4 ms·

No that's not quite right. Lethality is the effectiveness of desired outcome. Was the target eliminated? Collateral is the side effects of the desired outcome

by setquk 8y ago

No that's not quite right. Lethality is the effectiveness of desired outcome. Was the target eliminated? Collateral is the side effects of the desired outcome. Was anyone or anything else eliminated? They are two different metrics. Consider two contrasting analogies which break your understanding: Ballistic missile: high lethality, high collateral probability. Polonium tea: high lethality, low collateral probability. About 20 years ago, I was working in the defence sector, on guidance systems, as an engineer. Sat through many a powerpoint about how collateral could be marketed away. Turns out they won that battle eventually... Incidentally I bailed out when I saw what a fucking mess of a world I was creating.

derp_dee_derp 8y ago
This is bad logic. By your metrics, the most lethal thing in the world is a rusty spoon stabbed into some ones eye; either it kills the target instantly or kills them later due to infection. Very close to 100% death rate. Very lethal. No collateral damages, either. And yet no professional militaries are armed with rusty spoons
- Dylan16807 8y ago
  I don't know what logic you're seeing but that's not an accurate description. A spoon is low lethality, low collateral.
- dragonsngoblins 8y ago
  That's because the lethality of a rusty spoon is actually very low... The lethality of having been stabbed in the eye might be high, but not of spoons themselves since it is hard to successfully wound the eye of an enemy soldier with a rusty spoon at a distance when said enemy soldier is armed with ranged weaponry, and it is still difficult to do even in melee range relative to how easy it is to wound with bayonets and combat knives.
- setquk 8y ago
  They had swords that did that. Then they found out that guns had higher lethality with lower risk to the attacker (another primary metric). Collateral wasn't much of a problem back then. No one gave a shit.
- imtringued 8y ago
  What is a bullet if not a very carefully shaped rusty spoon stabbed into someone via a complicated launching mechanism?

by setquk 8y ago

derp_dee_derp 8y ago

This is bad logic. By your metrics, the most lethal thing in the world is a rusty spoon stabbed into some ones eye; either it kills the target instantly or kills them later due to infection. Very close to 100% death rate. Very lethal. No collateral damages, either. And yet no professional militaries are armed with rusty spoons

Dylan16807 8y ago
I don't know what logic you're seeing but that's not an accurate description. A spoon is low lethality, low collateral.
dragonsngoblins 8y ago
That's because the lethality of a rusty spoon is actually very low... The lethality of having been stabbed in the eye might be high, but not of spoons themselves since it is hard to successfully wound the eye of an enemy soldier with a rusty spoon at a distance when said enemy soldier is armed with ranged weaponry, and it is still difficult to do even in melee range relative to how easy it is to wound with bayonets and combat knives.
setquk 8y ago
They had swords that did that. Then they found out that guns had higher lethality with lower risk to the attacker (another primary metric). Collateral wasn't much of a problem back then. No one gave a shit.
imtringued 8y ago
What is a bullet if not a very carefully shaped rusty spoon stabbed into someone via a complicated launching mechanism?