of genocide.
The only ones I've seen argue against calling Russian actions in Ukraine a genocide are those who sometimes accidentally use Russian phrases when writing in English, that is, the denial is emotional, not fact-based.